Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/boundvolumes/529bv.pdf
Page Number: 901.0

529US3

Unit: $U60

[09-26-01 12:39:04] PAGES PGT: OPIN

826

UNITED STATES v. PLAYBOY ENTERTAINMENT
GROUP, INC.
Opinion of the Court

cized § 504, which has the real possibility of promoting more
open disclosure and the choice of an effective blocking sys-
tem, would provide parents the information needed to en-
gage in active supervision. The Government has not shown
that this alternative, a regime of added communication and
support, would be insufﬁcient to secure its objective, or that
any overriding harm justiﬁes its intervention.

There can be little doubt, of course, that under a voluntary
blocking regime, even with adequate notice, some children
will be exposed to signal bleed; and we need not discount the
possibility that a graphic image could have a negative impact
on a young child.
It must be remembered, however, that
children will be exposed to signal bleed under time channel-
ing as well. Time channeling, unlike blocking, does not
eliminate signal bleed around the clock. Just as adolescents
may be unsupervised outside of their own households, it is
hardly unknown for them to be unsupervised in front of the
television set after 10 p.m. The record is silent as to the
comparative effectiveness of the two alternatives.

*

*

*

Basic speech principles are at stake in this case. When
the purpose and design of a statute is to regulate speech by
reason of its content, special consideration or latitude is not
accorded to the Government merely because the law can
somehow be described as a burden rather than outright sup-
pression. We cannot be inﬂuenced, moreover, by the per-
ception that the regulation in question is not a major one
because the speech is not very important. The history of
the law of free expression is one of vindication in cases in-
volving speech that many citizens may ﬁnd shabby, offensive,
It follows that all content-based restrictions
or even ugly.
on speech must give us more than a moment’s pause.
If
television broadcasts can expose children to the real risk of
harmful exposure to indecent materials, even in their own
home and without parental consent, there is a problem the