especially the set down in pacifica. >> but spent just a minute, what would make it less standardless in your view is essential if the policy deals with the graphic nature of the talk with the image, the repetitive part, but extensive news, the fleeting as. >> i think the easiest way to do that is to pattern something where you have distinct standards. in applying the miller standard, apply the 3-prong test to the issues, each of which has to be met. in the fcc revision as applied to indecency standards, it is argued that there are various factors, the graphic nature of the material, whether it is pandering. they all interrelate so you can essentially find what every what -- whatever you want. 1 factor outweighs the other. it actually requires it to be a test rather than a review of the commission, saying 1 factor simply up with another without any further explanation. battle of would make it clearer -- that alone would make it clearer. i do not know if it will be sufficient to supply the supreme court on the vagueness issue, but it would be an improvement. >> with the graphic nature

the supreme court emphasized contextual analysis in at pacifica -- in the zapata -- in pacifica.hough it may not be precisely clear in every case of the decision would come out, it has trumped it. it was meant to give broadcasters an idea of how the commission -- what the commission's remark would be. they were -- what the commission's framework would be. there is a body of law extending since that decision which explains -- which helps explain or analyze how the commission does this. it is not a close text. >> there was discussion of young earlier. if that was not scripted, it was pretty close to being scripted. in terms of the fleetingness, compared to this particular case, it would seem they were on different ends of the spectrum. am i correct? >> i think they were both less than a second -- the actual image was less than a second. i do not know that they would agree with the characterization of it being scripted, whereas in young there was an attempt to have the performers' performance off-screen. but they were in robes, naked underneath, and i guess nobody figured out, that

the supreme court emphasized contextual analysis in at pacifica -- in the zapata -- in pacifica. i think the argument was closed in pacifica. even though it may not be precisely clear in every case of the decision would come out, it has trumped it. it was meant to give broadcasters an idea of how the commission -- what the commission's remark would be. they were -- what the commission's framework would be. there is a body of law extending since that decision which explains -- which helps explain or analyze how the commission does this. it is not a close text. >> there was discussion of young earlier. if that was not scripted, it was pretty close to being scripted. in terms of the fleetingness, compared to this particular case, it would seem they were on different ends of the spectrum. am i correct? >> i think they were both less than a second -- the actual image was less than a second. i do not know that they would agree with the characterization of it being scripted, whereas in young there was an attempt to have the performers' performance off-screen. but they were in robes, nak

and clark howard who does a, kind of a consumer show, that is on commercial radio syndicated by pacifica. so we're on radio stations around country, non-profit radio stations. plus we cover about an eighth of the uk and we're in ghana in africa on pacifica stations and we're syndicated first page tv on television, the third hour of radio program, we do like, don imus used to do, you know, it's radio and tv at the same time. and so we run that through that third hour on first page tv which is on dish network. >> what time of the day are you on in oregon, when you do the show? >> in oregon it's nine to noon pacific time, it is noon to three eastern time. >> how would you say you approach your show different from most others that have one of these radio shows? >> i try not to do complaint radio, that is one of the things that frankly turns me off, when i hear it. i think it's really easy to just complain about the issues with the people and the politicians, but that i try to be entertaining, informative and relevant obliviously but in a way that offers solutions. i don't, in fact i have a k

i am -- i and syndicated by pacifica. we cover about an eighth of the u.k.nçghanna. ççthe third hour of our radio program is radio and television at the same time. we8d8ñw3 do that on dish networ. >> what time of day are you on in oregon when you do the show? >> in oregon, it is 9:00 a.m. to noon. >> how do you approach your show different from most shows that have]i one of these radio show? >> i try not to do complete radio -- complaint radio. it turns me off when i hear it. i tried to -- i tried to be entertaining, informative and relevant piece -- i've try to be entertaining, informed givatived relevant. my riding long preceded my radio show. --- writing long preceded by radio show. it was something my dad used to say. if you cannot come up with the solution, do not tell me about the problem. what are the ways that we can fix these problems? i am very interested in results. but i think that solutions have to come out of a large understanding. that is the only thing that concerns me about some of my colleagues on the right and left, is that they will t

orie mac amy goodman, host of pacifica radio "democracy now!" talks to raj patel, author of "the value of nothing" and namoi kelin, author of "the shock indoctrine" about their books, the economy, the earthquake in haiti and other topics. [applause] >> what a great honor it is -- can you hear now? what a great honor it is to be here with two colleagues, who are my media heroes. and to be here on this cold night that approves those meetings in copenhagen were about something very real. yes, the whole issue of sorption than global warming when we are having these kind of arctic my. but let me introduce the two guests tonight. namoi kelin is a remarkable public intellectual scholar and activist. her work is both groundbreaking and breathtaking. when naomi was in iraq as the rest of the pundits for talking about president bush not knowing what he was doing she came out saying no, he has a very clear plan. she wrote a piece in harper's magazine called bad debt years zero building iraq and the yukon utopia. she broke through the small circle of common