Equal Opportunity Rule
Obscene material, "is not protected by the First Amendment," (361) to the Constitution and cannot be broadcast at any time. On the other hand, indecent material is protected by the First Amendment and cannot be banned entirely. It may, however, be restricted in order to avoid its broadcast during times of the day when there is a reasonable risk that children may be in the audience.
According to the U.S. Supreme Court, to be obscene, material must meet a three-prong test, "(1) an average person, applying contemporary community standards, must find that the material, as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest (i.e., material having a tendency to excite lustful thoughts); (2) the material must depict or describe, in a patently offensive way, …show more content…
The Equal opportunities rule is sometimes confused with the fairness doctrine because this doctrine, "never said that opposing views were entitled to equal time," (366), as the Equal opportunities rule mandates. The Fairness Doctrine was a regulation of the State 's Federal Communications Commission which required broadcast licensees to present controversial issues of public importance, and to present such issues in an honest, equal and balanced manner. The, "equal {opportunities} rule {basically} require {d} equal air time for all major candidates competing for political office. It was preceded by the fairness doctrine, abolished in 1987, which required radio and television broadcasters to air contrasting views on controversial public issues," (http://www.factmonster.com/ce6/society/A0909692.html).
The fairness doctrine required stations to offer equal opportunity to all legally qualified political candidates for any office if they had allowed any person running in that office to use the station. However, this doctrine by no means stated that, if a station gives one free minute to a candidate on the prime time, it must do the same to another. What was just stated above is something which is along the lines of the equal opportunities rule, which primarily says that if a station offers ten minutes to a candidate, it must offer the exact same time to the other
According to the U.S. Supreme Court, to be obscene, material must meet a three-prong test, "(1) an average person, applying contemporary community standards, must find that the material, as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest (i.e., material having a tendency to excite lustful thoughts); (2) the material must depict or describe, in a patently offensive way, …show more content…
The Equal opportunities rule is sometimes confused with the fairness doctrine because this doctrine, "never said that opposing views were entitled to equal time," (366), as the Equal opportunities rule mandates. The Fairness Doctrine was a regulation of the State 's Federal Communications Commission which required broadcast licensees to present controversial issues of public importance, and to present such issues in an honest, equal and balanced manner. The, "equal {opportunities} rule {basically} require {d} equal air time for all major candidates competing for political office. It was preceded by the fairness doctrine, abolished in 1987, which required radio and television broadcasters to air contrasting views on controversial public issues," (http://www.factmonster.com/ce6/society/A0909692.html).
The fairness doctrine required stations to offer equal opportunity to all legally qualified political candidates for any office if they had allowed any person running in that office to use the station. However, this doctrine by no means stated that, if a station gives one free minute to a candidate on the prime time, it must do the same to another. What was just stated above is something which is along the lines of the equal opportunities rule, which primarily says that if a station offers ten minutes to a candidate, it must offer the exact same time to the other