The Children's Television Act of 1990 was enacted to encourage television broadcasters to serve the needs of children more extensively in their programming. To do so, the Act provides that in considering licensing renewals, the Federal Communications Commission "shall consider the extent to which the licensee has served the educational and informational needs of children through the licensee's overall programming."
The first license renewals that will be subject to this Act were considered in 1992. Assume that in one of these initial renewal proceedings, the F.C.C. determines that a television broadcaster has totally failed to program material that serves the needs of children, and denies renewal of the license on this basis. Also assume that the broadcaster appeals the denial on the ground that the above aspect of the Act and the denial of renewal violate the first amendment to the United States Constitution.
Discuss arguments that might be made on both sides of this issue, and state how you believe the issue should be resolved, and why. Be sure to define the Children’s Television Act of 1990, the Public Broadcasting Act of 1967, and core children’s broadcasting. Cite a minimum of two cases.
Sample Answer
The Children's Television Act of 1990 was enacted to encourage television broadcasters to serve the educational and informational needs of children. The Act requires the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to consider a broadcaster's efforts in this area when reviewing their license renewals. The Public Broadcasting Act of 1967 established the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which funds public television and radio, including programming for children. Core children's broadcasting refers to programming specifically designed to meet the unique developmental, educational, and informational needs of children.The Children's Television Act of 1990 was enacted to encourage television broadcasters to serve the educational and informational needs of children. The Act requires the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to consider a broadcaster's efforts in this area when reviewing their license renewals. The Public Broadcasting Act of 1967 established the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which funds public television and radio, including programming for children. Core children's broadcasting refers to programming specifically designed to meet the unique developmental, educational, and informational needs of children.
Arguments Against the FCC
A broadcaster could argue that the FCC's denial of their license renewal violates the First Amendment by imposing a content-based restriction on their programming. The Supreme Court has held that content-based regulations on speech are subject to strict scrutiny, meaning the government must prove the regulation serves a compelling interest and is narrowly tailored to achieve that interest.
The broadcaster could assert that the Act forces them to air specific types of content (educational and informational) and limits their editorial discretion. This could be seen as a form of compelled speech, which the First Amendment generally prohibits. They might argue that the FCC's action is not narrowly tailored because there are less restrictive means to achieve the government's interest, such as providing tax incentives for educational programming rather than threatening license renewal.
The broadcaster could also draw on precedents like Federal Communications Commission v. League of Women Voters of California (1984), where the Court found a ban on editorializing by public broadcasters to be unconstitutional, and Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. Federal Communications Commission (1969), which upheld the fairness doctrine but in a context different from the current case. They might argue that the broadcast spectrum is not as limited as it was in the past due to the rise of cable and digital media, weakening the "scarcity" argument that has traditionally been used to justify government regulation of broadcasting.
Arguments for the FCC
The FCC would argue that its action is a constitutionally permissible exercise of its authority to regulate the public airwaves. It would invoke the scarcity doctrine, established in Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. Federal Communications Commission, which holds that because the broadcast spectrum is a limited public resource, broadcasters can be required to serve the public interest in exchange for a license. The FCC would contend that serving the educational needs of children is a compelling government interest, especially given the vulnerability of a young audience.