The use of print for mass communication is more complicated, because a person can write just about anything without curbs being placed on it. This makes such things as pornography available, sometimes to people who should not be seeing it -- for instance, children. Since each person has his or her own threshold regarding at what point printed material becomes offensive, they need to work with their local leaders if they think some publication has crossed a line. Local and state agencies can pass laws, which may be challenged for constitutionality, providing a system of checks and balances over printed material. .

             The situation with radio is slightly different. Very often radio's influence is only over a regional area. A wide variety of formats exist. A consumer might tune into a radio station that plays only music from the 50's, or the 80's, or that is dedicated to some extreme political view some might find offensive. The solution for the consumer is simple: change to another station. Once again, freedom of speech dictates that almost anything can be said on the radio. There are some rules regarding good taste, but the example of Howard Stern demonstrates that even language many find distasteful may find a place somewhere on the radio. .

             But the very nature of radio broadcasting has changed as well. Micro-radio stations, which began to appear in numbers in the 1980's, do not need licenses because their broadcast power is under 100 watts. Very often they depend on listeners for donations in order to stay operational, and often have some kind of activist approach (Coopman, 1999). At the other extreme are Internet-based radio stations. Because they have no geographic locations, they do not fall under the jurisdiction of any country even though people in that country can tune the station in (Coopman, 1999). This is the path Howard Stern has taken rather than submit to FCC regulations. .

             The cinema is a different situation.