Recognizing that the law does not exactly prohibit indecent programming but, instead, gives operators a choice about whether to carry it, the U.S. Court of Appeals rejected a similar challenge earlier this year. Helms maintains that the amendment allows for editorial control by the private sector, not the government. The Clinton administration also defends the law. Denver Area Consortium v. Federal Communications Commission , 95-124. Alliance for Community Media v. F.C.C .
Bad examples make bad legislation.
In any given case where things have gone to the Supreme Court, then you normally have an extreme example. In the case of programming, the fact of the matter is that watching that program is 100 percent voluntary. The censor is the person who is reviewing or listening to it. It is too easy for other people to set standards for me. In our system of government, the First Amendment says, in effect, that I can set my own standards.