MyDD :: We Can Make A Difference

We Can Make A Difference

by Chris Bowers, Thu Dec 09, 2004 at 05:17:11 PM EST

The UCC's new, activist stance in regards to the FCC and network bigotry is something that not only do I think we should become involved with, but it is a cause where we can make an important difference (read pastordan's take on it here). If you have any doubts about this, just read this post from Jeff Jarvis:

With not much original reporting, I discovered that the latest big fine by the FCC against a TV network -- a record $1.2 million against Fox for its "sexually suggestive" Married by America -- was brought about by a mere three people who actually composed letters of complaint. Yes, just three people.

I filed a Freedom of Information Act request on Oct. 12 asking to see all of the 159 complaints the FCC cited in its complaint against Fox.

I just received the FCC's reply with a copy of all the complaints -- and a letter explaining that, well, there weren't 159 after all. William H. Davenport, chief of the FCC's Investigations and Hearings Divison, admits in his letter that because the complaints were sent to multiple individuals at the FCC, it turns out there actually were only 90 complaints. It gets better: The FCC confesses that they come from only 23 individuals.

It is shocking enough that what tens of millions of us are permitted to see by our government can be determined by 159 ... or 90 ... or 23.

But it gets even better: I examined the complaints and found that all but two of them were virtually identical. In other words, one person took the time to write a letter and 20 other people then photocopied or merely emailed it to the FCC many times. They all came from an automated complaint factory like the one I write about here. Only two letters were not the form letter.

So in the end, that means that a grand total of three citizens bothered to take the time to sit down and actually write a letter of complaint to the FCC. Millions of people watched the show. Three wrote letters of complaint.

And on the basis of that, the FCC decided to bring down the heavy hammer of government censorship and fine Fox an incredible $1.2 million for suggesting -- not depicting but merely suggesting -- sex on a show that had already been canceled because the marketplace didn't like it anyway.

We can only retake our airwaves if we decide to act.

Tags: Media (all tags)

Permalink :: 17 Comments :: Post a Comment

can someone draft some talking points (none / 0)

and post here with correct addresses and names at the FCC?

We can start some email chains with suggestions that letter writers:
1-compose letters in their own words
2-choose some, but not all of the talking points
3-adhere to a polite tone or avoid particular words or issues

I'm quite sure that if I start a chain to the few people I know, it will generate at least 10 letters.

by sarany on Thu Dec 09, 2004 at 05:23:07 PM EST

Re: can someone draft some talking points (none / 0)

I completely agree we need some talking points and then have a mass REAL LEGITIMATE hand written campaign of emails and letters AGAINST these illegitimate dominionists who are trying control our airwaves and government.

Chairman Michael K. Powell: Michael.Powell@fcc.gov
Commissioner Kathleen Q. Abernathy: Kathleen.Abernathy@fcc.gov
Commissioner Michael J. Copps: Michael.Copps@fcc.gov
Commissioner Kevin J. Martin: KJMWEB@fcc.gov
Commissioner Jonathan S. Adelstein: Jonathan.Adelstein@fcc.gov

General information, inquiries & complaints: fccinfo@fcc.gov
Freedom of Information Act requests: FOIA@fcc.gov
Comments on FCC Internet services: webmaster@fcc.gov
Elections & political candidate matters: campaignlaw@fcc.gov
Children's Television Programming Report (Form 398) (KIDVID) mbinfo@fcc.gov
Cable Operations & Licensing System (COALS) coals_help@fcc.gov

Federal Communications Commission
445 12th Street, SW
Washington, DC 20554

by inst on Thu Dec 09, 2004 at 07:14:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: can someone draft some talking points (none / 0)

Are you looking for general talking points on censorship or ones specific to the UCC?

by yitbos96bb on Thu Dec 09, 2004 at 09:16:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: can someone draft some talking points (none / 0)

I'd like talking points specific to this issue/action (UCC).

