that framework that proved most crucial. Section 326 of the Communications Act provides the abiding standard, and no regulation or condition shall be promulgated or fixed by the Commission which shall interfere with the right of free speech or radio communication.
             This body of laws clearly defines any governmental involvement as a non-viable scenario. The only group involved in this volatile debate that feels otherwise is, ironically, the government. Must we, the people, obey the dictates of a government that refuses to obey those same dictates itself? The tension over potential content regulation that filled the air in the late 1960's and early 1970's, however, remains with us in the 21st century. While more hearings and reports littered the landscape throughout the 1970s and into the 1980s, Congress assiduously avoided any acts
             that smacked of direct content regulation. (House 64)
             In 1990, however, this began to change as Congress took two
             significant steps that threaten to alter drastically the delicate
             balance previously maintained in this area. First, "Congress passed the Children's Television Act of 1990, which not only sets advertising limits in children's programming but requires the FCC, for the first time, to consider the extent to which a TV licensee has served the educational and informational needs of children when reviewing that station's application for renewal of license." (Children 16)
             As the 1993 Senate hearings drew to a close, an illuminating
             exchange took place. The committee chairman, Senator Earnest Hollings (D-S.C.), after hearing witnesses from the major networks, sought to discredit their position by playing a video tape, in the hearing room, of a short clip from the half-hour
             sitcom Love and War. The clip was from an episode in which the cast of male and female actors, departing from their usual comedic wit in a restaurant that serves as the show's regular set, engaged in a sho...