O'Reilly...Patently Offensive. Do a FCC complaint. And Kick this.

[Tom Joad]

Edit for additional comments on Radio.

I know there are several other posts on the O'Reilly comments San Francisco, but i want to post here a suggestion that we complain to the FCC. By any standard of human decency, O'Reilly's comments were profane, and offensive to the human community, but especially those who live in the Bay Area, or may visit the Bay Area in the future.

The FCC does not have jurisdiction regarding cable TV, only broadcast tv and radio. Therefore, when filling out forms, refer to a radio station near you.
This is where O'Reilly is broadcast on radio. Find the one nearest you! Note also times, because it makes a difference if it is done when children are likely to be listening.

http://www.billoreilly.com/stationfinder

See the FCC standards here:
http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/obscene.html
Specifically under Profane:
Profane Broadcast Restrictions

The FCC has defined profanity as “including language so grossly offensive to members of the public who actually hear it as to amount to a nuisance.”

Like indecency, profane speech is prohibited on broadcast radio and television between the hours of 6 a.m. to 10 p.m.

You too can fill out a FCC complaint, online.
http://svartifoss2.fcc.gov/cib/fcc475B.cfm

Be sure to include your name and address, otherwise it is not worth your time.

I want to hear that you filed a (non-anonymous, complete with your address) complaint with the FCC.

Here is the specifics of my complaint on O'Reilly's broadcast of November 9th:
*************
The November 9th program of the "O'Reilly Factor" contained "language so grossly offensive to members of the public who actually hear it as to amount to a nuisance.”

It was patently offensive to our communities when Mr. Reilly encouraged terrorists to attack targets in the U.S. city of San Francisco.

Specifically the words were:
"And if Al Qaeda comes in here and blows you up, we're not going to do anything about it. We're going to say, look, every other place in America is off limits to you , except San Francisco. You want to blow up the Coit Tower? Go ahead."

Mr. O'Reilly made this comment because he objected to the way the citizens of San Francisco acted on their democratic rights in the election of November 8th.

I cannot imagine anything more offensive, and more profane, than to encourage the killing, maiming of ordinary people. The purpose of these comments was to shock and offend people, especially members of the San Francisco Bay Area, but it extends to anyone of conscience. It is tantamount to encouraging violence and mayhem. Indeed, it is quite reasonable to suspect that followers of Bill O’ Reilly may commit such violence. This broadcast in the very least has created a nuisance; it may invite terrible violence. All government agencies are expected to protect citizens against such irresponsible behavior.

[rosesaylavee]

1. Kicked and nominated.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

2. If he said it on cable TV, the FCC doesn't have jurisdiction.

[Tom Joad]

3. I believe you are right there... however...

It was broadcast over radio, so others who mention the radio station that O'Reilly broadcasts in their city.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

4. Aha! Excellent. Then by all means, the FCC it is.

I'd love to see them fine the hell out of the stations that broadcast his rot, so they fire his sorry ass.

[onenote]

21. never ever going to happen, nor should it

O'Reilly's comments were stupid and offensive. But under absolutely no stretch of the imagination were they actionable. Political speech --even when it offends -- is protected by the First Amendment. Frankly the more O'Reilly spouts off the better, since he is making himself the same sort of joke that Pat Robertson has become. If the freepers were organizing this sort of crusade against comments from the left (and yes, I know that they have), we would be screaming bloody murder.

Pointing out the hypocrisy of the right is fine, but actually thinking that the FCC would/should step in or desiring such a result is as far from progressive as you can get.

onenote

[EFerrari]

36. I strongly disagree, onenote.

Today, I have to read up, because my own knowledge of this area is limited and the subject is complicated. But look at this analysis (found here http://users.telerama.com/~jdehullu/speech/sphist.htm )

Hate Speech

One of the most significant free speech/hate speech cases arose in 1977. The National Socialist Party of America (NSPA), led by a man named Frank Collin, announced plans to march in front of the Village Hall in Skokie, Illinois. Skokie had a large Jewish population, including several thousand survivors of the World War II holocaust in Europe. Village officials first obtained an injunction against the demonstration. After the injuction was reversed, the village enacted three ordinances to prohibit certain kinds of demonstrations, including that of the NSPA. Collin sued to prevent the ordinances from being enforced.

