preview

Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. V.

Decent Essays

The Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992, wanted to broadcast television to have equal opportunity with cable television. So, they required cable television systems to give a certain amount of channels to the local broadcast television. In Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission, broadcasting for the speakers or broadcasters are challenge because they have problems with sharing the same frequency and the physical limitation on the number of speakers, where as in cable, there is no problems with speakers sharing the same channel. Since there have been “rapid advances in fiber optics and digital compression technology” (pg.523). In order for the government to fix the more broadcaster than frequencies available in the electromagnetic spectrum problem. The government would have to “divide the electromagnetic spectrum and assign specific frequencies to particular broadcasters” to prevent any signal collision (pg.523). The government forcing the must-carry law to cable television system questions whether they violate the cable television First Amendment right. But the 5-4 decision, the justices believe that they are creating a competitive market for other broadcast televisions. …show more content…

Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission, give broadcasters the chance to share public issues on broadcast stations, the fairness doctrine help broadcasters with licenses. When there are frequency monopolies, it could be an issue for other broadcaster that have other views. The government reinforce the licenses to allow people the opportunity to broadcast on a frequency. Throughout the court decision in Red Lion Broadcasting Co. Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission, Justice Bryon White wrote that the First Amendment does not give a person a right to a licenses or monopolizes a radio frequency. So, it means that a person cannot own the radio frequency to prevent another person from using the

Get Access