Instructor Resource
Trager, The Law of Journalism and Mass Communication 6e
CQ Press, 2018
Class Activities
Chapter 10: Obscenity and Indecency
1. Have students discuss the differences among obscene, indecent, and pornographic material.
Have them consider the ways the general public use these terms. Is there confusion among
the public? Do political or religious views distort people’s understanding of how the law
categorizes sexual material?
2. Ask students to justify or reject the view that violence is acceptable in popular media but
sexually explicit material may not be.
3. The Miller v. California definition for obscene material now is nearly four decades old.
Have students discuss if the definition has served its useful time? Would students
recommend changing it? Have students discuss factors supporting or criticizing the Miller
standard.
4. The 2012 Fox Television Stations case, excerpted in the chapter, left undecided if the FCC’s
indecency regulations abridge broadcasters’ First Amendment rights. Students could discuss
this question, not forgetting Pacifica’s focus on harm to children. To begin a discussion using
a real example, it might be useful to consider a complaint the FCC received about a “Will
and Grace” episode. The Commission appended the following program excerpt to its
decision:
Partial Transcript
Will and Grace
November 13, 2003
Show Summary: Will takes Karen to get a physical and encounters a very odd doctor played by
Jack Black. Jack decides he wants to be a nurse when he meets a cute student nurse at Karen’s
doctor’s office. Once he realizes he’s good at it, he gets scared and decides to drop out, but Will
convinces him that he should continue. This episode contains a lot of references to drug use and
some graphic sexual content.
Instructor Resource
Trager, The Law of Journalism and Mass Communication 6e
CQ Press, 2018
Karen picks up a latex glove in the doctor’s office.
Instructor Resource
Trager, The Law of Journalism and Mass Communication 6e
CQ Press, 2018
…
In making indecency determinations, the Commission has indicated that the ‘full
context in which the material appeared is critically important,’ and has
articulated three ‘principal factors’ for its analysis: ‘(1) the explicitness or
graphic nature of the description or depiction of sexual or excretory organs or
Instructor Resource
Trager, The Law of Journalism and Mass Communication 6e
CQ Press, 2018
or explicit descriptions of sexual or excretory activity to render the program
indecent. Consequently, we conclude that the material in question is not indecent.
– NBC Telemundo Licensing Co., 20 F.C.C.R 4813, 4815-16 (2005)
5. With a few minor exceptions, indecent material is allowed on cable television at all hours of
the day and night. Do students agree with the courts that have given cable this First
Amendment protection? Why or why not? Or would students change the law and allow
indecent material on broadcast stations as well as cable networks?