Reading Summary #8 Chapter 10

Topic Overview:
-If the government is unable to prove that material has any parts of the Miller Test (see below), the material cannot be found as obscene
- whether material lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value is determined by using national criteria based on expert testimony
- It is illegal to provide minors with sexually explicit content that would not be obscene if given to an adult
-The FA protects indecent material, EXCEPT in broadcast television and radio
- The supreme court has rejected several attempts to prevent children from seeing sexually explicit material on the internet

Key Terms:

Important Cases:
Federal Communications Commission v Fox Television Stations Inc.
A decision by the Supreme Court that upheld regulations of the Federal Communications Commission that ban "fleeting expletives" on television broadcasts, finding they were not arbitrary under the Administrative Procedure Act.

Federal Communications Commission v Pacifica Foundation
A Supreme Court decision that defined the power of the Federal Communications Commission over indecent material as applied to broadcasting. The decision reaffirmed the notion that the government has a freer hand to regulate the broadcast medium than other forms of media.

Relevant Doctrine:

Miller Test for Obscenity- The Miller test for obscenity includes the following criteria: (1) whether the average person, applying contemporary community standards would find that the work appeals to prurient interest (2) whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law, and (3) whether the work lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.

Current Issues:
The main issue I think of when reflecting upon this chapter is just the fact that the government really cant protect children from seeing explicit material. It is unfortunate, because as a coach and past babysitter, I have seen many children get into the wrong kinds of material online. These explicit materials can be harmless, but are often times negatively impact kids' lives. I understand that restricting certain types f explicit material is suppressing ones freedom of speech and does not abide with FA law, i just wish there was some way we could better monitor the kind of material children have access to. I suppose for now, it is simply the job of the parents.
Questions: