FCC v. Pacifica Foundation

Last updated

FCC v. Pacifica Foundation
Seal of the United States Supreme Court.svg
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued April 18–19, 1978
Decided July 3, 1978
Full case nameFederal Communications Commission v. Pacifica Foundation, et al.
Citations438 U.S. 726 ( more )
98 S. Ct. 3026; 57 L. Ed. 2d 1073; 1978 U.S. LEXIS 135; 43 Rad. Reg. 2d (P & F) 493; 3 Media L. Rep. 2553
Case history
PriorComplaint granted, 56 F.C.C.2d 94 (1975); reversed, 556 F.2d 9 (D.C. Cir. 1977); cert. granted, 434 U.S. 1008(1978).
Holding
Because of the pervasive nature of broadcasting, it has less First Amendment protection than other forms of communication. The F.C.C. was justified in concluding that Carlin's "Filthy Words" broadcast, though not obscene, was indecent, and subject to restriction.
Court membership
Chief Justice
Warren E. Burger
Associate Justices
William J. Brennan Jr.  · Potter Stewart
Byron White  · Thurgood Marshall
Harry Blackmun  · Lewis F. Powell Jr.
William Rehnquist  · John P. Stevens
Case opinions
MajorityStevens (Parts I, II, III, and IV-C), joined by Burger, Blackmun, Powell, Rehnquist
ConcurrenceStevens (Parts IV-A and IV-B), joined by Burger, Rehnquist
ConcurrencePowell, joined by Blackmun
DissentBrennan, joined by Marshall
DissentStewart, joined by Brennan, White, Marshall
Laws applied
U.S. Const. amend. I; 18 U.S.C.   § 1464

Federal Communications Commission v. Pacifica Foundation, 438 U.S. 726 (1978), was a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court that upheld the ability of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to regulate indecent content sent over the broadcast airwaves. [1]

Contents

Background

On the afternoon of October 30, 1973, radio station WBAI in New York City, owned by the nonprofit Pacifica Foundation, aired a program about societal attitudes toward language and included the monologue "Seven Words You Can Never Say on Television" by comedian George Carlin, from his 1972 album Class Clown . The broadcast included Carlin's recitation of the words "shit", "piss", "fuck", "cunt", "cocksucker", "motherfucker", and "tits". [2] [3]

In reference to this case, a poster in a WBAI broadcast studio warns radio broadcasters against using the seven dirty words. Seven Dirty Words WBAI.jpg
In reference to this case, a poster in a WBAI broadcast studio warns radio broadcasters against using the seven dirty words.

John Douglas, an active member of Morality in Media, filed a complaint with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) claiming that he had heard the broadcast on his car radio while driving with his young son, and that the content was inappropriate for minors per the FCC's rules on indecency over the public broadcast airwaves. [4] Douglas also noted that the material should not have been broadcast during the daytime (it was approximately 2:00pm) when minors were more likely to be listening, per the FCC's rule requiring adult-oriented programming to only be broadcast during late-night hours. [1]

The FCC forwarded Douglas's complaint to Pacifica Foundation for comment. The foundation replied that the program was intended to be educational, addressing public attitudes toward language, and that Carlin was "a significant social satirist" who "like Twain and Sahl before him, examines the language of ordinary people... using words to satirize as harmless and essentially silly our attitudes towards those words." Pacifica also noted that it had received no other public complaints about the broadcast. [1]

In February 1975, the FCC issued a declaratory order stating that Pacifica and WBAI "could have been the subject of administrative sanctions." [1] While no such sanctions were enacted, the FCC recorded the incident in the station's file for later consideration if there were customer complaints about the station in the future or if its broadcasting license was up for renewal. The order noted that regulations on indecent broadcast content had indeed been violated by WBAI. [5] The order also explained that the Carlin routine was "patently offensive" and "deliberately broadcast" at a time when minors could have been listening, which were forbidden per the Communications Act of 1934. [1]