When I write my own, I inevitably find an error or two, usually just after I've sent my email. There's nothing worse (IMO) than getting facts wrong in a communication of this kind. I don't want to give the FCC a reason to discount my letter because of an error, or because I chose a silly talking point.

by sarany on Fri Dec 10, 2004 at 09:30:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: can someone draft some talking points (none / 0)

at Kos, there's a link to a petition that the UCC is preparing.

So, distilled from the petition:

1-UCC (United Church of Christ) has created an ad to run nationwide, that sends a message of welcome and tolerance to all, whatever their race, age, class or sexual orientation.

2-CBS and NBC have rejected the ad as "too controversial." The idea that a ad that promotes mere tolerance could be seen as "too controversial" defies common sense.

3-Rejection of this ad is a rejection of programming policy allowing depiction of a full range of religious expression. It showcases the extreme degree of power the networks hold over our public discourse and the free exchange of ideas. It is a form of tyranny. No network should be deciding what shall and what shall not be discussed.

4-In stark contrast to this rejection of a message of tolerance and inclusion, our networks are willing to profit from programming that depicts graphic sex and violence and greed. This is not an argument for censorship, but an argument for letting each viewer decide what to reject or accept.

5-In a time when much is being made of the state of divisiveness that exists in our country, any message of benevolent tolerance, of forming community across social 'boundaries' should be welcomed by our broadcast networks.

6-The public airwaves belong to the public and should not be used to express the narrow viewpoints of any particular group to the exclusion of any other. Nor should they deny expression to any particular group or message because of potential (or actual) objections by any opposing group.

7-The FCC should give sober consideration to any complaints against networks and specific affiliates who refuse to air the UCC ads. The FCC should consider taking action against any broadcast entities who may not operating in the public's best interest.

8-Let the viewer decide what messages to reject or accept. This is the networks chief responsibility as stewards of our public airwaves. I urge the FCC to put a stop to the censorship of the UCC ad and to consider taking appropriate action against stations who exercise this sort of censorship of public discourse.

by sarany on Fri Dec 10, 2004 at 10:28:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]

One thing that should be pointed out (none / 0)

The specific reasons NBC and CBS rejected the ad were different.

The gist of the reasons were:

NBC rejected it because the whole "bouncers at the church" bit might piss off other churches by implying they were intolerant. That is, they didn't have a problem with saying the UCC was tolerant, they had a problem with inferring that other churches are intolerant. There is a certain logic with this reasoning.

CBS, however, rejected it because "the executive branch proposaled a gay marriage amendment", which is disgusting. For one thing, there was nothing about marriage in the ad at all. Second, it was a proposal which was defeated. Third, ick.

So, in my mind, CBS needs to be tarred and feathered more than NBC.

by Geotpf on Fri Dec 10, 2004 at 04:30:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: can someone draft some talking points (none / 0)

Call a UCC church in your area and they have talking points they can give you.

by yitbos96bb on Mon Dec 13, 2004 at 04:46:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

UCC - FCC controverswy (none / 0)

I am happy to support the UCC in this issue. It defies decency and common sense that 23 individuals...mainly using the same form letter....can stop another denomination of the same religion from merely trying to attract church-goers.

by Debi White on Thu Dec 09, 2004 at 08:07:10 PM EST

Re: UCC - FCC controverswy (none / 0)

Just FYI, the 23 people were for the Fox complaint...The UCC ad was rejected before any heat was generated. The networks are so scared of everything, they no longer put the best interests of the public (or their business since this will generate boycotts) over their fears of FCC fines.

That being said, love that you support fighting it.

by yitbos96bb on Thu Dec 09, 2004 at 09:06:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

UCC (none / 0)

The UCC is pretty pissed. They were talking about it in church...the commercial as well as the God is still speaking, campaign. The National church is asking all of the affiliates to do a letter writing campaign to the stations in protest. Please get involved even if you are not a church goer, of another religion or an aetheist. If we allow this type of selective censorship on this issue, then the next time your issue comes up, it makes it all that much easier for the networks to keep you from accessing the public airwaves. The more letters sent, the more the networks can see how serious we are and that we are a much stronger force than the so called "moral" right.

by yitbos96bb on Thu Dec 09, 2004 at 09:15:36 PM EST

Hey... (none / 0)

Is this really that important?

Come on, there is a lot of (especially) violence and sex on primetime TV. I'm an open-minded guy (not a parent, though) and sometimes broadcast TV stations seem like they are overdoing the sexual content.

Also, some of these 'first person shooter' video games are really crossing the line..

Don't get me wrong, -there are many censorship issues that ARE important to me, but the level of sex or violence levels on primetime commercial TV shows is NOT one of them. And I certainly don't see the Democrats as seeing violence or sex on early evening TV to be any kind of a good thing, DO YOU?

I don't think any sane person would.

Later on, when all the kids are in bed, then adult content and freedom from censorship IS important.

Broadcast stations that use public mediums like radio waves DO need to be accountable to the communities they serve. The GOP has gutted the ability of communities to require local content.

They are blocking new licenses for local community groups. They are blocking locally-sourced programming. THAT is an important issue...

by ultraworld on Thu Dec 09, 2004 at 10:52:08 PM EST

Re: Hey... (none / 0)

I think that the point is that a letter-writing campaign was able to correct sexual content on television. The censorship issue relates to whether the UCC can buy an advertisement for its church which says that it welcomes all types of people...including gays. That's what the protest now is about.

by Abby on Fri Dec 10, 2004 at 09:02:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Your mention of local content... (none / 0)

...allows me to make a counter argument.

Right now, local communities have NO power over what can and can not be allowed on the air.

That is, there is a nationwide standard-local standards don't come into play.

Let's say partial nudity on TV would be acceptable in San Francisco (to name a liberal area). I don't know if it would be, but it certainly is in most of Europe, so this is not unconceivable. But it's not acceptable in Nowhere, Alabama.

The standards of Nowhere, Alabama are the ones that are used-it's one, nationwide standard.

If it was more flexible, to the needs of each community, it certainly would be much less of a problem.

by Geotpf on Fri Dec 10, 2004 at 04:40:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

wow (none / 0)

those numbers really put it all into perspective.

Visit us at TexasKAOS, where we're taking Texas back!

by annatopia on Thu Dec 09, 2004 at 11:34:50 PM EST

FCC Letters (none / 0)

Good point Chris!

Sometimes small volumes make a big difference, but it also depends on the type of comments to the FCC. Most of the communications that the FCC get are in regard to specific proceedings that have docket #'s and in those cases you need to go to the FCC web site to submit (http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/ ) - while this gets in the official record it is unclear how much they are read at the FCC.

In cases where the FCC has not created a decent electronic system (such as indecency complaints and license renewals) a human being has to go through them and figure out what to do with it. A single letter that hits home with the FCC staffer who is reading it can make a big difference.

I have been working with the UCC on http://www.accessibleairwaves.org and the campaign has generated over 2,000 comments in less then a day. However, numbers are not everything so using the site to send personalized messages (we hard coded in the official case numbers so they all get filed correctly) will really make a difference.

by KenD on Fri Dec 10, 2004 at 06:14:51 AM EST

Complaints (1.00 / 1)

Complants must have substance before they are given weight. You lefties are always belly cching about some fiction or other. You have made so many outragious slanders that your "wolf cry" is no longer being heeded. Hee Hee Hee Hee!

by Robert A August on Fri Dec 10, 2004 at 02:54:38 PM EST

Re: Complaints (none / 0)

Hee Hee Hee Hee! Look at me, I'm a Republican so devoid of a meaningful life that I actually took the time to register and post on a progressive blog! Hee Hee Hee Hee! Hee Hee Hee Hee! Is my effeminate internet laugh bothering you yet? Hee Hee Hee Hee Hee Hee Hee!

What do I know about crying wolf? After all, my local church gets its members to flood the media with complaints any time the word "poop" is used on-air before midnight! Hee Hee Hee Hee Hee!

by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner on Fri Dec 10, 2004 at 05:31:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.