• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

Here comes the FCC bible!

D

Dougee

Guest
FCC Hires Conservative Indecency Critic
August 08, 2005
By Todd Shields

The Federal Communications Commission has hired as an advisor an anti-pornography activist and former lobbyist for groups that push for Christian precepts in public policy. The move may herald an invigorated campaign against broadcast indecency and bring renewed pressure on cable to reconsider its racy offerings.

Penny Nance, until recently a board member of Concerned Women for America, is working as a special advisor in the FCC's Office of Strategic Planning and Policy Analysis, said aides to FCC Chairman Kevin Martin.

The strategic planning office helps develop agency policy. Concerned Women for America describes its mission as "helping to bring Biblical principles into all levels of public policy." In recent weeks Nance, a longtime supporter, stepped down from the organization's board, said an official with the Washington, D.C.-based group.

Nance founded the Kids First Coalition, a nonprofit group based in Alexandria, Va., that describes itself as working to protect children. It invites members to contact Congress on such issues as abortion and pornography, and publishes Republican speeches and position papers on its Web site. In recent years Nance has twice testified before Congress, describing Internet pornography as a threat to children and speaking in favor of technology that lets DVD movie viewers skip past sexual and violent scenes.

In a January letter to President Bush, Nance joined others in calling for stricter enforcement of indecency laws and identifying a "huge indecency problem" on basic cable. She has said TV broadcasters should restore a family hour when racy programming is held off the air. In 2002, she asked regulators to ensure direct broadcast satellite provider DirecTV did not fall under control of News Corp. chairman Rupert Murdoch, whom she dubbed a purveyor of "must-sleaze TV" on the Fox network. (Murdoch gained control of DirecTV in 2003, after regulators blocked its merger with EchoStar Communications that Nance backed.)

Nance arrives during a quiet period for FCC indecency enforcement,following record fines of $7.9 million proposed in 2004 under Martin's predecessor, fellow Republican Michael Powell.

Martin is on record as supporting strict enforcement of indecency laws, although the extent of his enthusiasm has yet to be tested. The commission has proposed no indecency fines during his five months in the chair.

Some observers believe the FCC is preparing to act, perhaps in coming weeks, on as many as 50 indecency complaints. Some see Nance's arrival as an indication the agency is leaning toward stricter enforcement. "Why else would [Martin] have someone like that onboard?" asked one Washington attorney who watches the FCC closely.

Nance declined an interview, telling Mediaweek, "I can't talk now." Martin's office said she advises the commission on "broadcast- and cable-related consumer and social issues" in a post that "serves as liaison and provides outreach to Congress, public interest groups and the industry." A Martin aide said Nance is working part-time, but did not say when she began working at the agency.

In filings to Congress last month, Nance said she had terminated her work as a lobbyist for Kids First and for the Fort Lauderdale, Fla.-based Center for Reclaiming America, a group that says it works to "implement the Biblical principles on which our country was founded." The filings may have coincided with Nance's start at the FCC,since she couldn't plausibly represent both the agency and private groups.

Nance's activism has spanned a broad range. In 1999 she worked for conservatives fighting a nuclear test ban treaty favored by President Clinton, and the previous year she helped organize a rally in Washington to demonstrate women's dismay at Clinton's sex scandals, according to an account in The Washington Times. This year she signed letters calling for an end to Senate filibusters of judicial nominees and urging Bush to appoint a Supreme Court justice "who understands the difference between cherished liberty and ruinous license."

Nance has previously taken a direct interest in issues of broadcast indecency. "It is time the networks revisited the family hour," she wrote in a by lined article in The Washington Times on May 5, 2003. The family viewing hour resulted from an agreement among major broadcast networks to keep graphic programming off the air from 8 p.m. to 9p.m. when children are most likely to be watching.

In January, Nance joined others in the letter urging Bush to appoint as FCC chair someone committed to enforcing indecency laws. Other signatories included stalwarts of the conservative political movement such as Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, and Phyllis Schlafly, president of Eagle Forum, as well as longtime FCC critics Donald Wildmon, chairman of the American Family Association, and Brent Bozell, president of the Parents Television Council, who both argue the agency has shirked its responsibility to crack down on indecent broadcasts.

"The breakdown of standards on TV and radio is a 'moral values' problem we can not ignore," said the letter to Bush, which was widely interpreted in D.C. as a plea to appoint Martin. It called for "repeated and expanded" fines "until broadcasters understand they are not above the law." It also cited "a huge indecency problem on basic cable channels."

Cable operators are facing demands that they offer subscribers channel-by-channel program selection, in part so consumers need not subsidize racy programming that is part of broad programming tiers. Such an approach is favored by consumer groups that want to cut monthly cable bills and by many cultural conservatives, including the Concerned Women group that Nance served.
 
