roundtable: FCC weighs minimums for educational TV programming
roundtable: FCC weighs minimums for educational TV programming
FCC weighs minimums for educational TV programming
W. Curtiss Priest (BMSLIB@mitvma.mit.edu)
Thu, 06 Apr 95 10:07:51 EDT
Message-Id: <9504061415.AA29985@a.cni.org>
Date: Thu, 06 Apr 95 10:07:51 EDT
From: "W. Curtiss Priest" <BMSLIB@mitvma.mit.edu>
Subject: FCC weighs minimums for educational TV programming
To: Telecommunications Policy Roundtable <ROUNDTABLE@CNI.ORG>
NOTICE: Contains copyrighted material, do not redistribute unless you
abide to the copyright notice appearing at the end of this article.
As provided for under Section 107 of the 1976 Copyright Law, the
following piece is being distributed for non-profit purposes and for
comment, criticism, and teaching. In cases where the purpose of
conveying information is to fully inform the reader, the entire body of
the work is reproduced.
**************************************************************************
CITS Observations (may be freely distributed):
W. Curtiss Priest
We find it curious that it falls on the FCC to deal with the serious
social issues surrounding television content.
We laud the FCC in this effort, however, since we know of no other
part of the Federal government able or willing to take on these
important issues at a time when "meddling" in the affairs of industry
is frowned upon.
Reed Hundt, like David Kessler of the FDA, are brave people to tackle
these issues when their very organizations are at risk.
They should be supported in their efforts.
You can email your support (or criticisms) to:
Chairman Reed Hundt rhundt@fcc.gov
Commissioner James Quello gclark@fcc.gov
Commissioner Andrew Barrett bettyfre@fcc.gov
Commissioner Susan Ness sness@fcc.gov
Commissioner Rachelle Chong rchong@fcc.gov
**************************************************************************
Boston Globe, April 5, 1995
FCC to weigh setting minimums
for educational TV programming
ASSOCIATED PRESS
WASHINGTON - Calling TV "the third parent" in
many homes, the nation's top broadcast regulator is
pushing a plan to make stations air a minimum amount
of educational programming for children.
If the plan is adopted, the Federal Communications
Commission would require stations to provide a certain
number of hours of such shows. Broadcasters could
choose to pay other stations to produce and air the pro-
grams.
The plan, opposed by the TV industry and at least
two of the five commissioners, will be unveiled by FCC
chairman Reed Hundt at the agency's meeting today.
Hundt failed to persuade his fellow commissioners to
consider only his plan, and it is expected that a group of
less restrictive proposals, including having the FCC do
nothing, will be offered.
"The TV is the third parent in most households,"
Hundt said.
Those familiar with the plan said stations initially
would have to air three hours a week of educational pro-
gramming, increasing a half-hour each year to a maxi-
mum of five hours. Cable television stations would not be
affected.
Under the plan, a station would have to air a mini-
mum amount - one hour a week - itself. It could then
make a deal with another station, commercial or public,
to broadcast the remaining required hours, Hundt said.
To help parents find the educational shows, the sta-
tion trading its programming obligations would be re-
sponsible for promoting them.
'That's important to the parent is getting a quantity
of this programming and knowing where to find it,"
Hundt said.
Some in the industry expressed concern about sta-
tions' willingness to comply with the plan. "I'm just wor-
ried it won't work" said Kathryn Montgomery, presi-
dent of the Center for Media Education; "It's kind of
wishful thinking that stations would want to take this
on."
Commissioners Andrew Barrett and James Quello
are opposed to the scheme, saying it treads on broad-
casters' First Amendment rights. Commissioners Ra-
chelle Chong and Susan Ness, who have expressed con-
cerns, are undecided.
***************************************************
Copyright Notice: This article is protected under copyright law.
The right to disseminate this article is also protected under copyright
law (Section 107, 1976 Act).
The copyright law permits copying of materials for comment, criticism
and nonprofit purposes under the protection of fair use.
The copyright law also permits the copying of recent materials for the
"teachable moment." This allows copying, in full, for educational
purposes.
Also, the courts generally interpret copyright protection by economic
criteria. If the copying of a material reduces revenues to the
copyright holder, the court usually decides in favor of the plaintiff;
if the copying doesn't effect or increases the revenues, the court
usually decides on behalf of the defendent.
It is our judgment that occasional copying of a newspaper article does
not reduce revenues to the publisher and can actually create more
demand for a newspaper by attracting readership. An excerpt provides free
advertising for the publisher.
Thus, under fair use, teachable moment, and economic criteria we
selectively convey this copyrighted material to others.
******************************************************
_______________________________________________________________________________
| W. Curtiss Priest, Ph.D., Director *********************** |
| Center for Information, Technology, & Society * Improving humanity * |
| * through technology * |
| 466 Pleasant Street *********************** |
| Melrose, MA 02176-4522 BMSLIB@MITVMA.MIT.EDU |
| Voice: 617-662-4044 Gopher or WWW to our publications: |
| Fax: 617-662-6882 gopher.eff.org (under similar organizations, CITS |
| WWW: http://www.eff.org, under Documents & File Archives, under Gopher |
_____________________________________________________________________________|
![[CNI Home Page]](/Images/home.gif)