Al's Morning Meeting

[If it is determined by the FCC] to have broadcast obscene, indecent, or profane language, the amount of any forfeiture penalty determined under this subsection shall not exceed $325,000 for each violation or each day of a continuing violation, except that the amount assessed for any continuing violation shall not exceed a total of $3,000,000 for any single act or failure to act.

The FCC has been on a tear about indecency after doing little for years. Look at this log [PDF] of complaints and fines since 1993. The FCC logged hundreds of thousands of obscenity complaints in the first quarter, but a large percentage of them come from an activist group's mass e-mail campaign. The Parents Television Council argued that it was long past due time to raise fines because the old fines were not high enough to force media companies to pay attention.

As the FCC Web site points out:

In 2004 alone, the FCC took action in 12 cases, involving hundreds of thousands of complaints, assessing penalties and voluntary payments totaling approximately $8,000,000. The Commission has also toughened its enforcement penalties by proposing monetary penalties based on each indecent utterance in a broadcast, rather than proposing a single monetary penalty for the entire broadcast.  

There is a difference among things within broadcasts that are considered obscene, indecent or profane. What is and what is not OK to air? Here is an FCC fact sheet to explain the differences -- and when each type of programming can or cannot be aired. The FCC considers context to be important, but just because an utterance or image appears in a newscast does not make it automatically exempt from prosecution.

A law firm put up an indecency quiz (as a PowerPoint download) to test your knowledge about the law. 

The AP points out:

Under FCC rules and federal law, radio stations and over-the-air television channels may not air obscene material at any time, and may not air indecent material between 6 a.m. and 10 p.m. when children are more likely to be in the audience.

The rules do not apply to cable or satellite broadcasts. The FCC says indecent material is that which contains sexual or excretory material that does not rise to the level of obscenity.

Tougher penalties for broadcast indecency violations have been a high priority of conservative groups such as the Family Research Council, which said the bill would go "a long way in raising that cost for the networks that violate decency standards in a quest for higher ratings."

The legislation also has its critics, led by those who say it smacks of unneeded government regulation and infringes on freedom of expression. "Raising fines also does not alter the fundamental problem -- it is subjective and impossible to define indecency," Jeremy Harris Lipschultz, School of Communication director at the University of Nebraska at Omaha said in a statement.

The National Association of Broadcasters said it would prefer to see the nation's 13,000 radio stations and 1,700 TV stations police themselves. "The NAB position is that we think responsible self-regulation is preferable to government regulation in areas of program content," spokesman Dennis Wharton said.

The legislation, sponsored in the Senate by Sen. Sam Brownback  R-Kan., does not address issues such as the definition of indecent material and does not apply to cable and satellite radio and TV. It is also not as tough as a version passed by the House last year that would have increased the maximum fine to $500,000, allowed fines for individual performers and given the FCC the authority to revoke the licenses of broadcasters fined three or more times.

If you are looking for a nice sidebar to the opening of the World Cup, here's one.

The Boston Globe turned in a piece about how youth league soccer doesn't really keep score but the kids and parents do. I can tell you my kids jolly well knew who "won" every game they played.

The question is, does it harm kids to keep score? And while I'm at it, are we in an age of "trophy inflation?" My kids get trophies every time they compete in anything, regardless of how well they do. They love them, don't get me wrong, but this is a change in what trophies mean, isn't it? One reason not to keep score is that the parents may not be able to handle it, even if the kids can. 

The Boston Globe said:

"I think it's healthy to deemphasize the score, especially at early ages. As soon as you start to formalize the score, the pressure and expectations rise on everyone's part: coaches, parents, kids," said Peter Roby, director of the Center for the Study of Sport in Society at Northeastern University.

The state and national ruling bodies for youth soccer leagues have recommended that scores and standings not be kept in under-10 contests, saying that is the best way to keep youngsters interested in the sport.

In 1998, the Massachusetts Youth Soccer Association drew some flak for taking the stand that tournaments for under-10 teams should not award trophies to winners. Dr. Richard Ginsburg, who directs the Massachusetts General Hospital sports psychology program, said parents should emphasize "the joy of playing, a safe environment, and areas for development."

HIPAA Horror Story

Over the last couple of years, I have written about many HIPAA horror stories. Al's Morning Meeting reader Connie Myers sent me this one from Utah. Here is the top of the story from The Deseret (Utah) News:

Strict federal privacy laws protecting patients at health-care facilities left law enforcers in a frustrating situation as they sought to apprehend a man suspected of assaulting his wife and trying to burn her house down.

"We at least would like to know where these people are at," said Salt Lake County Sheriff's Sgt. Paul Jaroscak.

But that wasn't how it worked out earlier this week when deputies tried to serve an arrest warrant on the man, who had checked himself into the University Neuropsychiatric Institute (Uni). Although officers had learned from informants that the man was there, hospital officials refused to disclose if he was a patient, citing federal privacy laws.

Law enforcers fear criminals may try to use those privacy rules -- such as the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act -- as a way to hide from police.

Yesterday, I passed along a ton of HIPAA and journalist resources -- here is one more from the First Amendment Center.

When Clerks Fight Back and Get Fired
 
Jonathan Hiskes, a reporter at the Brown County (Ind.) Democrat dropped me an interesting note about a story he worked on back in December. It involved a convenience store clerk who was fired after she was robbed. The company said she was fired for keeping too much cash in the register and putting other clerks nationwide in danger in the process. 

Johnathan says in his note to me:

A colleague was in L.A. last week, where he saw a TV news story about a clerk who took a robber's gun, thinking it was fake and thwarting the robbery. That clerk was fired too.

I'd love to read a thorough report on how large convenience store chains treat victims of holdups. Is firing the victim common practice?

Jonathan raises an interesting question. We often see those videos on the news showing clerks taking a baseball bat to a thief's head. But what happens to the clerk after the publicity dies down? 

ABC News reported:

Working at a convenience store is one of the more dangerous jobs in America. In fact, four times as many store clerks are killed on the job as firefighters.

Crime is down in America, but there is still an average of 100 convenience store robberies every day.

The story continues:

Thousands of convenience stores employ security services like Westec Interactive (www.westecnow.com), and for 24 hours a day, Westec cameras watch. The services can call police if they see trouble, but more often, they just talk. Thieves are told: "Put it back immediately and leave the store. If you fail to do so, police will be dispatched."

And 98 percent of the time, they say, that's enough to get the robber to back off. That's much better than having a store clerk intervene, police say. In fact, police tell clerks, "Don't resist. Just give up the money." [...]

The convenience store industry agrees too. It says clerks who resist are much more likely to be hurt than those who cooperate.

Some convenience stores have even fired clerks who have intervened -- even those who intervened successfully. But lots of clerks say they're still going to do what they feel is necessary to defend themselves.

Wedding Betting

Go online and predict whether couples will split or live happily ever after based on their wedding announcement. A total waste of time -- and tons of fun.