First Amendment Status of Cable TV v. Broadcast

Censorship on television in the United States has been an issue ever since the television was invented. The public holds a variety of stances on the topic, and no matter what law is ever passed regarding censorship, it will never suit the needs of everyone. Some believe that censorship violates individual rights in the law, and others believe that censorship should be available through members in the family, not the government. On the other hand, some people strive to maintain government regulation of censorship. Television censorship is significant because it holds the future of our country. If channels continue to be censored, our rights will be violated. If not, then the future generations may change

1a) The internet is compared to provide an interpretation of the first amendment protection as it was not presented at the time of passing protection laws as a communication medium to find a common ground because it has similarities and as well as differing natures, values, abuses and dangers to the library, television and public places which the law treats differently.

In the United States Supreme Court case Verizon Communications Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission, Verizon Communications argued that it was wrong and unreasonable for the Federal Communications Commission to regulate and set leasing rates for networks. Ultimately, the January 14th decision held that the Federal Communications Commission can indeed set rates charged by the service provider for leased elements that are completely unbound from the provider's investment. Also the Federal Communications Commission can also require service provider's to combine certain elements of their networks at the request of the customer or user. However, in regards to network neutrality, the Federal Communications Commission does not have the

The issue of 1st amendment rights are critical subject in a Democracy such as America. For example, in the past countries like Nazi controlled Germany control media content to push out their extremist ideas and to squash any opposition content. That’s why government intervention is imperative to protect individual’s rights of free speech, freedom of press, and right to petition especially in relation to cable regulation. The best way to measure if government intervention in cable regulation is infringing upon citizens 1st amendment right is to focus on major consumer demands. The most appropriate goals to address the problem are to be able to please majority of consumers by implementing the perfect balance between autonomy and control when

The FCC has been monitoring large radio stations throughout the country for a long time now. This organization is a seven part group which is all run by Frank R. McNinch, who used to be the chief of the Federal Power Commission (Rockwell 217). This organization is primarily a licensing and monitoring assembly, which has technical regulatory powers. The licenses they give out are only valid for a period of time, and then must be renewed. These licenses decide the power and coverage the station has to broadcast on (Rockwell 218). These guidelines are very strictly enforced by the FCC because of how the public has reacted to some of the situations that have occurred. The FCC has also created criteria which has a “public mandate” that they are instituting into

According to an article from the New York Times by Rebecca R. Rutz and Steve Lohrfeb, they quoted the FCC commissioner Tom Wheeler is saying, “[they are using] all of the tools in our tool box to protect innovators and consumers” (Ruiz and Lohrfeb). The FCC is trying to make the Internet be considered as a public utility so that it can be under the same jurisdiction as a phone, TV, and radio. The reason why this would be beneficial is because FCC can now control the Internet and can make cable companies not be allowed to charge fees, slow speeds, and charge companies for throttling bandwidth. By not allowing cable companies to enforce their new profit scheme, they are allowing freedom of speech to flourish online. Censorship of any kind that limits speech is very powerful and it should be deemed illegal by the government’s jurisdiction.

In 1928 the law called the “Davis Amendment” was passed. Every zone had to have equal allocations of licenses, time of operation, station power, and wavelength. It made radio more consistent, therefore audiences enjoyed a better listening experience. The Davis Amendment asked many radio stations to relocate because no matter the size of location the number of stations had to be kept the same. In 1934 Congress passed the Communications Act, establishing the Federal Communications Commission, which “regulates interstate and international communications by radio, television, wire, satellite and cable in all 50 states, the District of Columbia and U.S. territories”. The FCC was created because TV was new, the Radio act of 1927 never mentioned it and they wanted to regulate TV. The impact of the FCC is still being felt today since they control what can be on TV, internet, and radio. The Radio Act’s influence on the FCC can be still felt

“The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) was created when Congress passed the Communications Act in 1934 which abolished the Federal Radio Commission and transferred jurisdiction of radio licensing to the Federal Communications Commission. This also included the telecommunications jurisdiction which was previously handled by the Interstate Commerce Commission. The

The FCC’s move will allow companies like Comcast, AT&T and Verizon to charge internet companies for speedier access to consumers and to block outside services they don’t like. The change also axes a host of consumer protections, including privacy requirements and rules barring unfair practices that gave consumers an avenue to pursue complaints about price gouging.

However, those who are against censorship on the Internet believe that it violates their right to free speech. Because the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regulates radio and television, Internet users believe this is the only available forum that guarantees the open exchange of ideas. The freedom of expression is a right guaranteed to Americans and therefore should not be restricted by the government.

Over the centuries, the media has played a significant role in the shaping of societies across the globe. This is especially true of developed nations where media access is readily available to the average citizen. The media has contributed to the creation of ideologies and ideals within a society. The media has such an effect on social life, that a simple as a news story has the power to shake a nation. Because of this, governments around the world have made it their duty to be active in the regulation and control of media access in their countries. The media however, has quickly become dominated by major mega companies who own numerous television, radio and movie companies both nationally and

Censorship may be protection from inappropriate materials, but it also limits free speech. For the limitation of free speech, it is reasonable why people are emphatically against censorship. It is understood that there is a need to filter some of the materials released in today’s society, but too much is being done by people who have no right meddling with everyone’s rights. Civilization has always been plagued by a never ending battle being fought over what is deemed right and wrong. In today’s culture, censorship oppresses everything in the media. From movies and music to television and even news stories, most of the content viewed today has been filtered one way or another. Restrictions have been in place since early societies have been

1. Changes in the US regulatory environment created additional challenges for Continental’s core business: 1992 Cable Act limited the cable TV companies’ ability to raise cable rates whereas costs at market prices reached up to $2000/subscriber. This inevitably led to constrained profit margins

The Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the "Communications Act"), and Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regulations and policies also significantly impact Comcast’s decision on the company's businesses, including cable system and broadcast station ownership, video services customer rates, carriage of broadcast television stations, broadcast programming content and advertising, package of programming to customers and other providers, access to cable system channels by franchising authorities and other parties, the use of utility poles and conduits, and the offering of high-speed internet and phone services (Marketline, 2013). Failure of Comcast's businesses to comply with the laws and regulations may result in administrative enforcement actions, fines and civil and criminal liability. In as much that laws, policies and regulations are much stricter in the U.S. this would present significant risks to the company's businesses which may affect its operating

In today’s world, there is an endless amount of information available to people everywhere around the globe. Mass media is definitely shaping our world, whether it is in a positive way or a negative way. Television and the radio waves provide us with hours of entertainment. The emergence of the Internet allows us to access thousands of pages of information within the reach our very own fingertips. But with the convenience of all this information comes along a certain level of responsibility. As a society, we Americans must decide what is appropriate information and entertainment for the masses to access and enjoy. But does today’s society give too much leeway in what it thinks as “appropriate?” Does increased