Who's Down With FCC? The PTC!

"The Federal Communications Commission," reports the New York Times, "leveled a record $3.6 million fine yesterday against 111 television stations that broadcast an episode of 'Without a Trace' in December 2004, with the agency saying the CBS show suggested that its teenage characters were participating in a sexual orgy."

If you want to watch the $3.6 million scene, the Parents Television Council has kindly made the video available. They're not, presumably, doing so for your enjoyment: The PTC, a subsidiary of the Media Research Center (SEE UPDATE), is trying to get shows and scenes that its members consider objectionable off the air. "The Parents Television Council was founded in 1995 to ensure that children are not constantly assaulted by sex, violence and profanity on television and in other media," according to the PTC Web site. The organization produces a list of the best and worst shows on television, and according to Sourcewatch, a December 2004 report in Mediaweek noted that "99.8% of 240,000 complaints made to the FCC complaining about indecency in 2003 originated from the Parents Television Council."

It's somewhat amusing, of course, that the PTC makes available the scenes they object to on their Web site, though it does make sense for them to show the scenes so people can see why the PTC is objecting. Still, the whole thing is a bit uncomfortable, which is perhaps why they include a disclaimer before the objectionable videos: "WARNING: Graphic Content!!! Do NOT push play if you don't want to see the explicit video!!!" (Jokes Steve Safran in the comments section of Lost Remote: "Yeah. That will keep teenagers from watching it." Writes another commenter: "I want to thank them for putting it all together in one place. Saved me a lot of time.")

I watched the scene in question, and I do think it was graphic in a way that didn't seem to serve any function other than titillation, although it did look to me like the "teenagers" featured were all about 25. (CBS says the episode contained "an important and socially relevant storyline warning parents to exercise greater supervision of their teenage children." I guess that's one way of looking at it.) The bigger question here has to do with to what degree television programming should be regulated. The FCC has been steadily increasing the scope of what it considers indecent, most dramatically after the infamous "wardrobe malfunction" during the 2004, for which CBS was fined $550,000, a fine the FCC has upheld.

Jeff Jarvis has just about the best reaction to this I've found from the perspective of those who think the FCC is going too far. (The PTC's celebratory statement is here, if you're interested.) Here's how Jarvis starts:

When government regulates speech, it falls onto a slick slope. This is a particularly perilous course these days, when mere cartoons can spawn deadly riots. Now, more than ever, shouldn't we be demonstrating the power of free speech, the courage to hear anything? Instead, in America, our government is washing our collective mouths out with soap.

…the largest-ever MSHA fine for mine safety violations (for a 2001 incident which resulted in 13 deaths) was $605,400.

Show [breasts] on TV, pay millions in restitution.

Kill 13 coal miners, and you'll just have to wait on buying that summer cottage until next year.

"PTC is not a subsidiary of the MRC. It is a separate group, though with a couple of board members who sit on the boards of both and Brent Bozell oversees both organizations. But it is not a "subsidiary" of the MRC. The NewsBusters blog, CyberCast News Service and the Free Market Project can properly be described as subsidiaries of the MRC.

It would be accurate to call PTC a group which "spun off" from the MRC since that is what happened in 1995 when the MRC's "entertainment division" became a legally separate operation with its own BOD, officers and articles of incorporation."