Pacifica Foundation challenged the declaratory order, on First Amendment grounds, to the Circuit Court for the District of Columbia. In March 1977, the circuit court reversed the FCC's order against Pacifica, ruling it to be censorship of a type that was also prohibited by the Communications Act of 1934. The court also held that the order was overbroad by failing to define the public interest that it was trying to serve, beyond poorly-defined protection of an unknown number of children in the audience, while confusing the definition of obscenity (unacceptable for all audiences) as opposed to content that is merely indecent (acceptable for some audiences such as consenting adults). [6]

Given the apparently conflicting provisions of the 1934 Act that were raised in the circuit court ruling, the FCC appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. The high court accepted the case in 1978 and resolved to reconcile the Act's restrictions on indecent broadcasting content with its prohibition of censorship. [1]

Supreme Court opinion

The Supreme Court primarily addressed the matter of whether government regulation of broadcasting content comports with the free speech rights of broadcast operators under the First Amendment. [7] The high court ruled 5–4 in favor of the FCC, holding that the Carlin routine was "indecent but not obscene". Therefore, the Commission could not ban such content outright, but it could restrict broadcasts to certain times of day. This was because the Commission had the authority to shield children from potentially offensive material, and to ensure that unwanted speech does not intrude on the privacy of one's home. [1]

In light of First Amendment concerns, the high court held that government regulation of broadcasting content, when in the form of a partial restriction but not a total ban, is not considered censorship. This is because of the "uniquely pervasive" nature of the broadcast airwaves, that in turn are "uniquely accessible to children". The court held that these two concerns were sufficient to "justify special treatment of indecent broadcasting," thereby allowing the FCC to sanction broadcasters for airing inappropriate content that violates the provisions of the Communications Act of 1934. [1] Thus, the Commission's warning to Pacifica about broadcasting the Carlin routine in the afternoon was found to be an acceptable regulatory action. [8]

If the Carlin routine had included obscenity, the FCC could have banned it from the broadcast airwaves outright. Since the routine was merely indecent (unacceptable for some audiences but acceptable for others), the FCC could not ban the content but could restrict it to certain times of day. This became known as the FCC's safe harbor rule. [9]

The ruling gave the FCC broad leeway to determine what constituted indecency in different contexts. [10] Conversely, it would be acceptable for Pacifica or any other radio station to broadcast the Carlin routine, or any similarly indecent material, outside of the daytime safe harbor hours when vulnerable audiences like children are more likely to be listening. [11]

Impact

The Pacifica ruling is often cited as one of the most important precedents in American broadcasting law and the U.S. government's ability to regulate mass media content. [12] The case is also cited for clarifying the potential conflict between the government's interest in protecting audiences and a broadcaster's First Amendment rights, [13] though the Supreme Court's interpretation is sometimes criticized for its inconsistency and inability to adapt to new media technologies or trends in popular content. [14] [15] The case is also an important precedent for determining the differences between obscene and indecent content and appropriate regulatory reactions to them. [16]

George Carlin has been credited for his role in this turning point for the law. In 1997, Pacifica Radio host Larry Bensky prefaced an interview with Carlin by saying: "George Carlin, you're a very unusual guest for Pacifica Radio. You're probably the only person in the United States that we don't have to give The Carlin Warning to about which words you can't say on this program, because it's named after you." [17] [18]

Despite its victory in Pacifica, the FCC at first used its new safe harbor regulatory powers sparingly. In the 1990s, however, the FCC ramped up sanctions for indecent broadcasts. By the early 2000s, the Commission began to levy more sanctions with higher dollar amounts–with fines of up to $500,000 for some offenses. [19] Such actions have been inconsistent and sometimes raise accusations of selective enforcement. [20]

Related Research Articles

The Communications Decency Act of 1996 (CDA) was the United States Congress's first notable attempt to regulate pornographic material on the Internet. In the 1997 landmark case Reno v. ACLU, the United States Supreme Court unanimously struck the act's anti-indecency provisions.