In Collin v. Smith (1978), the circuit court decided the case in favor of Collin. The court said, in part:

No doubt, the Nazi demonstration could be subjected to reasonable regulation of its time, place, and manner….Because the ordinances turn on the content of the demonstration, they are necessarily not time, place, or manner regulations….To permit the continued building of our politics and culture, and to assure self-fulfillment for each individual, our people are guaranteed the right to express any thought, free from government censorship. The essence of this forbidden censorship is content control. Any restriction on expressive activity because of its content would completely undercut the "profound national commitment to the principle that debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open."

The court also commented on the obvious pain that the Nazi demonstration would give to many of the residents of Skokie:

It would be grossly insensitive to deny, as we do not, that the proposed demonstration would seriously disturb, emotionally and mentally, at least some, and probably many of the Village's residents. The problem with engrafting an exception on the First Amendment for such situations is that they are indistinguishable in principle from speech that "invite(s) dispute … induces a condition of unrest, creates dissatisfaction with conditions as they are, or even stirs people to anger."

The court added that:

There is room under the First Amendment for the government to protect targeted listeners from offensive speech, but only when the speaker intrudes on the privacy of the home, or a captive audience cannot practically avoid exposure….

[onenote]

43. I don't understand how/why you disagree with me

My point was that trying to regulate O'Reilly stupid outbursts would be a bad idea (and unconstitutional). The case you cited found a law restricting speech to be unconstitutional.

Sorry, I don't follow how your post explains your 'strong' disagreement with me

onenote

[EFerrari]

49. This is what I was looking at:

The court added that:

There is room under the First Amendment for the government to protect targeted listeners from offensive speech, but only when the speaker intrudes on the privacy of the home, or a captive audience cannot practically avoid exposure….

[onenote]

55. but the fcc limits itself to speech with sexual content or connotation

The FCC to the best of my knowledge has not and will not regulate speech that is lacking in sexual content. Thus, for example, a number of years ago, the FCC refused to find that broadcasts containing the "n" word violated the statutory bar on obscene, indecent and profane language, even though its use was patently offensive to many people. The fact that speech is offensive, or even "patently offensive" to a segment of the listening audience (or even a large part of the audience) does not mean that it is unprotected by the Constititution, even when it is delivered via over-the-air broadcast.

onenote

[Chicago Democrat]

77. Advocating violence is not protected, Crying "Fire" in a Theatre.

is the same as promoting bombings.


My opinion. It should be litigated.

[EFerrari]

27. Well done!

:hi:

[niyad]

6. don't know where you got YOUR information, but. . .

Summary

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is an independent United States government agency, directly responsible to Congress. The FCC was established by the Communications Act of 1934 and is charged with regulating interstate and international communications by radio, television, wire, satellite and cable. The FCC's jurisdiction covers the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and U.S. possessions.


Media Bureau - regulates AM, FM radio and television broadcast stations, as well as cable television and satellite services.

http://www.fcc.gov/aboutus.html

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

12. The FCC does not regulate indecent or offensive material on cable TV.

It does regulate the economic aspect of cable franchises, etc., but only broadcast stations are subject to content regulation. http://ftp.fcc.gov/cgb/broadcast.html#complaint

[Sarah Ibarruri]

15. Aren't the airways the property of the nation?

I thought the FCC worked for this country, and therefore could regulate anything "aired."

Am I wrong?

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

16. Cable isn't considered "airwaves."

Broadcast TV is essentially free, and anybody with a TV can watch it, but you pay for cable service. So because broadcasters can send their programs to anybody in exchange for getting their FCC license, they have an obligation to the public. Cable, on the other hand, is something you pay for, so presumably those who have paid for certain kinds of speech not available to those who didn't pay for it, should get what they paid for. That's the theory, anyhow.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

63. So cable is UNREGULATED?

I'm so sick and tired of hearing so much is unregulated. We're being trampled by unregulated for-profit businesses from all sides.

[smurfygirl]

5. wow. nominated

this is why I never listen to O'lielly

[Clark2008]

74. That little Beagle mix with its tongue hanging out is adorable!

Made it worth wallowing through O'Lielly's filth to read this thread.

:hi:

[Deja Q]

7. Didn't * make some statement about those who support terrorists?

Send billybonzo to gitmo and have it done. He's a microcephalic apostate!

[niyad]

8. and what about ann coulter's statements in that vein? send 'em all!!!

[calimary]

9. Kicked and recommended!

Good idea, because this can't be allowed to stand. At the very least, we need to give him grief for what he said. Whether the paymasters take him off the air is uncertain. But if they hear no complaints, they'll automatically assume it was no big deal - like he's undoubtedly trying to reassure them it was.