Another bad choice by the man in the oval office. It is becoming clear that Bush and the republicans are starting to fear a backlash in this country and they are going to take their remaining time in office and try to push the conservative agenda as far as they can before they leave office.

I laugh every time Bush gives a speech about bringing freedom and democracy to the middle east, while behind the scenes his administration is taking it away from us here at home.

> FCC Hires Conservative Indecency Critic
> August 08, 2005
> By Todd Shields
>
> The Federal Communications Commission has hired as an
> advisor an anti-pornography activist and former lobbyist for
> groups that push for Christian precepts in public policy.
> The move may herald an invigorated campaign against
> broadcast indecency and bring renewed pressure on cable to
> reconsider its racy offerings.
>
> Penny Nance, until recently a board member of Concerned
> Women for America, is working as a special advisor in the
> FCC's Office of Strategic Planning and Policy Analysis, said
> aides to FCC Chairman Kevin Martin.
>
> The strategic planning office helps develop agency policy.
> Concerned Women for America describes its mission as
> "helping to bring Biblical principles into all levels of
> public policy." In recent weeks Nance, a longtime supporter,
> stepped down from the organization's board, said an official
> with the Washington, D.C.-based group.
>
> Nance founded the Kids First Coalition, a nonprofit group
> based in Alexandria, Va., that describes itself as working
> to protect children. It invites members to contact Congress
> on such issues as abortion and pornography, and publishes
> Republican speeches and position papers on its Web site. In
> recent years Nance has twice testified before Congress,
> describing Internet pornography as a threat to children and
> speaking in favor of technology that lets DVD movie viewers
> skip past sexual and violent scenes.
>
> In a January letter to President Bush, Nance joined others
> in calling for stricter enforcement of indecency laws and
> identifying a "huge indecency problem" on basic cable. She
> has said TV broadcasters should restore a family hour when
> racy programming is held off the air. In 2002, she asked
> regulators to ensure direct broadcast satellite provider
> DirecTV did not fall under control of News Corp. chairman
> Rupert Murdoch, whom she dubbed a purveyor of "must-sleaze
> TV" on the Fox network. (Murdoch gained control of DirecTV
> in 2003, after regulators blocked its merger with EchoStar
> Communications that Nance backed.)
>
> Nance arrives during a quiet period for FCC indecency
> enforcement,following record fines of $7.9 million proposed
> in 2004 under Martin's predecessor, fellow Republican
> Michael Powell.
>
> Martin is on record as supporting strict enforcement of
> indecency laws, although the extent of his enthusiasm has
> yet to be tested. The commission has proposed no indecency
> fines during his five months in the chair.
>
> Some observers believe the FCC is preparing to act, perhaps
> in coming weeks, on as many as 50 indecency complaints. Some
> see Nance's arrival as an indication the agency is leaning
> toward stricter enforcement. "Why else would [Martin] have
> someone like that onboard?" asked one Washington attorney
> who watches the FCC closely.
>
> Nance declined an interview, telling Mediaweek, "I can't
> talk now." Martin's office said she advises the commission
> on "broadcast- and cable-related consumer and social issues"
> in a post that "serves as liaison and provides outreach to
> Congress, public interest groups and the industry." A Martin
> aide said Nance is working part-time, but did not say when
> she began working at the agency.
>
> In filings to Congress last month, Nance said she had
> terminated her work as a lobbyist for Kids First and for the
> Fort Lauderdale, Fla.-based Center for Reclaiming America, a
> group that says it works to "implement the Biblical
> principles on which our country was founded." The filings
> may have coincided with Nance's start at the FCC,since she
> couldn't plausibly represent both the agency and private
> groups.
>
> Nance's activism has spanned a broad range. In 1999 she
> worked for conservatives fighting a nuclear test ban treaty
> favored by President Clinton, and the previous year she
> helped organize a rally in Washington to demonstrate women's
> dismay at Clinton's sex scandals, according to an account in
> The Washington Times. This year she signed letters calling
> for an end to Senate filibusters of judicial nominees and
> urging Bush to appoint a Supreme Court justice "who
> understands the difference between cherished liberty and
> ruinous license."
>
> Nance has previously taken a direct interest in issues of
> broadcast indecency. "It is time the networks revisited the
> family hour," she wrote in a by lined article in The
> Washington Times on May 5, 2003. The family viewing hour
> resulted from an agreement among major broadcast networks to
> keep graphic programming off the air from 8 p.m. to 9p.m.
> when children are most likely to be watching.
>
> In January, Nance joined others in the letter urging Bush to
> appoint as FCC chair someone committed to enforcing
> indecency laws. Other signatories included stalwarts of the
> conservative political movement such as Tony Perkins,
> president of the Family Research Council, and Phyllis
> Schlafly, president of Eagle Forum, as well as longtime FCC
> critics Donald Wildmon, chairman of the American Family
> Association, and Brent Bozell, president of the Parents
> Television Council, who both argue the agency has shirked
> its responsibility to crack down on indecent broadcasts.
>
> "The breakdown of standards on TV and radio is a 'moral
> values' problem we can not ignore," said the letter to Bush,
> which was widely interpreted in D.C. as a plea to appoint
> Martin. It called for "repeated and expanded" fines "until
> broadcasters understand they are not above the law." It also
> cited "a huge indecency problem on basic cable channels."
>
> Cable operators are facing demands that they offer
> subscribers channel-by-channel program selection, in part so
> consumers need not subsidize racy programming that is part
> of broad programming tiers. Such an approach is favored by
> consumer groups that want to cut monthly cable bills and by
> many cultural conservatives, including the Concerned Women
> group that Nance served.
>
 
