The Rules and Agencies That Control What Gets Broadcast and Published

UPI Study › Courses › Ethics in Technology › Free lessons › Lesson 15.12 Free with a free account

The Rules and Agencies That Control What Gets Broadcast and Published

Ethics in Technology · Chapter 15: Doing the Right Thing: Ethics, Media Responsibility, and Digital CitizenshipSection 15.12 · lesson 111 of 11616 min · free with a free account

← How Traditional and Digital Media Shape Public Opinion and Hold Organizations AccountableNext lesson: Evaluating Online Sources: How to Find Reliable Information and Spot Misinformation →

Earn 3 college credits for Ethics in TechnologyRecommended for credit by NCCRS · Computer Science 195 · self-paced · one payment, lifetime access
Enroll in Ethics in Technology · $250 →Download the syllabus (PDF)

In this lesson

First Amendment limits, the FCC, advertising and industry ratings.

  • Explain why media receive different regulation and protection
  • Distinguish obscenity, indecency and broadcast safe harbor
  • Define prior restraint and its constitutional limits
  • Describe FTC advertising and endorsement requirements
  • Identify major voluntary ratings systems and their origins

Free study notes

Get this lesson's notes by email

The key points and 4 practice questions with answers, in your inbox. One email, free.

One email. Unsubscribe in one click.

Transcript

Everything said in the video, section by section (1,938 words). Read along, or search it.

Doing the Right Thing: Ethics, Media Responsibility, and Digital Citizenship

Media Content Rules

American media law combines free expression, limited government regulation, and voluntary industry information systems. This lesson explains differing rules, for print, broadcast, cable, and internet services. First, connect those differences with characteristics courts considered, in important historical cases. Next, distinguish the narrow obscenity category, from protected speech classified as broadcast indecency. Then explain safe harbor, the overnight window allowing nonobscene indecent broadcasts. We also examine prior restraint, which blocks publication before audiences receive it. The Federal Trade Commission oversees deceptive advertising, including undisclosed material connections behind endorsements. Finally, identify the film, music, television, and game rating systems described in the source. Their histories connect public concern, political pressure, and industry efforts to inform parents. Specific legal categories matter here. A general dislike of content does not independently establish government authority to prohibit it.

Different Media

Historical Characteristics Help Explain Different Legal Rules

The First Amendment protects expression across media, although courts apply different rules in different settings. Print receives strong protection against government attempts, to stop publication before it happens. Near versus Minnesota, decided in nineteen thirty-one, is a central source example of that protection. For broadcast, Red Lion explained spectrum scarcity: available frequencies are limited, and simultaneous transmissions can interfere. The government licenses broadcast stations within that limited resource, rather than allowing every transmission unrestricted. Pacifica added broadcasting's pervasive presence, and its particular accessibility to children, as relevant considerations. Cable and satellite subscriptions are different services, to which the FCC's broadcast indecency restrictions do not apply. In nineteen ninety-seven, Reno versus ACLU applied full First Amendment scrutiny to internet speech. It rejected two broad Communications Decency Act restrictions, rather than the entire Act. The Court contrasted online access at that time, with the broadcast characteristics underlying its earlier cases. Those historical findings do not describe every modern online experience, including content appearing automatically. Broadcast is not the only service using licensed spectrum; the legal rationale needs precision.

Obscenity and Indecency

The Miller Criteria Define a Narrow Unprotected Category

Obscenity is a narrow legal category, rather than a label for anything someone finds offensive. Miller versus California, decided in nineteen seventy-three, supplies the three-part obscenity framework. First, the average person applies contemporary community standards, to the work taken as a whole. The question is whether that complete work, appeals to a prurient interest in sexual material. Second, it must depict or describe sexual conduct, in a patently offensive way. That conduct must be specifically defined, by the applicable law governing the obscenity determination. Third, the work taken as a whole, must lack serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value. All three criteria matter. Material satisfying them may be found obscene, and receives no First Amendment protection. Laws can prohibit its distribution or transmission, without making every offensive expression obscene. FCC indecency is different: contextually offensive descriptions or depictions of sexual or excretory organs or activities. The measure is the broadcast medium's standards, rather than any individual listener's reaction. Nonobscene indecent speech remains protected for adults, explaining timing restrictions instead of a blanket ban.