Sleepless nights I wish for him, that scum! MANY sleepless nights.

BTW - it's now done. Here's the text of comments in my just-filed FCC complaint:
O'Reilly uttered what I consider to be an extreme obscenity, and an incitement of violence against the people of San Francisco, simply because they chose to vote differently from the way he would dictate that they vote. It's their absolute right to vote their consciences in such matters as local/regional anti-gun legislation and keeping military recruiters out of public schools. Now, Bill O'Reilly thinks it's entertaining, provocative radio to provoke murder and mayhem upon people he disagrees with, by practically pleading with al Qaeda terrorists to destroy San Francisco. Just because of the way its citizens exercised their God-given right to vote! HOW DARE HE? Have we deteriorated in this country to the point where someone with an on-the-air bully-pulpit like his can call for the murder and destruction of an entire American city? And be allowed to get away with it, with no consequences or reprimand? He should be fined, HEAVILY, and taken OFF THE AIR.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

10. Is it too late to edit your post?

I thought the same thing as another poster.... Cable, no jurisdiction, but when you said it was on the radio also my ears perked up, cause that is FCC jurisdiction! Is it possible to edit your original post to say when responding to the FCC to explicitly state it was heard on the radio? I can't stand him. Actually, I'd love to see the two jerkoff before him off the air too.

[WearyOne]

11. the mans a traitor..calling for a terrorist attack on the USA !

[ananda]

13. You do realize..

.. that Faux news touts O'Really? as "the man who doesn't hold anything back." They're proud of it. They bring him on with that intro as if the whole country likes that sort of thing.

How sick is that!!??

[EFerrari]

33. Good! Now, they'll have to eat that! n/t

[Kagemusha]

14. Wishing on-air for SF to be attacked is political speech.

The FCC can't and shouldn't touch it.

Sadly, the radio corps don't seem willing to themselves.

[EFerrari]

34. Since when can calling for the destruction of an American community

POSSIBLY be construed as political speech?

Answer: Since lunatics like O'Reilly have been allowed to get away with it.

File the complaint anyway. Let the FCC make a determination -- that is what we pay them to do, isn't it? :)

[onenote]

47. right, and when they say the complaint has no merit

which is what they will do, in the unlikely event they even bother to respond to it, then O'Reilly will claim vindication, take on the role of victim and go merrily along his way.

I suppose in some ways, that won't be so bad since the last thing I want is for O'Reilly to feel like he can't spout off what he's thinking since, by doing so, he (like Robertson) makes him into more and more of a joke.

onenote

[EFerrari]

50. Well, you may be right.

Let's see how we do. :)

[onenote]

52. actually, since I occasionally work on FCC indecency complaints

as an attorney, I can state with a high level of confidence that in all likelihood, complaints about O'Reilly's comments will be responded to with a form letter. There is a small chance the FCC might issue a ruling on it, and if they do they will find that no rule has been violated.

onenote

[EFerrari]

53. Whatever they find, the message will have been sent.

We're not rolling over for this any more.

Bill O'Reilly is indecent, much more than any part of Janet Jackson's anatomy. I'll avoid the more direct comparison. :)

[onenote]

56. it doesn't take the FCC to send that message, and since they won't

send it, I'm not sure what the benefit is...but as I said, I don't imagine there is much harm either since upholding O'Reilly's right to be a jerk may encourage him to act that way and, as has happened with Robertson, he will continue to marginalize himself.

onenote

[EFerrari]

57. The benefit is this: if O'Reilly's sponsors check and see if there are

complaints being lodged, they will take this issue much more seriously than if we just whine. So, in fact, the "target" may not be the FCC directly.

I've been waiting so long for these jerks to marginalize themselves that one day I woke up, and they were running the country.

You sound as though you have a lot of experience with this and I appreciate your input.

/typo + clarity.

[OKDem08]

17. complained to FCC re: BO's comments n/t

[progdonkey]

18. done and done...

For the record, here's mine:

On November 8, 2005, on the "Radio Factor with Bill O'Reilly," Mr. O'Reilly said the following: "And if Al Qaeda comes in here and blows you up, we're not going to do anything about it. We're going to say, look, every other place in America is off limits to you, except San Francisco. You want to blow up the Coit Tower? Go ahead." This is highly offensive not only to the citizens of San Francisco and to all Americans who mourned the attacks of September 11th, but also to the memories of those who died on September 11th. Bill O'Reilly seems to view al-Qaeda not as an enemy of the United States, but as an ally of his to carry out his vile vindictive wishes.