> Another bad choice by the man in the oval office. It is
> becoming clear that Bush and the republicans are starting to
> fear a backlash in this country and they are going to take
> their remaining time in office and try to push the
> conservative agenda as far as they can before they leave
> office.
>
> I laugh every time Bush gives a speech about bringing
> freedom and democracy to the middle east, while behind the
> scenes his administration is taking it away from us here at
> home.

I agree. This jerk is trying to ram the right wing agenda through as much as he can because he probably knows it won't be long before he is impeached at the rate he's going.

I don't think Penny The Prude will be around for long either...<P ID="signature">______________
Seattle Hempfest, August 20-21, Myrtle Edwards Park, http://www.hempfest.org/

[email protected]


</P>
 
If you didn't like Larry's post or my last one, don't read this one.

This post contains my candid feelings about parenting and politics, and how this affects radio.

> I agree. This jerk is trying to ram the right wing agenda
> through as much as he can because he probably knows it won't
> be long before he is impeached at the rate he's going.

If people become parents, they should be responsible for parenting their children, not the media. They should not sit their kids in front of the television, radio, telephone, or computer without supervision. They should talk to their kids about the issues facing the community, country, and the world today, because if they don't, someone else will. They should actively find a daycare provider that aligns with their values, morals, etc., if necessary. They should not expect McDonalds, Taco Bell, and Jack in the Box to promote nutrition. They should become active in their kids schools, learn about the curriculum, lesson plans, etc., and pull their kids out of anything they feel is "against their religion" or "against their morals" BEFORE the instruction takes place.
This is just a small sampling of what I feel it should mean to be a parent.

IMO, not only are they trying to force their version of "truth," "liberty," and "FREEDOM;" they are also trying to claim that anyone that disagrees with their views is either: mentally ill, anti-American, or a terrorist. It is obvious that the Patriot Act and Patriot Act #2 are violations of the Bill of Rights and the Constitution as a whole, but as I understand part of the leglslation says that complaints about the laws of these Acts cannot be heard in any court of law.

I would also like to see George Walker Bush impeached for: Treason (inappropriate use of American troops), Perjury (claims of WMD stockpiles in Iraq), and Invasion of a Soverign Nation. I don't know if that will happen though, because not enough people are speaking up on it.

OK, so how does all this affect RADIO? How would anyone like to be a DJ, or a MD, PD, etc., and be thrown in prison if you play a song that some soccer mom doesn't like - even if you're the DJ and you had to play the song to follow the format, because it was on the Selector log? How would you like it if anyone that called into a talk show, questioned Bush's policies, and the radio station were subpoenaed by the FBI to provide your telephone number so they can backtrace it, and randsack (aka search) your home without warrant or reason?

My apologies if I sound like I'm going off the deep end with some of my recent posts, but these are legit concerns that affect all of us in all aspects of our lives, including the medium we love. Yes, I do attend political forums (not online ones, actual 'lets get together and talk about what's going on face-to-face, and what we can do about it' types).

I've said what I have to say about the issue now, and I thank you for your patience and understanding. Furthermore, if you have sat through my posts/comments, and want to contact me, a working e-mail address can be found in my profile. Thanks again.
 
Re: If you didn't like Larry's post or my last one, don't read this one.