Pacifica Foundation is an American non-profit organization that owns five independently operated, non-commercial, listener-supported radio stations known for their progressive/liberal political orientation. Its national headquarters adjoins station KPFK in Los Angeles, California.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Telecommunications Act of 1996</span> 1996 U.S. legislation overhauling telecommunications regulations and laws

The Telecommunications Act of 1996 is a United States federal law enacted by the 104th United States Congress on January 3, 1996, and signed into law on February 8, 1996 by President Bill Clinton. It primarily amended Chapter 5 of Title 47 of the United States Code. The act was the first significant overhaul of United States telecommunications law in more than sixty years, amending the Communications Act of 1934, and represented a major change in that law, because it was the first time that the Internet was added to American regulation of broadcasting and telephony.

Miami Herald Publishing Co. v. Tornillo, 418 U.S. 241 (1974), was a seminal First Amendment ruling at the United States Supreme Court. The Supreme Court overturned a Florida state law that required newspapers to offer equal space to political candidates who wished to respond to election-related editorials or endorsements. That law was found to be an unconstitutional restriction of freedom of the press under the First Amendment.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Seven dirty words</span> Words traditionally disallowed in U.S. broadcast radio and television

The seven dirty words are seven English-language curse words that American comedian George Carlin first listed in his 1972 "Seven Words You Can Never Say on Television" monologue. The words, in the order Carlin listed them, are: "shit", "piss", "fuck", "cunt", "cocksucker", "motherfucker", and "tits".

Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, 521 U.S. 844 (1997), was a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States, unanimously ruling that anti-indecency provisions of the 1996 Communications Decency Act violated the First Amendment's guarantee of freedom of speech. This was the first major Supreme Court ruling on the regulation of materials distributed via the Internet.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">WBAI</span> Pacifica Radio station in New York City

WBAI is a non-commercial, listener-supported radio station licensed to New York, New York. Its programming is a mixture of political news, talk and opinion from a left-leaning, liberal or progressive viewpoint, and eclectic music. The station is owned by the Pacifica Foundation with studios located in Brooklyn and transmitter located at 4 Times Square.

KPFK is a listener-sponsored radio station based in North Hollywood, California, United States, which serves Southern California, and also streams 24 hours a day via the Internet. It was the second of five stations in the non-commercial, listener-sponsored Pacifica Foundation network.

<i>Occupation: Foole</i> 1973 live album by George Carlin

Occupation: Foole is the fifth album released by American comedian George Carlin. It was recorded on March 2 and 3, 1973 at the Circle Star Theater in San Carlos, California, and released in October of that year. The album was later included as part of the 1992 Classic Gold collection, and The Little David Years (1971-1977) box set in 1999.

Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. Federal Communications Commission, 395 U.S. 367 (1969), was a seminal First Amendment ruling at the United States Supreme Court. The Supreme Court held that radio broadcasters enjoyed free speech rights under the First Amendment, but those rights could be partially restricted by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to maintain the public interest in equitable use of scarce broadcasting frequencies. As a result, the FCC's Fairness Doctrine was found to be constitutional.

Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. v. FCC is the general title of two rulings of the United States Supreme Court on the constitutionality of must-carry regulations enforced by the Federal Communications Commission on cable television operators. In the first ruling, known colloquially as Turner I, 512 U.S. 622 (1994), the Supreme Court held that cable television companies were First Amendment speakers who enjoyed free speech rights when determining what channels and content to carry on their networks, but demurred on whether the must-carry rules at issue were restrictions of those rights. After a remand to a lower court for fact-finding on the economic effects of the then-recent Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act, the dispute returned to the Supreme Court. In Turner II, 520 U.S. 180 (1997), the Supreme Court held that must-carry rules for cable television companies were not restrictions of their free speech rights because the U.S. government had a compelling interest in enabling the distribution of media content from multiple sources and in preserving local television.

In broadcast law, the pervasiveness doctrine is the doctrine stating that media content of broadcasts is subject to regulation because broadcast radio waves are available to anyone and therefore "uniquely pervasive". In general, profanity and sex, or other adult material deemed "indecent" by a broadcasting authority, may not be broadcast outside of overnight "watershed" or "safe harbor" hours when children are unlikely to be awake. Material deemed "obscene" may still be prohibited at all times.

Federal Communications Commission v. Fox Television Stations, Inc., 556 U.S. 502 (2009), is a decision by the United States Supreme Court that upheld regulations of the Federal Communications Commission that ban "fleeting expletives" on television broadcasts, finding they were not arbitrary and capricious under the Administrative Procedure Act. The constitutional issue, however, was not resolved and was remanded to the Second Circuit and re-appealed to the Supreme Court for a decision in June 2012.

Federal Communications Commission fines of <i>The Howard Stern Show</i>

Between 1990 and 2004, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) issued fines totaling $2.5 million to radio licensees for airing material it deemed indecent from The Howard Stern Show, the highest amount of any American radio show. The Supreme Court had provided broadcasting guidelines for indecent material in its 1978 ruling in its landmark decision, in which the court prohibited the "seven dirty words" made famous by comedian George Carlin. The FCC had received complaints about Howard Stern as early as 1981, but its limited power at the time prevented further action taking place.

Federal Communications Commission v. Fox Television Stations, Inc., 567 U.S. 239 (2012), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States regarding whether the U.S. Federal Communications Commission's scheme for regulating speech is unconstitutionally vague. The Supreme Court excused the broadcasters from paying fines levied for what the FCC had determined indecency, in a majority opinion delivered by Justice Anthony Kennedy. The Supreme Court had previously issued an opinion in the case in 2009 addressing the nature of the fine itself, without addressing the restriction on indecent speech.

Radio regulation in the United States was enforced to eliminate different stations from broadcasting on each other's airwaves. Regulated by the Federal Communications Commission, standardization was encouraged by the chronological and economic advances experienced by the United States of America. Commenced in 1910, before the Communications Act of 1934 was passed, the Federal Radio Commission was the first organization established to control the functioning of radio as a whole through the Commerce Clause. Airwaves run across interstate and international waters, leading to some form of regulation. As years progressed, deregulation was strongly encouraged to provide a little independence from the government.

Actionable indecency is a legal doctrine held by the Federal Communications Commission since the 1978 FCC vs. Pacifica case, that broadcast speech can be regulated even if it does not contain the seven dirty words deemed "indecent".

Comcast Cablevision of Broward County, Inc. v. Broward County, Florida, 124 F.Supp.2d 685, was a ruling at the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida over the constitutionality of a local ordinance requiring an Internet service provider to share its physical network with competitors. The ruling is often cited as an important early precedent on the matter of network neutrality and the free speech rights of Internet service providers.

Federal Communications Commission v. Sanders Brothers Radio Station, 309 U.S. 470 (1940), was an early precedent on the enforcement of broadcasting law in the United States. The Supreme Court held that when the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) makes spectrum allocation decisions regarding the use of broadcast frequencies by radio stations, such decisions should be made to serve the public interest, convenience, and necessity as defined by the Communications Act of 1934. Consequently, such decisions by the FCC do not need to consider the profitability or business interests of the companies assigned such frequencies, or those of their competitors.

