NAB REVISITS CODE OF CONDUCT, FORMS NEW TASK FORCE
The NAB said it would form a task force to review creation of a code of conduct and other options for broadcasters. The announcement Thurs. followed a daylong closed summit on responsible programming (CD April 1 p5)
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
The NAB Exec. Committee indicated it will move quickly in appointing a task force that will be inclusive of the entire broadcast industry. The first meeting of the task force will be during the NAB convention. “Given the serious First Amendment concerns surrounding issues related to program content, it is our strong belief that voluntary industry initiatives are far preferable to government regulation,” said NAB Pres. Eddie Fritts.
However, several industry observers questioned what’s “truly” voluntary. “It is not truly voluntary when you have law makers pressuring broadcast content,” said First Amendment attorney Robert Corn-Revere. He noted that in 1975, pressured by the FCC, the NAB developed a code, which was thrown out by a Cal. judge after the Screen Actors Guild claimed it violated First Amendment rights. “The problem with a code is that it can be a restrictive form of speech and most adversely affect artists,” said Media Access Project Pres. Andrew Schwartzman.
Another issue is whether a code would violate antitrust laws. The original code was abolished in 1982 following a consent decree with the Justice Dept. The agreement came in an antitrust suit -- litigated for several years -- primarily on its restrictions on the amount of ads permitted per hour on subscribing stations. Several years ago, the late Sen. Paul Simon (D-Ill.) proposed granting the NAB an antitrust waiver if the association could come up with a code of conduct, but the NAB never did, Schwartzman said. He suggested that legislation that indicated the code wouldn’t violate antitrust laws was a “safer” bet than obtaining a waiver from the Justice Dept. because the agency can always change its mind.
Another question was how the NAB would implement a voluntary code, a TV executive said at the NAB Summit. There were a lot of options the task force would explore beyond the code including individual codes of conduct, such as Clear Channel’s “zero tolerance” policy. Such initiatives wouldn’t run into First Amendment objections, Corn-Revere said: “Every broadcaster has the right to make there own indecency rules.”
The issues aren’t new. In 2000, a dozen or more members of Congress of both parties called for broadcasters to develop a voluntary code on programming content covering sex and violence. The NAB did adopt a “Statement of Principles” on programming issues in 1990, including stronger language on sex and violence than did the Code. However, there was no interpretation on enforcement of these principles by the NAB or others, and they weren’t intended to establish new criteria for programming decisions.