House Passes Hike In Indecency Fines For Broadcasters
This article is from the archive of The New York Sun before the launch of its new website in 2022. The Sun has neither altered nor updated such articles but will seek to correct any errors, mis-categorizations or other problems introduced during transfer.
WASHINGTON – Chafing over a “wardrobe malfunction” and racy radio shock-jock programs, the House overwhelmingly passed a bill yesterday authorizing unprecedented fines for indecency.
Lawmakers sought to hit broadcasters where it hurts – the pocketbook – in approving the measure 389-38, rejecting criticism that the penalties would stifle free speech and expression and further homogenize programming.
The bill would increase the maximum fine from $32,500 to $500,000 for a company and from $11,000 to $500,000 for an individual entertainer.
“With passage of this legislation, I am confident that broadcasters will think twice about pushing the envelope,” said Rep. Fred Upton, a Republican of Michigan, chairman of the House telecommunications panel, and author of the bill. “Our kids will be better off for it.”
The White House said in a statement that it strongly supports the legislation, which “will make broadcast television and radio more suitable for family viewing.”
A similar bill has been introduced in the Senate, where it has broad bipartisan support. Senator Stevens, a Republican of Alaska and chairman of the Commerce Committee, has said he wants to act on the bill quickly, but he hasn’t given a timetable.
Any differences in the two bills would have to be resolved before it can go to President Bush for his signature. Last year the two chambers were unable to reach a compromise.
Opponents said they were concerned that stiffer fines by the Federal Communications Commission would lead to more self-censorship by broadcasters and entertainers unclear about the definition of “indecent.”
They cited the example of several ABC affiliates that did not air the World War II drama “Saving Private Ryan” last years because of worries that violence and profanity would lead to fines, even though the movie already had aired on network TV.
Rep. Jerrold Nadler, a Democrat of New York, said changing the channel is the best way for families to avoid racy programming.
“But the prurient Puritans of this House are not satisfied with free choice and the free market,” Mr. Nadler said. “Instead, they want the government to decide what is or is not appropriate for the public to watch or listen to.”