> This post contains my candid feelings about parenting and
> politics, and how this affects radio.
>
> > I agree. This jerk is trying to ram the right wing agenda
> > through as much as he can because he probably knows it
> won't
> > be long before he is impeached at the rate he's going.
>
> If people become parents, they should be responsible for
> parenting their children, not the media. They should not
> sit their kids in front of the television, radio, telephone,
> or computer without supervision. They should talk to their
> kids about the issues facing the community, country, and the
> world today, because if they don't, someone else will. They
> should actively find a daycare provider that aligns with
> their values, morals, etc., if necessary. They should not
> expect McDonalds, Taco Bell, and Jack in the Box to promote
> nutrition. They should become active in their kids schools,
> learn about the curriculum, lesson plans, etc., and pull
> their kids out of anything they feel is "against their
> religion" or "against their morals" BEFORE the instruction
> takes place.
> This is just a small sampling of what I feel it should mean
> to be a parent.

MY THOUGHTS EXACTLY!! We don't need big conservative government playing social nannies with taxpayer dollars!

And to be honest, I'd have a harder time trying to explain to my kids why people in government can get away with things the rest of us would be in prison for. Talk about the "accountability" hogwash the Republicans have been feeding us all during the Clinton years!
>
> IMO, not only are they trying to force their version of
> "truth," "liberty," and "FREEDOM;" they are also trying to
> claim that anyone that disagrees with their views is either:
> mentally ill, anti-American, or a terrorist. It is obvious
> that the Patriot Act and Patriot Act #2 are violations of
> the Bill of Rights and the Constitution as a whole, but as I
> understand part of the leglslation says that complaints
> about the laws of these Acts cannot be heard in any court of
> law.


>
> I would also like to see George Walker Bush impeached for:
> Treason (inappropriate use of American troops), Perjury
> (claims of WMD stockpiles in Iraq), and Invasion of a
> Soverign Nation. I don't know if that will happen though,
> because not enough people are speaking up on it.

The good news is opposition to the Bush regime is at an all time high..and getting higher as more is being uncovered about the Karl Rove debacle and other scandals this administration has yet to answer for. I honestly don't think this jerk in the Oval Office is going to be there in 2008 at the rate things are unravelling for him. Even many Republicans that once supported Bush with religious zeal are trying to distance themselves from him. Some of them even support impeachment....

>
> OK, so how does all this affect RADIO? How would anyone
> like to be a DJ, or a MD, PD, etc., and be thrown in prison
> if you play a song that some soccer mom doesn't like - even
> if you're the DJ and you had to play the song to follow the
> format, because it was on the Selector log? How would you
> like it if anyone that called into a talk show, questioned
> Bush's policies, and the radio station were subpoenaed by
> the FBI to provide your telephone number so they can
> backtrace it, and randsack (aka search) your home without
> warrant or reason?

If Penny Nance gets her way, that may be the case. I'm hearing demands from some of these people for parental controls for RADIO. Can you imagine the social uproar from artists, youth, the radio industry, the media, other religions or ideologies if such an invention was forced upon the public?
>
> My apologies if I sound like I'm going off the deep end with
> some of my recent posts, but these are legit concerns that
> affect all of us in all aspects of our lives, including the
> medium we love. Yes, I do attend political forums (not
> online ones, actual 'lets get together and talk about what's
> going on face-to-face, and what we can do about it' types).

You're not off the deep end, you're pretty much average these days.
>
> I've said what I have to say about the issue now, and I
> thank you for your patience and understanding. Furthermore,
> if you have sat through my posts/comments, and want to
> contact me, a working e-mail address can be found in my
> profile. Thanks again.

You're not alone, there's millions who are getting fed up with this administration. Air America is regularly heard blasting out of cars all over the Northwest, the biggest party song of this summer is "B.Y.O.B" System Of A Down (which slams the Bush/Blair administrations for their invasion of Iraq.) High school students and their parents are sparring with local schools over overzealous military recruiters in the schools. Moral inside the military is at an all time low (desertion is not unusual) and the possibility of a draft is increasing as more and more young people try to avoid the military.

Is pulling out of Iraq sending the wrong message? Then what is the right message? Staying in Iraq says to terrorists "Come kill some more of us." Which is exactly what they are doing. Our military is NO deterrant over there. They know we're stretched way too thin and our soldiers are getting extremely weary And the puppet regime the Bush cronies are setting up in Iraq have ideals for women that are no different from the Taliban (burqas, illegal to drive a car, husbands/male family members call their shots.) At least under Hussein, women had equal rights as men as Iraq was perhaps the most Western-styled and secular republic in the Middle East (which was why Islamic terrorists hated Iraq and avoided it until the US came barging in. Now terrorists are EVERYWHERE in Iraq.)

If the lyrics of "War Pigs" Black Sabbath ever so accurately described an administration, it is definately this one.....
>
<P ID="signature">______________
Seattle Hempfest, August 20-21, Myrtle Edwards Park, http://www.hempfest.org/

[email protected]


</P>
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom