Freedom is under assault in Washington DC today--but all Americans will be less free tomorrow. Big Government is going after an easy target now--the big television networks--but it might soon be going after targets closer to home--your computer, and your Internet connection.
      The issue at hand, of course, is the FCC's effort--which is succeeding--to clamp down on free speech and free expression over the airwaves.
      Nine years ago, in an episode of Fox's "The Simpsons" set in 2010, Marge Simpson confessed, "You know, Fox turned into a hardcore sex channel so gradually I didn't even notice." But in 2004, it was CBS, not Fox, which brought us Janet Jackson's halftime primetime breast. And Mel Karmazin, CEO of Viacom, which owns CBS and MTV (which produced the Super Bowl halftime show), discovered that no broadcast network will turn into even a softcore sex channel anytime soon.
      Karmazin apologized for Jackson's breast immediately after the Super Bowl, and he has continued to apologize, most recently to a House of Representatives subcommittee investigating "indecency" on TV. He has insisted, repeatedly, that Viacom-MTV-CBS had no prior knowledge of what Federal Communications Commission Chairman Michael Powell has called "the now-infamous display." A fat lot of good it has done him. In his testimony before the House, Karmazin lamented:
      Some have publicly stated that they don't believe that we were duped by Jackson and [Justin] Timberlake. Even with the facts before them, they never will. Yet, logically, there was nothing to gain for Viacom-not for ratings, not for advertising dollars, not for promotional value. Our reputation and the reputations of CBS and MTV are too valuable to risk by engaging in such stunts.
      Congress wasn't buying it. "You knew what you were doing," replied Rep. Heather Wilson (R-NM). "You know that shock and indecency creates a buzz that lines your pocket.But the American people are fed up with indecency, and you just don't seem to get it." Rep. Mary Bono (R-CA) was more succinct but just as dubious: "I get the feeling you are apologizing all the way to the bank."
      The Congresswomen had a point. The performers MTV assembled for its Super Bowl halftime show are nobody's definition of "family entertainment." Karmazin declared that Timberlake, "a seasoned performer in numerous live television events, had never engaged in such an antic." Perhaps he was unaware of Justin's infamous televised simulated sex with Kylie Minogue at the Brit Awards last year. Perhaps.

      But perhaps Karmazin was simply too polite to say what he was likely thinking:

      It's you who don't get it, Congresswoman Wilson. Americans are not fed up with what you call "indecency." According to ABC News, the adult business has grown into a $10-billion-a-year industry-bigger than the NFL, the NBA and Major League Baseball combined." If Americans are so fed up with "indecency," how did "Sex and the City" become a beloved national institution? Every year, the broadcast networks lose more market share to cable, and last year, for the first time ever, cable overtook the broadcast networks in primetime viewers. And it's only going to get worse for us. Why? Because Americans want what CBS, NBC, ABC, Fox, UPN and WB can't show them, but cable can.
      Not that anyone would cry any tears for Karmazin if he had said this. Viacom is a major player in cable TV; it owns, besides MTV, Nickelodeon, BET, Spike, Comedy Central, Showtime, the Movie Channel, Flix and the Sundance Channel. Therefore, CBS' loss is still Viacom's gain. (CBS's rivals are in cross-ownership situations with cable and satellite companies as well.)
      Why give the milk away when you can make people buy the cow? So long as every ex-CBS viewer subscribes to Viacom's cable networks, Karmazin probably wouldn't care if the Tiffany Network went the way of the DuMont Network. But Michael Powell would care, and only the cynical would suggest the reason is that the FCC Chairman would be left with much less to regulate. That is, the mandate of the FCC only extends to broadcast television, not cable. (And not, thankfully, the Internet.)
      According to Powell, free TV is not merely a "public trust"-he believes free TV is an entitlement program! As he said to the Wall Street Journal last year,
      We absolutely need to maintain a viable free television service for the welfare of our citizens. Free broadcast television remains an important service for those citizens that cannot afford pay television.
      Yet Chairman Powell was full of sympathy for the broadcast networks last year, noting that "high quality programming," such as "The Sopranos" ("enjoyed by millions each week on HBO"), has fled free TV precisely because "Pay television programmers enjoy greater First Amendment protection against government content regulation than their broadcast counterparts" and warning that "Bringing free television into a more hostile regulatory environment will continue to drive investment to pay television and drive more sports and creative programs to pay television."
      But what a difference a "wardrobe malfunction" makes! Five months later, Powell was doing his best impression of "The Simpsons"' Helen Lovejoy. "We must take action to protect our nation's children," he told the House subcommittee.
      Meanwhile, subcommittee Chairman Fred Upton (R-MI) has introduced the Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act, which would raise the maximum FCC "indecency" fines from $27,500 to $275,000 and up to $3 million for repeat offenders. Senator Trent Lott (R-MS) wants a "three strikes and you're out" law, which would strip licenses from thrice-offensive broadcasters. Hell hath no fury like politicians pandering for votes, so Mel Karmazin and his colleagues will keep their heads down until the after the November elections, when the witch finders will move on. It's hard to blame them, but perhaps one day Karmazin or one of his kin will say what needs to be said:
      You know, every time I hear somebody whine, "Won't somebody please think of the children?!" I wonder, "Don't these children have parents?" TV is TV, whether it comes from an antenna or cable or satellite, whether it's free or subscription or pay-per-view, whether it's "Teletubbies" or "The Sopranos" or hardcore pornography, it all ends up in the same box. Eighty-five percent of American homes have cable TV or satellite. Hell, 62 percent of the officially "poor" have cable or satellite. So let's stop pretending pay TV is some kind of luxury item, OK?
      We're all wringing our hands about Janet Jackson's breast, but who's protecting our children from the Bada Bing Club? Their parents, right? Really? Sixty-three percent of American children have TV sets in their bedrooms; half of them watch as much cable as free TV; and 46 percent of them watch most of their TV alone.
      Remember the last time Congress got hot and bothered about TV? We got the V-chip and a mandatory rating system. Guess what? Nobody cares! The Annenberg Center trained 110 families how to use the V-chip, but only eight percent bothered. What does that tell you?
      The Supreme Court ruled in the Playboy case that even hardcore erotica couldn't be scrambled, because there were "less restrictive ways" of preventing access-you could cancel it or you could not order it in the first place. Well, there are three ways less restrictive than government censorship for parents to prevent access to any TV programs they don't want their kids watching. 1. Change the channel. 2. Turn off the TV. 3. Take the TVs out of their bedrooms.
      TV is a business like any other business. There's nothing mystical about it. We're in it to make money, the same as everybody else. You might not like what we do, but nobody's forcing you to watch it. It's not our business-and certainly not Michael Powell's or Congress' business-to raise America's children.
      Unfortunately, Karmazin said none of that. Unfortunately, for a corporate executive in a heavily regulated industry to speak such truth to power is about as likely as Janet Jackson and Justin Timberlake being invited back to the Super Bowl.
      The big question is whether or not this effort to regulate broadcast TV will, in the future, extend to cable TV, and to the Internet. Right now it doesn't look likely, but it's a lot more likely than it was before the "Boob Bowl," and before Karmazin's cringing performance before The Powers the Be.


###


Contact GPC@ivote2004.com