Goodbye Good Programming
When one thinks of original, successful radio shows in the U.S., one show definitely comes to mind, Howard Stern. The Howard Stern morning radio show has been the most successful radio show on the radio for some time now. Howard Stern created a show unlike any other; it is a morning radio show that has it all. The show has interviews with famous people, listeners can call in to the show with there opinions, current news, and most notably its sexual content and controversial opinions on what is happening in the world we live in. The show has always pushed the limits of freedom of speech while at the same time opened new doors and ideas within the limits. Currently in our country this show has become under fire by our government and is very close to being taken off the airwaves. This is just one show that is in jeopardy of being taken off the air.
Recently our government through its administrative agency for communications, the FCC, has decided to send a message to the corporate media to clean up their broadcasts. The FCC defines indecency as:
1. An average person, applying contemporary community standards, must find that the material, as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest.
2. The material must depict or describe, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by applicable law.
3. The material, taken as a whole, must lack serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.
The fine for broadcast indecency has been raised to $275,000.00 from $27,500.00 per instance. The problem that has arisen from this new interest in cleaning up broadcasts to protect the general public from being exposed to this indecency is that some of our best programming is in jeopardy. There are some huge corporations behind this programming such as Time Warner, Viacomm, Clear Channel, etc. these corporations are becoming concerned that the government is starting to focus attention on how big they have become and how much power they have to control the media.
Unfortunately, because of this new motivation to control our programming to the FCC?fs liking one avenue of our freedom of speech is being taken away from us. The public programming we currently have is perfectly acceptable and almost to conservative. It?fs not like we have one TV or radio station that everyone is forced to watch. If you don?ft like what your watching or listening to you can just change the channel or turn it off.
As the technologies associated with communications have evolved, so have the messages that are being transmitted. In an effort to shield citizens from offensive speech, the United States government passed the Communications Act of 1934, which created the rules that a broadcaster would have to obey to remain on the air and restricted broadcasters from “utter[ing] any obscene, indecent, or profane language by means of radio communication” (Scalia 2). This ban on obscene language was only to be in effect from the hours of 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. in an attempt try to limit children from hearing the offensive speech. Congress created the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to regulate this act and in 1975, the FCC implemented the statutory ban on indecent broadcasts when the comedian George Carlin did his “Filthy Words” piece during a daytime broadcast. In FCC v. Pacifica Foundation, the Supreme Court found the ban to be both good law and constitutional. The FCC said...
... are seen and treated in our society. The biggest part of the problem is the way people act about and to homeless people. It's ridiculous to treat anyone different because of their social status; it's pretty much racism. Simple things people can do is just treat people equally, no matter who they are, and not just basing it on how they look.Homelessness is one of the fastest growing epidemics in the United States right now. There are over 3.5 million homeless people in the US now. Also, a quarter of people living on the streets are severely mentally ill, and must be admitted to institutions, and have the capability to if they were given or knew they had a chance. The poverty level is constantly rising, and is forcing more and more people onto the streets. We can just sit around and hope someone else does it, or we can take action. Next time you walk by homeless man or family, and before you make a judgement about them, just take a minute and think about how easily it could be you.
Through many writers’ works the correlation of mortality and love of life is strongly enforced. This connection is one that is easy to illustrate and easy to grasp because it is experienced by humans daily. For instance, when a loved one passes away, even though there is time for mourning, there is also an immediate appreciation for one’s life merely because they are living. In turn, the correspondence of mortality and a stronger love for life is also evident in every day life when things get hard and then one is confronted by some one else whom has an even bigger problem, then making the original problem seem minute. This is seen as making the bad look worse so then the bad looks good and the good looks even better. The connection of mortality and one’s love for life is seen in both T.S. Eliot’s The Wasteland and Yulisa Amadu Maddy’s No Past No Present No Future.
...things keeping on changing. Obscenity is an issue that needs to be addressed now and in the future and this could only be done through the power of the highest court, The Supreme Court.
Electronic media content can be viewed differently according to personal opinions, but the First Amendment Rights of the United States Constitution lay the foundation for the legal system that is to be followed. These rights form a guide that help citizens have a stronger grasp on what is and isn’t acceptable within the eye of the law. Narrowing down to electronic media content, there has been a rise of tension involving first amendment rights of content regulations. The spectrum scarcity rationale has made it possible to control licensing schemes, along with direct content control to make sure rules are being followed according to the First Amendment. The differences between cable TV versus broadcasting are similar, yet contrasting.
