VIOLENCE = INDECENCY, FCC TO TELL CONGRESS

If the FCC had its way, it would regulate TV violence just as it now does TV indecency. In fact, it would make no distinction between the two.

According to industry and FCC sources, the agency will soon ask Congress to have "its way" in a report concluding a two-year inquiry into TV violence and what to do about it.

And it is not just broadcasting the FCC is targeting. The report also suggests that Congress mandate "other forms of consumer choice" for cable subscribers—a la carte programming menus, family tiers and channel blocking.

The report finds "strong evidence" that TV violence is harmful and a correlation between TV violence and agressive behavior in children.

Despite large First Amendment obstacles, the FCC report contends that Congress has "the ability and authority" to craft a sustainable regulatory regime for TV violence.

The report has bipartisan support at the FCC. Republican Chairman Kevin Martin and Democratic Commissioner Michael Copps are said to be working closely in drafting the report.

A likely third vote—all that is necessary at the five-person commission—is Republican Deborah Taylor Tate, a vocal proponent of cleaning up the airwaves. It is unclear where Commissioners Robert McDowell and Jonathan Adelstein stand, whether they will want to go as far as their peers in trying to curb TV violence.

The FCC report is likely to find a good reception on Capitol Hill, where many Republicans and the newly empowered Democrats have expressed concerns about indecency and violence in the media. In fact, the FCC inquiry was triggered by a letter from key lawmakers.

Senators Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) and Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Texas) are chief advocates for granting the FCC authority to regulate violent content.

The FCC commissioners may shed more light on their thinking about violence tomorrow when they appear before the House Telecommunications Subcommittee chaired by Ed Markey (D-Mass.,), the driving force behind the legislation that mandated the V-chip more than a decade ago.

TVNEWSDAY was first to report that the FCC was considering a report on TV violence last month, but it was thought then that it would be more of a statement of concerns and broad suggestions. Among other things, the draft would have punted the problem to the Department of Health and Human Services for further study.

But as the staff-written draft report has circulated among the commissioner over the past few weeks, it has apparently become more pointed.

At the heart of the report is the idea that the definition of broadcast indecency can be stretched to cover TV violence. In other words, the report will assert that TV violence is just another form of indecency.

If the FCC and Congress can make that idea stick, it could slip past the First Amendment barrier.

The Supreme Court has already blessed the regulation of indecency except during the so-called safe harbor (10 p.m. to 6 a.m.) when few children are likely to be in the audience.

The FCC floated the violence-as-indecency idea when it asked for comments on its inquiry in 2004.

"The Commission has traditionally defined indecency in terms of sexual or excretory organs and activities," the FCC said in the notice of inquiry, "but the Supreme Court has concluded that the term indecent ‘merely refers to nonconformance with accepted standards of morality' and that ‘neither our prior decisions nor [statutory] language or history supports the conclusion that prurient appeal is an essential component of indecent language.'"

In the notice, the FCC also concedes "that an interpretation of indecency or obscenity as encompassing violence would be novel."

According to one source, the FCC picks up its definition of violence from Morality in Media, a group best known for its anti-indecency crusading.

MIM's definition, found in its 2004 comments on the FCC inquiry: "Intense, rough or injurious use of physical force or treatment either recklessly or with an apparent intent to harm."

MIM says it cobbled its definition together from definitions of violence in Webster's Encyclopedic Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language and Black's Law Dictionary.

In arguing for government regulation of violence, the FCC report declares the V-chip a flop.

The V-chip technology and accompanying ratings system is meant to give viewers the power to regulate programming in their homes by blocking programs they found unacceptable.

Last summer, in reaction to rising concerns about indecency, broadcasters joined with other media groups in a public education campaign to inform viewers about the V-chip and how to use it.

That campaign did not amount to much, and appears to have had little impact, either on the public or on their federal representatives.