His comments were in response to his displeasure that the citizens of San Francisco had the audacity to exercise their right to vote as Americans contrary to his political wishes. For that, he has called on al-Qaeda to raze the city; in other words, he has called for a second, city-scale September 11th in San Francisco, for which he will proudly not mourn. Such speech is clearly "language so grossly offensive to members of the public who actually hear it as to amount to a nuisance.”

:toast:

[MadJohnShaft]

19. Done, and to the local station too

[Swamp Rat]

20. Kick ... I need decent photos of O'Reilly to vandalise!

:mad:

[EFerrari]

32. Swampy, do one of him with bin Laden! n/t

[Swamp Rat]

40. That was part of my design idea, but I need decent photos of O'Reilly

with his nasty mouth open, making faces while delivering his talking point lies.

[EFerrari]

42. like this?

I better stop. This is making me nauseus. I don't know how you and DA to it!

[Swamp Rat]

44. Yes thanks, but slightly better resolution.

If you know of any video links like the ones at Crooks and Liars, I might be able to do a screen capture, though I doubt the quality would be good. I really need photos that are a bit clearer and larger so that I can do a REAL number on him. ;)

[EFerrari]

46. If none of these 5 work, I'll look again. Just can't do it too close

to a meal.

[Swamp Rat]

58. LOL!

Thanks! Don't let ... fuck! My dog got out!...

[Catfight]

22. O'Reilly the Pervert is ALWAYS offensive. Now he's treading new

water and calling for a terrorist attack on an American region. I can't wait for ACT 3, publicly executing someone from SF? O'Reilly is a white male who would have been apart of the KKK, someone who would have and probably did scream about ending segregation, so why would he be any different about people that weren't born white and male? O'Reilly obviously makes a lot of money saying outrageous things, I guess you can say whatever you want on AM Hate radio.

[newyawker99]

23. kick

:kick:

[NMDemDist2]

24. my complaint

"And if Al Qaeda comes in here and blows you up, we're not going to do anything about it. We're going to say, look, every other place in America is off limits to you , except San Francisco. You want to blow up the Coit Tower? Go ahead."

This quote is offensive. I lived and worked in San Francisco for years and the thought of anyone asking terrorists to blow up the Coit Tower is despicable. Mr. O'Reilly needs to be firmly censored for this. He has refused to withdraw his comment and should be fined or removed from the air.

[SillyGoose]

25. Thanks for this FCC info. I filed a complaint about BO's comments.

The FCC's Profane Broadcast Restrictions sure seem applicable in this situation:

The FCC has defined profanity as “including language so grossly offensive to members of the public who actually hear it as to amount to a nuisance.”
http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/obscene.html

[EFerrari]

26. Adding my nomination. Thanks for the info!

Go, DU!

:kick::kick::kick:

[ryan_cats]

28. Great idea!

Great idea! After all the crap Stern gets for minor things we hear on TV every day, it's nice to be able to use these ridiculous rules on a wingnut thuglican.

Is that crackpot Florida attorney filing charges against Lufa boy like he does against Stern?? Now we can at point out the obvious double standard.

Finally, Stern was saying they now want to be able to regulate satellite radio? Great, they can't seem to let Stern go and he is not nearly offensive as the hate radio that goes on every day.

[Boxerfan]

29. Excellent....Thank you for the link...

I really hope they actually read these letters...
Here's mine...
"This is MUCH more serious than Janett Jacksons boob-shot!

I have normally avoided listening to Bill O'Rielly & his like as they are basically HATE RADIO. I believe something should have been done to give rational people EQUAL TIME on the airways as a way to balance things out.That would be the fair way to handle HATE RADIO is to allow a opposing viewpoint equal time.
But I was listening (for comedy value) on Friday when Bill O'Rielly actually called for a TERRORIST ATTACK on a MAJOR US CITY!!
Good God how can you ignore this! It was not said in jest & this evil little man has an unfortunately large audience!....
Here are his own word-MAKE HIM ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEM!

"And if Al Qaeda comes in here and blows you up, we're not going to do anything about it. We're going to say, look, every other place in America is off limits to you , except San Francisco. You want to blow up the Coit Tower? Go ahead."

I await your response & will follow up to see what actions you are taking."

[EFerrari]

30. kick

:kick:

[EFerrari]

31. Done! It was EASY!

Filing for: Elizabeth Ferrari
has been received by the FCC Thanks for your information.
When inquiring about your complaint, be sure to reference the following confirmation number:

FORM475B: 05-WB11177169

Additionally, be sure to mention that you filed this complaint over the Internet.

