At long last, the FCC’s new anti-obscenity drive is achieving the intended “chilling effect.” A number of ABC affiliate TV stations are refusing to carry the network’s broadcast of “Saving Private Ryan.”
“Would the FCC conclude that the movie has sufficient social, artistic, literary, historical or other kinds of value that would protect us from breaking the law?” WOI-TV President Raymond Cole said in a statement appearing on its Web site. “With the current FCC, we just don’t know.”
An FCC spokewoman said the agency wouldn’t tell stations whether the program would run afoul of indecency rules “because that would be censorship.” She added, without irony, “If we get a complaint, we’ll act on it.”
Among the balking stations are Sinclair Broadcasting’s six ABC affiliates (including the ABC affiliate here in Columbus, Ohio). This seems to fit right in with Sinclair’s decision earlier this year to ban Nightline’s tribute to fallen U.S. soldiers in Iraq.
Take that, Janet Jackson!
brainrow :: First Amendment Under Siege | 04-Aug-06 at 6:52 pm | Permalink
[…] A total of 66 television stations refused to air “Saving Private Ryan” this past Veteran’s Day. They were running scared over possible sanctions from the FCC. […]
brainrow :: Connect the Dots | 04-Aug-06 at 6:59 pm | Permalink
[…] On Veterans Day last year, the ABC television network broadcast Saving Private Ryan. But sixty-six ABC affiliates balked at carrying the movie, fearing indecency fines from the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). The FCC knew the content of the movie, but wouldn’t say whether they would fine stations for airing it. […]
Spink Nogales | 10-Aug-06 at 1:44 am | Permalink
Tass and Pravda business model. Replace “for the good of the State” with “for the good of the Family”.
[Comment moved by site owner.]