of Youth
  Copyright   Internet   Media
  Sex and   Censorship     Violence in   the Media

  About Us
  Contact Us
  Court and Agency Briefs
  Fact Sheets
  Policy Reports

Search FEPP

Issues - Media Policy:
Media Literacy & Media Democracy

Social Media Censorship
(November 19, 2015) - offers information and help to people whose postings have been taken down by social media sites.

FCC Proposes Easing Up on Censorship of "Indecency"
(April 12, 2013) - After years of controversy and litigation, the agency seems poised to abandon its rule on "fleeting expletives" and return to square one.

The Great Indecency Case Ends With a Whimper
(June 27, 2012) -Why did the Supreme Court decide not to decide whether the FCC's shifting, unpredictable, vague, and often discriminatory censorship regime violates the First Amendment?

Court Strikes Down Penalty for "Nipplegate"
(November 2, 2011) - The decision represents one more judicial rejection of the FCC’s dramatic escalation, in recent years, in the censorship of programming it perceives as “indecent.”

Back to the Past: the Government's Strategy in the "Fleeting Expletives" Case
(September 19, 2011) - The government's recently filed brief tries to dissuade the Supreme Court from considering the vagueness of the FCC's definition of "indecency" or the chilling effect of its censorship regime.

Requiem for California's Violent Video Games Law
(June 28, 2011) - Justice Scalia's majority opinion does not allow politicians to create new exceptions to the First Amendment, but four of his brethren beg to differ.

FCC Censorship of "indecency" is Unconstitutional
(July 13, 2010) - Three judges have finally struck down the "fleeting expletives" rule.

Sarcasm Reigns as Court Revisits the FCC's "Fleeting Expletives" Rule (January 13, 2010) - Three Court of Appeals judges subjected the Federal Communications Commission to a barrage of withering sarcasm during oral argument in round 3 of Fox Television v. FCC.

Fleeting Expletives Redux: Court of Appeals Sets New Briefing Schedule
(August 4, 2009) -The Court of Appeals has set a new briefing schedule in the case challenging the FCC's rule against "fleeting expletives." Will this finally lead to the end of government censorship of the airwaves?

Supreme Court Clears the Way for Ending FCC Censorship of the Airwaves
(April 28, 2009) - At first blush, it's a win for what one dissenting justice called a "wildly expansive" claim of censorship power, but the tea leaves suggest that the Court might be ready to consign the FCC's reign of error to a well-deserved grave.

Supreme Court Blushes at Those S-words and F-words
(November 4, 2008) - The oral argument on election day in Federal Communications Commission v. Fox Television was not a model of First Amendment eloquence.

Victory for "First Sale" Rule in the Case of Promotional CDs
(June 18, 2008) - A judge has ruled that music companies can't stop the trade in promo CDs.

Supreme Court Will Review "Fleeting Expletives" Case
(March 13, 2008) - A showdown is looming over FCC censorship of "indecency" on the airwaves.

Protecting "PEG" Access
(January 16, 2008) - A federal court stops Comcast's plan to exile public access channels to cable Siberia - at least for now.

Can Cellphone Companies Censor Text Messages?
(October 24, 2007) - Verizon's blocking of a Naral/ Pro-Choice America message might be illegal if text messages, like phone calls, are covered by "common carrier" rules.

A Huge Victory for Free Speech on the Airwaves
(June 4, 2007) - The U.S. Court of Appeals has invalidated the FCC's ban on "fleeting expletives," and in the process, cast doubt on the constitutionality of the entire "indecency" censorship regime.

"Reclaiming the First Amendment"
(January 22, 2007) - A conference sponsored by the Brennan Center and Hofstra Law School explored the viability of a "right of access" along with other reforms that might help democratize the mass media.

Filmmakers, Writers, Free Speech Groups Urge Court to End FCC Censorship
(November 30, 2006) - 20 organizations, led by the Brennan Center, have filed a friend-of-the-court brief arguing that the FCC's rules banning "profanity" and "fleeting expletives" on the airwaves are unconstitutional.