[EFerrari]

35. Doug hasn't logged into DU yet, but here's his, too! Took 2 minutes.

Filing for: Doug P Ferrari
has been received by the FCC Thanks for your information.
When inquiring about your complaint, be sure to reference the following confirmation number:

FORM475B: 05-WB11177216

* * *

Thanks for putting this together, Tom!

[goclark]

38. FCC done nt

[troubleinwinter]

37. I filed an FCC complaint, AND wrote these sponsors:

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

Text of my letter to sponsors:

On the November 9th broadcast of the "O'Reilly Factor" program, which your company sponsors, Mr. O'Reilly encouraged a terrorist attack on an American city and populace with these statements:

"And if Al Qaeda comes in here and blows you up, we're not going to do anything about it. We're going to say, look, every other place in America is off limits to you , except San Francisco. You want to blow up the Coit Tower? Go ahead."

Attempting to incite such an attack is dangerous and offensive. Followers of Bill O’ Reilly may commit such violence. This broadcast in the very least is horribly offensive and may incite violence and terrorism against American citizens.

I would expect that your company will show that it does not support calls for terrorism against Americans by withdrawing your sponsorship of his programs.

[yurbud]

39. Is there a way to do a complaint against Pat Robertson for threatening

that town for kicking creationists off the school board?

[onenote]

45. no, for any number of reasons

Not the least of which is that he didn't "threaten" anyone. He made stupid, idiotic statements, which is his stock in trade. But there is no "threat" in what he said, which was the following:

"I'd like to say to the good citizens of Dover: if there is a disaster in your area, don't turn to God -- you just rejected Him from your city," Robertson said on his daily television show, "The 700 Club."

"And don't wonder why He hasn't helped you when problems begin, if they begin. I'm not saying they will, but if they do, just remember, you just voted God out of your city. And if that's the case, don't ask for His help because he might not be there," he said.

onenote

[Iowa]

41. Complaint filed and nominated...

Thanks to Tom Joad for making it so easy. I hope everyone here does it - it took maybe 10 minutes.

[brettdale]

48. kick

kick

[jarnocan]

51. thanks did it and passed info on.

Filing for: Jacalyn Engler
has been received by the FCC
My daughter plans to move there. This was an attempt to intimidate people from taking related actions too.

[Chailife77]

54. Petition to Fire Bill O'Reilly

Dear Friends,

I have just composed and signed the petition:
Fire Billy O'Reilly Now!

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/856781675

Please help by signing, and passing on, this petition. It takes 30 seconds and will really help. Please follow this link:

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/856781675

The system centralizes signature collection to provide consolidated, useful reports for petition authors and targets. Please forward this email to others you believe share your concern. To view additional petitions, please click here:
http://www.thePetitionSite.com
Thank you

Total Signatures: 57
The most recent signatures* as of 12:09 PM PST Nov 13, 2005

# 57 11/13/05 11:32 AM Pj Mandeville, NA, ie
# 56 11/13/05 11:26 AM Anonymous, CA, us
# 55 11/13/05 10:41 AM Anonymous, OH, us
# 54 11/13/05 10:28 AM Anonymous, WI, us
# 53 11/13/05 10:10 AM Anonymous, MA, us
# 52 11/13/05 8:42 AM Karen Spencer, CO, us
# 51 11/13/05 8:34 AM Jelisa Kenney, PA, us
# 50 11/13/05 7:44 AM Cynthia Van Savage, CT, us
# 49 11/13/05 5:07 AM ElJuana Hermansen, AZ, us
# 48 11/13/05 3:51 AM Kary Collison, AZ, us
# 47 11/13/05 12:20 AM Mardi Anderson, MO, us
# 46 11/13/05 12:02 AM Catherine Stehl, IL, us
# 45 11/13/05 12:01 AM Anonymous, AZ, us
# 44 11/12/05 10:56 PM Jeanette Ponder, NJ, us
# 43 11/12/05 9:57 PM Debby Johnson, NV, us
# 42 11/12/05 9:12 PM John Phipps, MD, us
# 41 11/12/05 8:20 PM Jm Mcewen, CA, us
# 40 11/12/05 8:00 PM Anonymous, NC, us
# 39 11/12/05 7:51 PM Anonymous, MN, us
# 38 11/12/05 7:50 PM Anonymous, WA, us
# 37 11/12/05 7:43 PM Anonymous, MD, us
# 36 11/12/05 7:34 PM Alice Jenson, WI, us
# 35 11/12/05 7:12 PM Anonymous, AZ, us
# 34 11/12/05 7:05 PM Lee ann landers, AZ, us
# 33 11/12/05 6:53 PM Dan Lawrence, CA, us

