The U. S. Supreme Court decision on broadcast indecency in FCC v. Fox Television, Inc. , (June 21, 2012) (â€œFox IIâ€), has reignited an important debate: whether TV networks have a right to distribute indecent material into our homes without our consent. The U. S. Congress prohibited such activity and the high Court upheld that prohibition decades ago. To obtain their licenses to broadcast, networks pledge to act in the â€œpublic interest,â€ but for years, they have abandoned that pledge to promote their own morbid interest in indecency.
After Fox, the Federal Communications Commission is free to enforce federal indecency law for broadcast TV (the law does not apply to cable TV). However, many voices have been raised against enforcement. The voice of Jacob Sullum, senior editor at Reason Magazine, seems typical of those in opposition. In a post-Fox article on Reason.com entitled, â€œA Mythical Right to Decency,â€ Sullum claims that the FCC cannot respond to the 1.5 million existing complaints to the FCC from offended Americans without being â€œfarcicalâ€ and violating the First Amendment. He deems enforcement of federal laws a â€œcensorious enterpriseâ€ full of â€œintellectual and constitutional bankruptcy.â€ But Sullumâ€™s hysterical response has always been clearly disaffirmed both by Congress and the Supreme Court. There are logical and responsible reasons for this. Read More: http://townhall.com/columnists/patricktrueman/2012/07/17/the_right_to_decency/page/full/