[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Cato Institute paper on "Lessons from FCC Regulation"
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 1997 07:30:50 -0800 (PST)
From: Declan McCullagh <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Cato Institute paper on "Lessons from FCC Regulation"
[I read through most of this paper last night. It doesn't say anything new
about the CDA per se, but it is worth reading for what it says about way
the Fairness Doctrine was used to intimidate political opponents, and how
government controls over the content of speech are intolerable. --Declan]
*************
Linkname: 270. Chilling the Internet? Lessons from FCC
Filename: http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-270es.html
CHILLING THE INTERNET?
Lessons from FCC Regulation of Radio Broadcasting
by Thomas W. Hazlett and David W. Sosa
Executive Summary
Congress included the Communications Decency Act in the
Telecommunications Act, which was signed into law on February 8,
1996. The CDA sought to outlaw the use of computers and phone lines
to transmit "indecent" material and provided jail terms and heavy
fines for violators. Proponents of the act argue that it is
necessary to protect minors from undesirable speech on the
burgeoning Internet. The CDA was immediately challenged in court by
the American Civil Liberties Union, and the special three-judge
federal panel established to hear the case recently declared the
act unconstitutional. Yet its ultimate adjudication remains in
doubt.
Ominously, the federal government has long experimented with
regulations designed to improve the content of "electronic" speech.
For example, the Fairness Doctrine, imposed on radio and television
stations until 1987, was an attempt to establish a standard of
"fair" coverage of important public issues. The deregulation of
content controls on AM and FM radio programming, first under the
Carter Federal Communications Commission in early 1981 and then
under the Reagan FCC (which abolished the Fairness Doctrine in
1987), led to profound changes in radio markets. Specifically, the
volume of informational programming increased dramatically
immediately after controls were ended--powerful evidence of the
potential for regulation to have a "chilling effect" on free
speech.
*******
Thomas W. Hazlett is a professor of agricultural and resource
economics and director of the Program on Telecommunications Policy,
University of California, Davis. David W. Sosa is a doctoral
student in the Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics,
University of California, Davis. This article originally appeared
in the Michigan Telecommunications and Technology Law Review, an
online journal, and is reprinted with permission.