I am writing in response to Ginger McCall’s column in the April 7 issue of The Pitt News… I am writing in response to Ginger McCall’s column in the April 7 issue of The Pitt News regarding the Federal Communications Commission’s disciplinary action against Howard Stern. I believe I can clarify the “knee-jerk public reaction” to the current scrutiny of broadcasters.

The real issue for many broadcasters and free speech advocates isn’t the action taken against Stern, or even the proposed increase of the maximum fine to $500,000. There are several proposed regulations that are far more contentious. Among them:

-Five hundred thousand dollar fines for performers of indecent or obscene material: This would go far beyond all previous FCC enforcements, which have solely targeted broadcast licensees.

-Expansion of indecency/obscenity regulation to include cable TV and satellite TV and radio: In other words, even if you wanted to pay extra to get this material, it will be forbidden to you. Currently, pay services are exempt from regulation in this area.

-Unprecedented fines for news programming. While news has never been specifically exempted from obscenity laws, context was always taken into account. That appears to be changing, thus exposing news operations to FCC disciplinary action.

In short, certain members of government are seeking to discipline musicians who perform material deemed profane or obscene, prohibiting certain programming whether or not carried on the public airwaves, and limiting or preventing coverage of news stories that involve profane or sexual topics.

One doesn’t have to be a smut peddler — or even a Howard Stern fan — to be concerned about these developments.

Greg Weston

General Manager, WPTS

Pittsburgh, Pa.