rm ([personal profile] rm) wrote2009-06-05 07:48 pm

update on krxq situation

http://glaadblog.org/2009/06/05/update-nissan-wont-renew-krxq-advertising-contract/

8 advertisers have now pulled their stuff from the station in light of this mess.

Thanks to [livejournal.com profile] selasphorus for the update.

[identity profile] xtricks.livejournal.com 2009-06-06 12:01 am (UTC)(link)
My question is, what is the FFCs guidelines towards advocating violence?

While they used an 'imaginary' child as an example, the whole discussion was brought up by a real child.

[identity profile] kel-reiley.livejournal.com 2009-06-06 12:12 am (UTC)(link)
damn, i used to know FCC regulations backward and forward

[identity profile] xtricks.livejournal.com 2009-06-06 01:02 am (UTC)(link)
Well, they find a gazillion dollars for a clearly accidental and momentary nudity issue but a half-hour talk show advocating violence against children the could be (very arguably) defined as troubled gets a pass?

Does it fall under free speech protections?

[identity profile] kel-reiley.livejournal.com 2009-06-06 01:13 am (UTC)(link)
they've changed a few things recently (since i studied, anyway) so i'm not sure what it would fall under now

[identity profile] klwalton.livejournal.com 2009-06-06 05:17 am (UTC)(link)
The FCC is fangless and it sucks. Just sayin'.