Broadcast Safe Harbor

Indecency Has a Time Window; Obscenity Does Not

Broadcast indecency is restricted from six in the morning, until ten at night. The complementary safe harbor runs from ten at night, until six the following morning. The diagram divides that overnight window at midnight, showing its position within each day. Its boxes show chronological periods, rather than scale their width to the number of hours. Safe harbor permits nonobscene indecent broadcasts; obscene broadcasts remain prohibited at every hour. The source connects these rules, with the Carlin monologue in FCC versus Pacifica Foundation. The broadcast occurred in nineteen seventy-three; the Supreme Court decided Pacifica in nineteen seventy-eight. WBAI aired George Carlin's Filthy Words monologue, at about two in the afternoon. A father heard it while driving with his young son, and complained to the FCC. The five-to-four decision supported the FCC's action, concerning that monologue in its broadcast context. Its reasoning addressed pervasiveness and children's access, alongside the different treatment of the broadcast medium. Later rules established the current hours; Pacifica did not set that exact window. The broadcast rule does not extend, to cable subscriptions, satellite subscriptions, or internet streaming.

Prior Restraint

Blocking Publication in Advance Faces an Especially Heavy Burden

Prior restraint is government action, that blocks or prevents publication before it happens. Subsequent punishment instead concerns legal liability, applied after the material has already been published. Government restraints on publication face an especially strong presumption, against their constitutionality. Near versus Minnesota rejected a law, permitting suppression of newspapers treated as malicious, scandalous, and defamatory. Its nineteen thirty-one decision protected publication, while recognizing potentially different issues in exceptional circumstances. The Court illustrated that possibility, with wartime troop transport sailing dates and similar immediate military information. That illustration does not create a general exception, for anything the government calls sensitive. The Pentagon Papers case concerned restraints, on publishing a classified Vietnam War history. In nineteen seventy-one, the Nixon administration sought restraints, against the New York Times and Washington Post. The Supreme Court concluded that the government, had not met the heavy burden justifying restraint. The newspapers could publish the documents, because those requested restraints were not justified. That result did not give newspapers, blanket immunity from every possible consequence after publication. Libel suits and other lawful subsequent liability remain possible, subject to their own constitutional requirements. The exceptional burden on advance suppression, does not permit unlimited punishment afterward.

FTC Advertising Oversight

Truthful Claims Need Appropriate Support Before the Ad Runs

Advertising raises another concern: commercial claims can deceive consumers, regardless of their medium. Section five of the FTC Act prohibits, unfair or deceptive practices in or affecting commerce. The Federal Trade Commission applies advertising standards, across print, broadcast, and internet promotion. A material claim or omission must not mislead consumers, acting reasonably under the circumstances. Objective product or service claims need appropriate evidence, before the advertisement is disseminated. Required support depends on the claim, rather than identical proof for every advertisement. Newly gathered evidence cannot replace the reasonable basis, the advertiser should already have possessed. Endorsements create another risk, when audiences mistake a promotional relationship for independent judgment. The FTC's Endorsement Guides explain, how the agency applies its law to these advertising practices. The Guides are administrative interpretations. They are not themselves binding regulations, although deceptive conduct can support enforcement under section five. That distinction preserves the disclosure lesson, while identifying the legal basis for enforcement.

Endorsements and Influencers

Make Unexpected Material Connections Clear to the Audience

A material connection is a relationship or benefit, that can affect an endorsement's weight or credibility. The source examples include payment, a free product, or another benefit from the advertiser. An unexpected material connection needs disclosure, clearly and conspicuously presented to the audience. When the context already makes the relationship clear, an additional disclosure may not be necessary. The two thousand twenty-three Guides clarify, presenting that information in the endorsement's format. An audible representation needs an audible disclosure; a visual representation needs a visual disclosure. Both formats require both disclosures, so audiences can notice and understand the information. Information buried in a bio link or hashtag collection, can fail that clear disclosure standard. Lord and Taylor illustrates the concern, through a paid Instagram campaign involving fifty fashion influencers. According to the FTC, they posted photos wearing a company dress, without disclosing the promotional relationship. The campaign occurred in two thousand fifteen. FTC charges and settlement followed in two thousand sixteen, after the campaign year.

Voluntary Industry Ratings

Audience Information Can Respond to Public and Political Pressure

The source describes a recurring pattern, behind several voluntary content rating and labeling systems. Public concern about media content, can lead to hearings or pressure for stronger government action. Industry organizations then develop information tools, allowing audiences, especially parents, to choose material more knowingly. Those efforts respond to regulatory pressure, without proving government censorship would otherwise have occurred. Film ratings are one early example: Jack Valenti's MPAA introduced the voluntary system in nineteen sixty-eight. It replaced the Hays Production Code, which had been adopted in nineteen thirty. The new approach categorized content for audiences, rather than approve every film under the old production rules. The organization is now called the Motion Picture Association, formerly the Motion Picture Association of America. A content rating is not a legal finding, that the work satisfies the Miller obscenity criteria. The histories share a broad pattern, while their legislation, organizations, and exact development differ.

4 Source Ratings Examples

Preserve the Industry, Dates and Context Behind Each System

The four examples connect each information system, with its industry and historical context. Film ratings began in nineteen sixty-eight, with the categories G, M, R, and X. M became GP in nineteen seventy, then PG in nineteen seventy-two, as the industry clarified parental guidance. PG-thirteen followed in nineteen eighty-four, and NC-seventeen replaced X in nineteen ninety. Recorded music's Parental Advisory Label traces its labeling agreement, to nineteen eighty-five. Senate hearings and the Parents Music Resource Center, pressed the industry about explicit or violent lyrics. The Center was co-founded by Tipper Gore; the Recording Industry Association of America administers the voluntary program. Television's Parental Guidelines rolled out and were revised in nineteen ninety-seven, following the previous December's announcement. The Telecommunications Act of nineteen ninety-six, connected a voluntary rating system with V-chip blocking technology. Covered new television sets needed a blocking feature; this did not immediately cover every existing television. The law also provided an FCC fallback, if acceptable voluntary ratings were not developed. For games, the Entertainment Software Rating Board began, in nineteen ninety-four. Its founder, the Interactive Digital Software Association, later became the Entertainment Software Association. Nineteen ninety-three congressional hearings examined, games including Mortal Kombat and Night Trap. Pressure for a government rating commission helped motivate, the industry's own system of content information. These examples show self-regulation serving parental choice, within histories shaped by controversy and pressure.

7 Key Terms

Separate the Rationale, Content Category, Timing and Enforcement

Spectrum scarcity names a historical rationale, based on the limited available frequencies for broadcast communication. Obscenity satisfies all three Miller criteria, rather than failing a general decency expectation. Indecency concerns contextually offensive sexual or excretory descriptions, under broadcast standards, without equaling obscenity. Safe harbor is the overnight broadcast window, from ten at night until six in the morning. Prior restraint blocks publication in advance, and arrives with a presumption against constitutional validity. Subsequent punishment is liability after publication, still constrained by constitutional and legal requirements. The FTC Endorsement Guides explain deceptive endorsement practices, including disclosure of unexpected material connections. Keep these seven terms separate; each answers a different question about regulation or publication.

5 Takeaways

Match the Medium and Conduct With the Correct Kind of Rule

The first takeaway is that historical characteristics, help explain why different media receive different regulatory treatment. That does not establish an absolute ranking, for every dispute or modern technology. Second, obscenity is narrow and unprotected, while nonobscene indecency remains protected speech for adults. Broadcast safe harbor allows indecency overnight, without permitting obscene broadcasts at any time. Third, government action blocking publication in advance, faces a special constitutional burden. Possible liability after publication is a separate question, with its own legal and constitutional limits. Fourth, FTC advertising standards cross media, addressing deception, substantiation, and unexpected promotional relationships. Finally, the four rating systems offer industry information, for audiences concerned about mature or unsuitable content. Their development responds to public and political pressure, through different histories rather than identical events. Match the medium, category, timing, and agency, before explaining why a particular rule applies.

Review and Apply

Explain the Legal Rationale and the Limits of Its Reach

First, explain spectrum scarcity, then Pacifica's additional concerns about pervasiveness and children's access. The second distinguishes obscenity's three criteria, from nonobscene indecency and the broadcast safe harbor. Remember the window: ten at night, until six in the morning; it excludes obscene broadcasting. For Pentagon Papers, the government did not meet the heavy burden for prior restraint. That answer permits the publication in this case, without promising blanket immunity from later liability. Next, compare the FTC's advertising standards across media, with the FCC's specific broadcast indecency restrictions. Finally, connect film, music, television, and game ratings, with public concern and industry information tools. Explain the common pattern, preserving each system's dates, organizations, and legal context. A precise answer states the rule, and the boundary preventing an unlimited generalization.

About Ethics in Technology at UPI Study

Ethics in Technology (Computer Science 195) is a self-paced online course of 116 video lessons in 15 chapters, from cybersecurity basics, privacy and surveillance to big data, hacking, malware, network defense, intellectual property, cybercrime, encryption, emerging technology and digital citizenship. It carries a NCCRS credit recommendation for 3 semester credits.

Every lesson transcript is free on pages like this one, and the videos are free with a free UPI Study account. Enrolling adds a practice quiz after each lesson, the graded work and final exam that earn the credit, lifetime access, and an official transcript on completion. UPI Study has helped over 130,000 students with college credits. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.

Enroll now → Course details Download the syllabus All Computer Science courses

Compare: Cybersecurity vs Ethics in Technology · Which ethics course?

