Earlier this week, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments
on whether or not we still need the federal government and FCC to
regulate the broadcast airwaves for things like nudity and explicit
language. USA
Today compiles opinion columns and editorials on the
case: 

Jacob Sullum,
in Reason: “Fox and the other TV
networks challenging the ban (on indecency) are urging the Supreme
Court not only to uphold the 2nd Circuit’s decision (reversing the
ban) but to reconsider the 1978 ruling that approved content-based
regulation of broadcasting on the grounds that the medium was
‘uniquely pervasive’ and ‘uniquely accessible to children.’ Now
that nine out of 10 households are served by cable, satellite, or
fiber-optic TV and children commonly watch video from non-broadcast
sources, it is hard to make that argument with a straight face.
Three decades ago, the court portrayed TV and radio signals as
unwelcome visitors in people’s homes. That description was never
accurate. … It is even further from reality in today’s
entertainment market.”

Full story here.

Reason’s work the Supreme
Court and censorship is
here.