The Disconnect Between Fact and Rhetoric
(August 2, 2006) - A recent conference, "Beyond Censorship," touts ratings and filters, and buys into myths about proven harm from sexual or violent content.

Fact Sheets on Media Democracy
(August 2006) - The companies that own the mass media have a powerful influence over our culture, our political system, and the ideas that inform public discourse. This set of interlocking fact sheets gives background on broadcast and cable conglomerates, Internet access and WiFi, the First Amendment and media regulation, and the movement for media reform.

The Legal Needs of Media Reform Organizations: Report of a National Survey
(June 2006) - This report summarizes FEPP's nationwide survey of media reform groups to gauge their needs for pro bono legal assistance. Conclusions are that local media democracy groups need legal help on multiple issues, ranging from municipal broadband to cable franchising to low-power radio.

Net Neutality Takes Center Stage
(May 30, 2006) - How broadband technology and a bad Supreme Court decision have come to threaten the once-democratic Internet.

White Paper to the Nebraska Broadband Task Force: The Need to Permit Broadband From Public Entities
(May 22, 2006) - The Brennan Center and six other groups have filed a brief explaining why states shouldn't bar their cities, towns, and public power companies from offering high-speed Internet access.

America's Culture Czars
(March 21, 2006) - The FCC's latest "indecency" rulings are so radical as to beg for court review.

A New Use For Indecency?
(September 15, 2005) - New research suggests a link between media giants and raunchy broadcasting - but should we base policy decisions about media ownership on the FCC's censorship regime?

Two Defeats - and a Silver Lining
(June 28, 2005) - The Supreme Court's Grokster and Brand X decisions may be disappointing, but file-sharing technology survives, and the campaign for media democracy goes on.

Censoring Indecency is a Diversion
(March 16, 2005) - Why Senator Stevens' plan to extend indecency regulation to cable is an unconstitutional diversion from structural regulation of media oligopolies.

The Information Commons
(June 2004) - In the face of dramatic media consolidation and new laws that increase corporate copyright control, the emerging information commons offers new ways for producing and sharing information, creative works, and democratic discussion. FEPP's policy report describes the growing movement for democratic alternatives to for-profit control of information and ideas.

Fact Sheet on Media Violence
(January 2004) - Answers frequently-asked questions about social science research into the effects of media violence. The bottom line is that despite the claims of some psychologists and politicians, the actual research results have been weak and ambiguous.

Media Literacy: An Alternative to Censorship
(2002; second edition, 2003) - FEPP's survey of media literacy education and why it is preferable to TV ratings, Internet filters, "indecency" laws, and other efforts to censor the ideas and information available to the young.

Not In Front of the Children: "Indecency," Censorship, and The Innocence Of Youth
(2001, 2nd edition 2007) - From Huckleberry Finn to Harry Potter, Internet filters to the v-chip, censorship is often based on the assumption that children and adolescents must be protected from "indecent" speech. In Not In Front of the Children, FEPP Director Marjorie Heins explores the history of indecency laws and other censorship aimed at youth. Not in Front of the Children won the 2002 American Library Association's Eli M. Oboler Award for the best published work in the area of intellectual freedom.

For additional Materials on Media Policy in 2001-04, go to the Archives Page.


The Free Expression Policy Project began in 2000 as a project of the National Coalition Against Censorship, to provide empirical research and policy development on tough censorship issues and seek free speech-friendly solutions to the concerns that drive censorship campaigns. In 2004-2007, it was part of the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law. Past funders have included the Robert Sterling Clark Foundation, the Nathan Cummings Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation, the Educational Foundation of America, the Open Society Institute, and the Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts.

All material on this site is covered by a Creative Commons "Attribution - No Derivs - NonCommercial" license. (See You may copy it in its entirely as long as you credit the Free Expression Policy Project and provide a link to the Project's Web site. You may not edit or revise it, or copy portions, without permission (except, of course, for fair use). Please let us know if you reprint!