CABLE NUDITY CONVICTION OKed

By John Eggerton

GRAND RAPIDS, MI -- The Michigan Supreme Court has refused to review a lower court ruling that cable TV nudity is unlawful indecent exposure in the ACLU's appeal on behalf of Timothy Bruce Huffman. The case could have far-ranging consequences for free speech on cable TV. The original charges against Huffman came as a result of a three-minute segment on a public access TV channel here in which a penis with a face painted on it told jokes. Instead of invoking TV obscenity prohibitions, Kent County prosecutors went after Huffman for violation of the state's indecent-exposure law.

Both the trial judge and circuit court agreed with the state that the cable-access channel was a "public place" and that the exposure was conduct, not speech, and thus not protected by the First Amendment. A Michigan court of appeals agreed, and further concluded that TV nudity "can be more offensive than a more traditional public exposure."

First Amendment Attorney Robert Corn-Revere cautions against overstating the significance of the case. Corn-Revere says it is unlikely the ruling will be followed by any court outside Michigan. "This decision is an aberration," he says, "and is directly at odds with established Supreme Court precedent."

excerpted from:
"Cable Nudity Nixed"
By John Eggerton
© Broadcasting and Cable 2/27/06

as reported in
Free Speech X-Press
Vol. VIII, No. 15, March 3, 2006
Weekly Censorship Updates
Member Service of Free Speech Coalition

Drawing by Betty Dodson Ph.D.