To add your name to this petition go to:

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/856781675

*Signers may choose to hide their identity to the public. Such names will appear as "Anonymous" on the PetitionSite.com and advocacy emails similar to this. (The signature number above may not match the number assigned to your signature on the first page of the petition.) To view additional petitions, please click here:
http://www.thePetitionSite.com

[EFerrari]

59. Welcome to DU, Chailife!

:hi:

[stevietheman]

76. I added my name and my picture.

I can't wait to get on O'Reilly's enemies list. That would be a badge of honor.

[wakemewhenitsover]

60. Imagine the outrage on the right...

...if Al Franken had said the same thing about Kansas...

[NYCGirl]

80. When Al made a joke about Libby and Rove being "executed" for their

roles in Plamegate, the RW did squeal and try to report it to the FCC, just like people are doing here.

Personally, I think the First Amendment covers even O'Reilly's incredibly stupid speech. (BTW, I'm a native San Franciscan.)

[Initech]

61. O'Reilly may want to find a new career...

I hope that he eats those words, it should be a career killer for a guy who used to be on a show that wrote the book for sensationalist bullshit journalism.

[yurbud]

75. he should g back to being an entertainment reporter or hairdresser

[EFerrari]

62. Sunday night kick for a well done thread

:kick:

[EFerrari]

64. another kick

[Mnemosyne]

65. Done! n/t

[proud_Kucitizen]

66. Thanks for the info

It was my pleasure to do this as I hate that scum.

[EstimatedProphet]

67. Kick

[Cha]

68. Kick!

:bounce:

[FreedomAngel82]

69. I wish someone could do something about his violence

If this was a liberal host saying the same things they would be kicked off the air. Tonight I was trying to find my local progressive station and heard O'Reilly for a second and he called someone a "pinhead". :eyes: Ugh. He has such disrespect for people.

[EFerrari]

70. kick for Tom's readily usable kit.

:kick:

[raysr]

71. Done!

[Renew Deal]

72. Done

It was a no brainer. O'Reilly is a terrorist.

[EFerrari]

73. kick

[northamericancitizen]

78. Kick and recommended. Too bad I can't sign on any petition eom

[larryepke]

79. Complaint filed

"He Speaks. He Lies!"

[depakid]

81. His stations need to be fined

and, like Roberston & Coulter- he should be removed from the airwaves- like he would have been back before Reagan deregulated the media.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

82. We oughta add fake names..... get them REALLY confused

n/t

[Ian David]

83. FCC Makes Filing an Indecency Complaint Easier

From Focus on {your} The Family:

FCC Makes Filing an Indecency Complaint Easier
by Wendy Cloyd, senior editorial coordinator
New form simplifies the process.

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has unveiled a new form that makes it less complicated for people to file a complaint after hearing or seeing indecent material on the broadcast airwaves.

The Obscene, Profane, and/or Indecent Material Complaint Form — also known as FCC Form 475B — will reportedly simplify collecting information about TV and radio stations that air objectionable material.

<snip>

Patrick Trueman, former head of the Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section at the Justice Department, said the FCC is much more open to receiving indecency complaints than ever before.

"The chairman of the FCC, Kevin Martin, has gone out of his way to change the way indecency complaints are handled," he said. "He's very welcoming to those complaints."

Trueman said the very fact that the form has been designed to be easy to use reveals a new attitude at the regulatory agency.

"It's an indication that the Federal Communications Commission is seeking consumer complaints on indecency," he said. "Pro-family citizens should take advantage of this and file that easy complaint form every time they see indecency on television."

More:
http://www.family.org/cforum/news/a0038520.cfm/t_blank



FOR MORE INFORMATION:
Bookmark the link to the FCC's Form 475B and use it to report any program you think crosses the line.
http://svartifoss2.fcc.gov/cib/fcc475B.cfm

To access formats for people with disabilities, such as Braille, large print and audio files, please send an email to: [email protected]

[Xenotime]

84. Take him off the air!

His time has come.

[mwooldri]

85. First time I filed a complaint:

and here's my complaint #:

FORM475B: 05-WB11192483

Non anoymous... and may I make it onto Mr. O'Really's hate list.