President's Commission on Obscenity and Pornography
The President's Commission on Obscenity and Pornography was established by Congress in 1967 to address concerns over obscenity and pornography in the United States. Appointed by President Lyndon B. Johnson, the commission comprised seventeen members tasked with analyzing existing laws, defining obscenity, studying distribution patterns, and examining the effects of explicit sexual materials. The commission's research highlighted the complexities surrounding definitions of "obscenity" and "pornography," noting that the commercial market for sexually oriented materials was not as expansive as commonly thought. It conducted empirical studies, concluding that exposure to such materials did not significantly influence delinquent or criminal behavior. Based on these findings, the majority of the commission recommended repealing laws prohibiting the sale and distribution of sexual materials to consenting adults, while still advocating for restrictions on minors. Despite its recommendations, President Richard Nixon rejected the majority report, and subsequent Supreme Court decisions did not reflect its influence. The commission's efforts are recognized as one of the first systematic examinations of the impact of obscenity and pornography, although its conclusions have been critiqued, particularly from feminist perspectives regarding the portrayal of women in pornography.
President's Commission on Obscenity and Pornography
Date: October, 1967-September, 1970
Place: Washington, D.C.
Significance: This body created by Congress was the first federal commission seriously to study traffic in sexually explicit materials and its effects on people
Finding traffic in obscenity and pornography to be a matter of national concern, Congress passed Public Law 90-100 in October, 1967, creating an advisory council to study and recommend effective means for dealing with the problem. In 1968 President Lyndon B. Johnson appointed seventeen members to the commission. Congress specified four tasks for the Commission: to analyze laws controlling pornography and obscenity and to propose definitions of the latter, to determine the volume and distribution patterns of traffic in obscenity and pornography, to study the effects of pornography and obscenity, and to recommend appropriate action for controlling the traffic in such materials, consistent with respecting constitutional rights.
The commission noted the ambiguities surrounding the terms “obscenity” and “pornography” and their cognates. It avoided using “pornography” in descriptive contexts in its report, instead referring to the subject by expressions such as “explicit sexual materials” and “sexually oriented materials.” The commission confined its attention to sexual obscenity. Also, given the common usage of the term “obscenity” in the law, the commission opted to apply that term only to legally prohibited sexual materials.
The commission did a survey of existing federal and state obscenity laws, a comparative study of obscenity laws in other countries, and a review of constitutional law pertaining to obscenity. It found that although the Supreme Court had held that obscene materials did not enjoy general protection under the First Amendment, grave difficulties attended the defining of “obscenity’ in clear and practically useful terms. Federal and state statutes relied heavily on the so-called Roth test, which defined the obscene according to the three key, but problematic, elements of prurient interest, offensiveness, and lack of social value.
In its examination of the commercial traffic in obscenity and pornography, the commission observed the difficulty of determining with precision the size and scope of the industry. It claimed that the commercial market in sexually oriented materials was far smaller than many had estimated. It also discovered that there was no monolithic industry but rather several distinct markets and submarkets.
The commission developed a research program on the effects of exposure to explicit sexual materials. It used surveys, controlled experiments, and other empirical studies to explore how such exposure affected attitudes, aggressive behavior, and delinquency. The main and most significant conclusion tentatively drawn was that empirical research to date shows no evidence “that exposure to sexually explicit materials plays a significant role in the delinquent or criminal behavior among youth or adults.”
Based primarily on this conclusion, a majority of commissioners recommended the repeal of all federal, state, and local legislation prohibiting the sale, exhibition, or distribution of sexual materials to consenting adults. It did recommend continued legislation restricting sale to young persons and regulating public display and unsolicited mailing. It discussed methods of dealing with explicit sexual material other than legal control, including sex education and organized citizen action. There were a number of separate statements by commission members, and a minority report issued by commissioners Morton Hill and Winfrey Link, which deemed the majority report “a Magna Carta for the pornographer.” President Richard Nixon rejected the major recommendation of the report. The Supreme Court, headed by Chief Justice Warren Burger, issued a number of obscenity decisions in 1973 that showed no sign of influence by the report.
The report is nevertheless regarded as significant because it was the summary of one of the first systematic studies of the effects of obscenity and pornography undertaken. Social scientists perceive the findings as important but limited, in part because of the focus on nonviolent sexually explicit material. Feminist critics question the alleged harmlessness of pornography, especially given the violent, degrading, and misogynist character of much of the pornography that appeared starting in the early 1970’s.