" inappropriate lyrics should be banned from the radio "
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 6 votes the winner is...
drafterman
| Started: | 10/9/2011 | Category: | Entertainment |
| Updated: | 1 year ago | Status: | Post Voting Period |
| Viewed: | 525 times | Debate No: | 18703 |
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (0)
Votes (6)
|
Currently so called " inappropriate" language is banned from the radio and television, which violates the first amendment of the Unites States Constitution. I have proof of this because the exact deffinition of Freedom Of Speech is " freedom to speak freely without censorship ". The key word being censorship. This means that the media has no right whatsoever to validate what is " good " and " bad " language.
The "exact" definition of Freedom of Speech may well be the "freedom to speak freely without censorship" [1]. But that is most certainly not the meaning of the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. There are a variety of limitations to our Freedom of Speech. Determining whether or not radio censorship violates the First Amendment, we need to acknowledge that such determinations are an official function of the Judiciary branch. With their interpretive powers, the Courts determine if a law or regulation is unconstitutional. The most applicable court case here would be FCC V. Pacifica Foundation, 438 U.S. 726, 57 L. Ed. 2d 1073, 98 S. Ct. 3026 (1978) wherein the FCC issued sanctions against a radio station for airing an obscene broadcast [2]. Note that the FCC does not censor, even if it takes punitive actions. Censorship is provided by he broadcasting company itself (which does not violate the First Amendment, as a private entity) as a proactive measure to avoid FCC fines and sanctions. Until a new case overturns this decision, the FCC's authority to punish broadcasting companies for such content remains valid and, even if this authority was invalidated, private companies would still retain the authority to censor their own broadcasts, as the First Amendment only applies to government entities. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org... [2] http://www.ala.org... |
![]() |
Post a Comment
No comments have been posted on this debate.
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by kkjnay 1 year ago
| lifesaglitch911 | drafterman | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agreed with before the debate: | - | - | ![]() | 0 points |
| Agreed with after the debate: | - | - | ![]() | 0 points |
| Who had better conduct: | - | - | ![]() | 1 point |
| Had better spelling and grammar: | - | - | ![]() | 1 point |
| Made more convincing arguments: | - | ![]() | - | 3 points |
| Used the most reliable sources: | - | - | ![]() | 2 points |
| Total points awarded: | 0 | 3 |
Reasons for voting decision: One round?
Vote Placed by Ore_Ele 1 year ago
| lifesaglitch911 | drafterman | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agreed with before the debate: | - | ![]() | - | 0 points |
| Agreed with after the debate: | - | ![]() | - | 0 points |
| Who had better conduct: | - | - | ![]() | 1 point |
| Had better spelling and grammar: | - | - | ![]() | 1 point |
| Made more convincing arguments: | - | ![]() | - | 3 points |
| Used the most reliable sources: | - | ![]() | - | 2 points |
| Total points awarded: | 0 | 5 |
Reasons for voting decision: A complete win for Pro. Con really should have made this more than one round, so that there could be a back and forth, but, oh well.
Vote Placed by F-16_Fighting_Falcon 1 year ago
| lifesaglitch911 | drafterman | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agreed with before the debate: | - | - | ![]() | 0 points |
| Agreed with after the debate: | - | - | ![]() | 0 points |
| Who had better conduct: | - | - | ![]() | 1 point |
| Had better spelling and grammar: | - | - | ![]() | 1 point |
| Made more convincing arguments: | - | ![]() | - | 3 points |
| Used the most reliable sources: | - | - | ![]() | 2 points |
| Total points awarded: | 0 | 3 |
Reasons for voting decision: Same as below, and Con is a troll.
Vote Placed by dcarvajal1990 1 year ago
| lifesaglitch911 | drafterman | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agreed with before the debate: | - | - | ![]() | 0 points |
| Agreed with after the debate: | - | - | ![]() | 0 points |
| Who had better conduct: | - | - | ![]() | 1 point |
| Had better spelling and grammar: | - | ![]() | - | 1 point |
| Made more convincing arguments: | - | ![]() | - | 3 points |
| Used the most reliable sources: | - | ![]() | - | 2 points |
| Total points awarded: | 0 | 6 |
Reasons for voting decision: pros stance was more informed than cons was
Vote Placed by Man-is-good 1 year ago
| lifesaglitch911 | drafterman | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agreed with before the debate: | - | - | ![]() | 0 points |
| Agreed with after the debate: | - | - | ![]() | 0 points |
| Who had better conduct: | - | - | ![]() | 1 point |
| Had better spelling and grammar: | - | - | ![]() | 1 point |
| Made more convincing arguments: | - | ![]() | - | 3 points |
| Used the most reliable sources: | - | - | ![]() | 2 points |
| Total points awarded: | 0 | 3 |
Reasons for voting decision: Pro proved that Con's point about the extent of the First amendment was limited due to an opposing entity, the court case FCC V. Pacifica Foundation, 438 U.S. 726, 57 L. Ed. 2d 1073, 98 S. Ct. 3026 (1978), which has the ability of punishing inappropriate broadcasts...Due to the structure of the debate, Con couldn't address it and thus lost...
Vote Placed by thett3 1 year ago
| lifesaglitch911 | drafterman | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agreed with before the debate: | - | - | ![]() | 0 points |
| Agreed with after the debate: | - | - | ![]() | 0 points |
| Who had better conduct: | - | - | ![]() | 1 point |
| Had better spelling and grammar: | - | - | ![]() | 1 point |
| Made more convincing arguments: | - | ![]() | - | 3 points |
| Used the most reliable sources: | - | - | ![]() | 2 points |
| Total points awarded: | 0 | 3 |
Reasons for voting decision: Don't do one round debates kids










