You must have Credits on your Balance to download this sample
Denver Area Educational Telecommunications Consortium v FCC, 518 U.S. 727 United States v. Playboy Entertainment Group, 529 U.S.
Journalism & Communication
Pages 3 (753 words)
Student Name: Tutor’s Name: Subject: Date of Submission: Case Review The case number 95-124, Denver Educational Telecommunications Consortium, Inc., et al., Appellants, vs. Federal Communications Commission et al., Appellee, was argued from February 21, 1996 and decided on June 28, 1996…
In this Act, section 10 (a) and (c) allowed television program operator to forbid or deny broadcasting a program that it practically trusts portrays sexual activities or organs in a patently offensive way. On the other hand, section 10 (b) required the operators to distinguish a “patently belligerent” programming, block it and unblock it within 30 days of the viewer’s request (Breyer et al. 1). The appeal’s court held that the three sections were coherent with the First Amendment. The ruling was acknowledged in part and reversed in part. The court issued the opinion resolving that § 10(b) infringes the first modification. The sections’ “distinguish and block” requisites have understandable language obstructive upshots for subscribers, who cannot view telecasts distinguished on the “patently belligerent” channel devoid of significant prior planning. Additionally, the judge held that section 10 (b) was not properly designed to attain its primary goal of protecting the children from disclosure to “patently offensive” telecasts (Breyer et al. 1). The case number 98-1682, United States, et al., the Appellants, vs. Playboy Entertainment Group, Inc., the Defendant, was argued from November 30, 1999 and decided on May 22, 2000. ...
Not exactly what you need?