Why take it here

Why students take Ethics in Technology with UPI Study

The right and wrong of the digital worldEthics in Technology looks at the choices technology forces on people and organizations: security and privacy, surveillance and the law, big data, hacking and cyber warfare, malware and breaches, intellectual property, cybercrime, encryption, artificial intelligence and responsible digital citizenship. It suits computer science, information technology and business degrees.
Credit at a fraction of the priceThe same 3 credits can cost $750 or more at a US college. Here it is one payment, self-paced, with lifetime access.
Finish your degree soonerTransfer credits reduce the courses you still owe, so you can graduate earlier or lighten a heavy semester.
Strengthen an applicationA completed college-level course on an official transcript shows admissions and scholarship committees you can do the work.
Study on your own scheduleNo start dates, no deadlines. Watch the lessons, practice, and take the final when you are ready.
130,000+students helped with college creditsACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.

Where the credit goes

Universities that work with NCCRS

Ethics in Technology carries a NCCRS credit recommendation. These universities work with NCCRS; some are UPI Study's signed partners. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.

Thomas Edison State UniversityThomas Edison State UniversitySigned partnerUniversity of the PeopleUniversity of the PeopleSigned partnerCharter Oak State CollegeCharter Oak State CollegeSigned partnerStrayer UniversityStrayer UniversitySigned partnerColumbia Southern UniversityColumbia Southern UniversitySigned partnerIndiana TechIndiana TechSigned partnerPenn StatePenn StateWorks with NCCRSSouthern New Hampshire UniversitySouthern New Hampshire UniversityWorks with NCCRSSUNYSUNYWorks with NCCRS +many more cooperating universitiesFind my college →

Find my college → Not listed? Ask Athena in the corner of this page, or book a 15-minute call.

FAQ

Questions students ask us

About The Rules and Agencies That Control What Gets Broadcast and Published

What is the difference between obscenity and indecency?
Obscenity has no First Amendment protection, while indecency is protected for adults but can be restricted on broadcast radio and TV. Under Miller v. California (1973), material is obscene only if, taken as a whole, it appeals to prurient interest by contemporary community standards, depicts specifically defined sexual conduct in a patently offensive way, and lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value. Indecency covers patently offensive sexual or excretory material judged by broadcast standards.
What is the FCC safe harbor for indecent broadcasts?
The safe harbor runs from 10 p.m. to 6 a.m., when broadcast radio and TV stations may air indecent but not obscene material; from 6 a.m. to 10 p.m., indecency is restricted. The restrictions trace back to FCC v. Pacifica Foundation (1978), a 5-4 decision upholding FCC action over George Carlin's Filthy Words monologue, which WBAI aired around 2 p.m. in 1973. The broadcast indecency rules do not apply to cable, satellite subscriptions or internet streaming.
What is prior restraint, and why is it hard for the government to justify?
Prior restraint is government action that blocks publication before it happens, and courts treat it with a heavy presumption against its constitutionality. Near v. Minnesota (1931) struck down a law allowing suppression of newspapers deemed malicious or scandalous. In the 1971 Pentagon Papers case, the Supreme Court ruled the Nixon administration had not met its heavy burden to stop the New York Times and Washington Post from publishing. Publishers can still face lawful liability afterward, such as libel suits.
How did movie, music, TV, and video game rating systems start?
Each began as voluntary industry self-regulation under public and political pressure. The MPAA, now the Motion Picture Association, introduced film ratings in 1968, replacing the Hays Production Code. The music Parental Advisory label dates to a 1985 agreement after Senate hearings and pressure from the Parents Music Resource Center. TV Parental Guidelines took effect in 1997 after the Telecommunications Act of 1996 created the V-chip requirement, and the ESRB began rating video games in 1994.

About the Ethics in Technology course

How many college credits is Ethics in Technology?
Ethics in Technology (Computer Science 195) carries a NCCRS credit recommendation for 3 semester credits. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.
How much does Ethics in Technology cost and what is included?
$250, paid once, with lifetime access: all 116 video lessons, a practice quiz after each, the graded work and final exam, and an official transcript when you finish. It is sold on its own and is not part of UPI Study PRO.
Which universities accept UPI Study credits?
UPI Study has signed partner agreements with universities such as Thomas Edison State University, University of the People and Charter Oak State College, and works with universities such as Penn State, SNHU and SUNY. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities. Use "Find my college" on this page to check yours.
How long does Ethics in Technology take?
It is self-paced with no deadlines. The 116 lessons total about 28 hours of video; most students add reading and practice time and finish in a few weeks to a few months, on their own schedule.
How are the exams done?
Quizzes and assignments are online in the course. The final exam is taken online with proctoring; a person on the UPI Study team checks assignments, usually within two days.
How do my credits reach my college?
When the course shows 100% complete, request the official transcript from your dashboard. It is sent to the college you name, and you can send it to more than one. Check your college first with "Find my college" on this page, or ask Athena.

Ready for the full course? Earn 3 credits in Ethics in Technology.

116 video lessons, a quiz after each one, and the graded work that earns the credit. Recommended for credit by NCCRS.

Enroll in Ethics in Technology →Download the syllabus
Ethics in Technology
3 credits · NCCRSEnroll →