Nick Smith, March 14, 2004

The airwaves belong to the public, and they are licensed to broadcasters in order to serve the public. Unfortunately, broadcasters in recent years have been betraying their obligations to the public. More and more TV and radio programs are becoming increasingly crude, violent, immoral, and obscene. Parents find it harder and harder to shield their children from the onslaught of objectionable programs. Except for special programs, my children decided not to let their children watch TV and I understand and support their decision. Too much TV and what's on TV is not good for children. Congress needs to react to ensure that broadcasters do not use public airwaves in a way that is against the law simply because the fine or penalty is so low that it doesn’t deter. Broadcasters must be made to live up to at least the existing public decency standards.

The Supreme Court has defined indecent language and material and judged that restrictions do not violate free speech provisions in the Constitution. The traditional response from those in the entertainment industry about indecency is that no one has to watch it. There are several problems with that if you don’t know what’s coming. I think it is reasonable to expect TV and radio to provide entertainment suitable for families at least up until 9:00 or 10:00pm. If broadcasters refuse to serve the public as a whole, we can and should question their continued right to use the public airwaves.

The other problem is that it is no longer easy for parents to predict what programs will be suitable anymore. Standards are falling and indecency is seeping into all sorts of previously unobjectionable programs and advertisements. Janet Jackson and Justin Timberlake’s Super Bowl stunt as well as some of the commercials are prime examples. There are many others, such as the inappropriate speeches at past Grammy Awards and radio hosts that talk dirty. If Hollywood doesn’t monitor itself and give parents some level of control, they can hardly protest the legitimate backlash.

Congress is now taking action. I’ve joined more than 150 of my colleagues in cosponsoring the Broadcast Indecency Enforcement Act, which would vastly increase the fines for broadcasters that flout the indecency standards. It passed the House on March 11 by a large margin. Up to now, the fines have been set low enough that there was more to gain from high ratings for lewd programming than there was to lose in fines. That has to change and the maximum fine will go from $27,000 to $500,000 under this bill. It will also apply to individual performers and threaten broadcasters with the loss of their licenses for repeated violations. Congressman Upton’s legislation is a good start.

The public outrage is starting to have some effect. The Grammys and the Oscars were broadcast with a five-minute delay. Mel Karmazin, Chairman of Viacom, has instituted his company's new "zero tolerance" policy on obscenity. "If you don't comply, you'll be fired for cause," Karmazin testified. "This company won't be a poster child for indecency." Clear Channel gave the pink slip to shock jock Bubba the Love Sponge, who has had multiple indecency offenses. Clear Channel followed up by dropping shock jock Howard Stern’s program. The cable industry promised to put together a massive public awareness campaign and is looking into ways of enabling parents and consumers to block unwanted cable channels.

Despite these changes, the truth is that many in Hollywood and some broadcasters think that obscenity and sex are the norm and that with a good PR program, they can continue as usual. The industry has to change its attitude. Increasing the penalties for violating the public trust will certainly help. But we also have to continue to demand appropriate content for programs broadcast over public airwaves.

Congressman Nick Smith, a Republican, represents Michigan's 7th Congressional District in the U.S. House of Representatives.