Home Page

Es un latiguillo extendidísimo, incluso entre personas que se autocalifican como liberales, eso de afirmar que la derecha es más proclive a arbitrar medidas para favorecer la libertad económica y otras para coartar la libertad individual y que, por contra, la izquierda se caracteriza por favorecer la libertad individual mientras regula con mayor celo la económica. Prescindamos de que esa forma de ver las cosas parte de una subdivisión algo caprichosa de la libertad en compartimentos injustificables; es que además no es verdad.

Según leemos en CNSNews.com, el senador demócrata Jay Rockefeller anda haciendo campaña para que, después del verano, se apruebe un decreto que conceda poderes a la FCC (el CAC yanki) para regular los contenidos violentos en la tele. Parece que al senador no le gustó nada una escena de la serie (de la Fox, qué curioso) “24″.

Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.), a longtime critic of TV violence, plans to introduce a bill before the August congressional recess giving the Federal Communications Commission the power to regulate violent content on television. The authority would apply to cable and satellite programming as well as to broadcast networks.

“The television industry has been told for years that there is a direct correlation between the images on television and what our children are doing in real life,” Steven Broderick, press secretary for Rockefeller, told Cybercast News Service.

“The industry has said, we can clean up our act and take care of ourselves. They have tried and they have failed,” he added.

The FCC has long had the authority to censor images and language regarded as overly sexual or profane, but has never been able to regulate violent content.

Earlier this year, the agency released a report saying such regulation was needed, but asking Congress to formulate a definition for what is considered violence.

Broderick said Rockefeller was “disappointed” over the move.

“Clearly the intent of the Congress was for the FCC to define violence,” he said. “The senator believes that if the FCC won’t do it, then we must do it. But he would prefer if they did.”

In addition to providing a definition of television violence, Rockerfeller’s bill would also attempt to increase family-friendly programming and make it easier for parents to block content they deem inappropriate.

Y ¿quién se está oponiendo a esa medida liberticida? Has acertado, curioso lector: los libertarians. Nihil novum sub sole.

But Nick Gillespie, editor-in-chief at the libertarian Reason magazine, says Congress has turned the issue on its head. He accused government regulators of attempting to trample the right to free speech.

“If you believe in free expression and the First Amendment, one of the most basic rights that makes America unique and wonderful, we should not give these people any opportunity to limit our free speech,” he told Cybercast News Service.

Gillespie was particularly concerned that Rockefeller’s bill would extend to cable and satellite stations an “unprecedented” regulatory move.

“Cable and satellite are delivery devices that people have to pay for and somewhere between 85 and 90 percent of American households do this,” he said. “So this seems to me to be a massive power grab by federal regulators to be able to tell people what they can and cannot watch in their house.”

“First they’ll come for Comedy Central. Then they’ll come for HBO,” he added.

Congress, Libertarians Prepare for Clash Over TV Violence. Lee todo el extenso y fantástico reportaje de Matt Purple en CNSNews.com.

Por cierto:

Es que en todas partes cuecen habas, pero en mi casa a calderadas.