I sent LLFCC's October 4th commentary Hooray for the Parents Television Council to Dan Isett, Director of Corporate and Government Affairs of the PTC, and today received this reply:

"I read with some interest your commentary about [PTC Executive Director] Tim [Winter]'s remarks before the FCC earlier this week and am pleased that our concerns about media consolidation and the shortcomings of the v-chip and the TV ratings system met with your approval.

That being said, I feel I should at least attempt to add clarity to some misconceptions you appear to have about the PTC and our mission. Several times you refer to PTC as a "conservative" organization. We are not. Our more than 1 million members cover the entire political spectrum, and our activism is not limited to members of one political party anywhere we are active. To presume that working to restore a sense of decency to the entertainment industry is a "conservative" issue does a disservice to liberals, moderates and conservatives who are all equally concerned about the entertainment environment their children are exposed to.

Your comments about "the kind of Federal government the group would foist upon this country" are equally puzzling to me. As I'm sure you're aware, Congress has empowered the FCC to regulate indecent and obscene content on the public airwaves, and the Supreme Court has upheld those guidelines. The PTC has simply held the FCC accountable for its enforcement of existing indecency law, and we have never called on the FCC to rate TV programs as you appear to suggest.

Again, thank you for making me aware of your commentary. Please feel free to contact me directly should you have any questions about the PTC in the future.

Dan Isett"

LLFCC responds:

Like every lobbying group, the Parents Television Council doubtless likes to see itself as the non-partisan voice of mainstream America. But even a cursory look at the organization's staff page suggests otherwise. PTC President Brent Bozell's record says it all. Founder of the Media Research Center, Bozell's outfit publishes books like The Coming Meltdown of the Liberal Media and How to Identify, Expose and Correct Liberal Media Bias. Dan Isett is former chairman of the Lubbock County, Texas, Republican Party. The group's advisory board includes William Bennett, former Reagan administration Secretary of Education and former Drug Czar for Bush the First, John Carvelli of the Orange County Republican Party's 400 Club, Republican U.S. Senator Sam Brownback of Kansas, Holly McClure, movie critic for the Orange County Register, National Rifle Association board member Susan Howard, and Pat Boone, co-chair of the National Day of Prayer.

Sure, PTC's Web site lists some public figures on its Board of Advisors who can be construed as vaguely centrist, most notably National Honorary Chairman Steve Allen (who died six years ago). But I couldn't find a single advisor on the list described as an active Democrat, and with a President like Bozell, co-author of books like Pattern of Deception: The Media's Role in the Clinton Presidency, the organization may as well throw the words "RED STATE" across their home page in marquee letters. I thought I'd just be polite and use the word "conservative."

As for Isett's further puzzlement, I certainly did not intend to suggest that the PTC wants the FCC to rate television programs. My impression is that the PTC wants the FCC to accept the PTC's ratings of television programs. What other impression could I come to given that the group's Web site continuously invites the public to read its ratings, then slip over to Council's do-it-yourself FCC complaint form to lob off a pre-formatted gripe about a show that the user may not have actually seen?

Ok. So like many Americans, I don't agree with the Parents Television Council's socially conservative agenda. But I am still delighted that Tim Winter, PTC's Executive Director, made that gutsy speech against big media in Los Angeles on Tuesday. The PTC may not represent everybody, but it represents a perspective heard all too rarely on this issue.

Bookmark/Search this post with:

                  

Isett says ... "As I'm sure you're aware, Congress has empowered the FCC to regulate indecent and obscene content on the public airwaves, and the Supreme Court has upheld those guidelines. The PTC has simply held the FCC accountable for its enforcement of existing indecency law ..."

Isett seems to overlook how controversial the issue already is.

"... to REGULATE
INDECENT and
OBSCENE content"

It is the common understanding of the people that our speech is free, namely it would not be REGULATEd, moreover the usual problem that what one person thinks indecent another treats as commonplace. If I yell "fire!" in a crowded theater (and there is no fire) then my utterance was not "speech" - in fact it was merely a lie that can be shown likely to lead to negative outcomes such as injury and death. Having laws against such utterances does not compare to having laws restricting speech in the public market.

If anyone anywhere has their speech curtailed in any measure because of PTC's involvement, then PTC is engaging in "Unamerican Acts" by the same easy logic Isett uses.

Perhaps Isett excuses himself thinking "but I am doing a right thing!" -- okay, Mr. Isett. Those of us concerned with free speech are doing the right thing to oppose your group and its reliance on its stated motives.

-ecsd (not anonymous)