<i>Trinity Methodist Church, South v. Federal Radio Commission</i> Court case

Trinity Methodist Church, South v. Federal Radio Commission, 62 F.2d 850 (1932), was an early precedent on the enforcement of broadcasting law in the United States. The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit upheld a decision by the Federal Radio Commission (FRC) to deny a broadcasting license for radio station KGEF, due to controversial content broadcast by Robert P. Shuler. The court held that the public interest in appropriate content on the broadcast airwaves can override free speech concerns under the First Amendment, and that the denial of a radio station license is acceptable if done per due process of law requirements under the Fifth Amendment.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 FCC v. Pacifica Foundation, 438 U.S. 726 (S. Ct., 1978).
  2. ↑ "George Carlin, Filthy Words". Exploring Constitutional Conflicts. Retrieved December 18, 2016. The following is a verbatim transcript of "Filthy Words" (the George Carlin monologue at issue in the Supreme Court case of FCC v. Pacifica Foundation) prepared by the Federal Communications Commission...
  3. ↑ James Sullivan: Seven Dirty Words: The Life and Crimes of George Carlin. ISBN   9780786745920. p. 4
  4. ↑ "Boca Man Forever Linked To George Carlin". WPEC. June 23, 2008. Archived from the original on June 28, 2008. Retrieved February 18, 2014.
  5. ↑ Samaha, Adam. "The Story of FCC v. Pacifica Foundation (and Its Second Life)" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on April 19, 2011. Retrieved October 5, 2011.
  6. ↑ Pacifica Foundation v. FCC, 556 F. 2d 9 (D.C. Cir., 1977).
  7. ↑ Arnold, Fran Avery; Cameron, Cara Ebert (1979). "Broadcasters' First Amendment Rights through the Courts with the Seven Dirty Words: F.C.C. v. Pacifica Foundation". Nova Law Journal. 3 (1): 271 – via HeinOnline.
  8. ↑ Eichman, Gregor (Spring 1979). "A Pig in the Parlor: F.C.C. v. Pacifica Foundation". Western State University Law Review. 6 (2): 290–292 – via HeinOnline.
  9. ↑ Kerrigan, Wade (October 1993). "FCC Regulation of the Radio Industry: A Safe Harbor for Indecent Programming". Iowa Law Review. 79 (1): 150–152 – via HeinOnline.
  10. ↑ Levi, Lili (2013). "'Smut and Nothing But': The FCC, Indecency, and Regulatory Transformations in the Shadows". Administrative Law Review. 65 (3): 523 – via HeinOnline.
  11. ↑ Spade, Dana R. (Spring 1993). "Incentives and Methods for Compliance with FCC Regulations in Broadcast". Preventive Law Reporter. 12 (1): 19–20 – via HeinOnline.
  12. ↑ Tremblay, R. Wilfred (2003). "FCC v. Pacifica Foundation". In Parker, Richard A. (ed.). Free Speech on Trial: Communication Perspectives on Landmark Supreme Court Decisions. Tuscaloosa, AL: University of Alabama Press. pp. 218–233. ISBN   978-0-8173-1301-2.
  13. ↑ Bloom, Theodore Samuel (1979). "FCC v. Pacifica Foundation: An Indecent (Speech) Decision? – (George Carlin's Filthy Words)". Ohio State Law. 40 (1): 159–161 – via HeinOnline.
  14. ↑ Mustin, Scott H. (Winter 1979). "FCC Content Regulation of Cable Pay-Television: The Threat of Pacifica". Cumberland Law Review. 9 (3): 829 – via HeinOnline.
  15. ↑ Susca, Margot A.; Proffitt, Jennifer M. (2011). "Patently Offensive: What Pacifica Tells Us About Regulating Broadcast Violence". Free Speech Yearbook. 45 (1): 87–91.
  16. ↑ Billingsley, Robert T. (Winter 1979). "Indecent Language: A New Class of Prohibitable Speech - FCC v. Pacifica Foundation". University of Richmond Law Review. 13 (2): 311 – via HeinOnline.
  17. ↑ Bensky, Larry (June 4, 1997), Living Room : Interview With Comedian George Carlin, Pacifica Radio Archives, retrieved February 18, 2014
  18. ↑ Bensky, Larry (June 4, 1997), PZ0624b Radical Comedians Box Set DISC TWO, Pacifica Radio Archives, retrieved February 18, 2014
  19. ↑ Butler, Jordan (Summer 2011). "The FCC in 2010: Seventy-Six Years of Obscenity, Indecency, and Inconsistency". Capital University Law Review. 39 (3): 640–642 – via HeinOnline.
  20. ↑ Goldsamt, Seth T. (Winter 1995). "'Crucified by the FCC'? - Howard Stern, the FCC, and Selective Prosecution". Columbia Journal of Law and Social Problems. 28 (2): 220–224 – via HeinOnline.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.