Regardless of what the world does, in general, this country desires to protect the youth from sex in television and radio. Some Americans feel furious when seeing or hearing sexual material and send complaints to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). While others either support the questionable material or feel indifferent towards it.
The first reason why peoples became homeless is that people lost their jobs, their homes are destroying from tornados, and mudslide and other young teenagers like to run away from home because of alcohols and addiction to drugs. Second, is they are family became mental illness and could not afford the health care. People should respect and show courtesy to homeless. There is a saying, “You Can’t Judge a book by it cover” it is the English idioms and it is a figure of speech. The person that says the quote was George Eliot. The meaning is people only see the outside appearance is like the covers of the book are sometimes boring. However, people need to get better acquainted with each other to see inside a person is similar to when people open their book or their heart. The homeless people could get help to treat their addictive to alcohols and drugs. The government has programs for the homeless to have the social welfare of inexpensive for a rent a house, food stamps for foods, and affordable health care. There are men, women, LGBT, and children could become homeless. Most individual of homeless will either go to jail or would drink from alcohols and drugs. Most of the U.S. states are banned the homeless from the streets. People prevent homeless people if they addictive to alcohol or drugs are not letting them buy in their stores. People who
‘I can’t define pornography, but I know it when I see it.’ (P. Stewart, US Supreme Court’) Justice Potter Stewart’s remarks in the Jacobellis Vs. Ohio Supreme Court case are infamous in both American law and pop culture. Since the inception of the first amendment, American law has excluded the use of profanity or obscene content from protected free speech. However, as Justice Stewart stated, courts and lawmakers have routinely struggled to outline what constitutes obscenities…… This struggle is largely in part to the fluid dynamic of morality in society.
Both parents are critical for a child’s growth and development. Not having a parent may impact both child and parent adversely. “Children with one parent are at higher risk of delinquency, then, because there is one less person capable of supervision” (Anderson, 576). It seems only logical that a child raised by one parent would have a harder time trying to stay out of trouble. Individual and Contextual Influences on Delinquency: The Role of the Single-parent Family an article written by Amy Anderson focuses on the single-parent family role. The data used to examine this role was taken from an evaluation type of research called the Gang Resistance Education and Training (GREAT). The sample population was 5,935 eighth-grade students, aged thirteen to fifteen from forty-two schools at eleven sites. They used three measures of self-reported delinquency, status, property, and person offenses. The results of this study seemed to be that the specific family structure did not affect weather an adolescent participated in delinquent activity.
The central theme surrounding despair is clearly shown through the use of the three literary devices. Through the information that has been gathered, the reader can conclude that both of these men are so absorbed into their own grief that they live each day as shallow as the last. Despair is revealed through living by a daily routine, masking sorrow, and being stuck living with the same bad habits. A life without meaning is pointless; live a life where there are no regrets and where positive moments occur every day.
During the transition from a high school writer to a collegiate writer, my strength at understanding the basic principles of good writing has remained consistent. I grasp the ...
I feel that censorship of controversial television advertisements is an unjust practice, which violates the first amendment in the Constitution.
Did you remember to tell your cousin happy birthday on Facebook? Do you know how many people liked your latest picture on instagram? Or how many retweets did you get on your totally relatable and borderline inspirational tweet? As of January 2014, 74% of online adults use social networking sites (Rainie). Also more than 9 out of 10 American teenagers use social media(Blaszczak). Because of social networking we are becoming more connected than ever before. Important information can spread faster than wildfire, and we now have the ability to have friends and relationships all over the world. With the ability to communicate and interact with anyone at our fingertips what could go wrong? Well...lots of things.
The argument against media censorship has been going on for years, even decades. It is still a hotbed issue for some. Should something that offends some be banned for everyone? Should forms of media be censored, and if so, how is it done fairly and equally? Arguments will be presented as well as some as some deeper issues as well.
76% of American adults online use social networking sites such as Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Linkedin, and Pinterest, as of July 2015, up from 26% in 2008. A social network is a website that brings people together to talk, share ideas and interests, or make new friends. Some believe social networks harm the society because it’s a waste of time and can be very dangerous; however it can be a very useful tool like staying in touch with family and finding out about the news.