Content based censorship itself, whether done by illegal government actions or for commercial reasons pandering to institutionalized bigotry, is generally an incredibly insidious form of hate speech. It demeans the beliefs, identity, ideology, or similar aspects of an individual or demographic, while the censor hides like a coward behind the expression not openly presented as disappeared into the night as if seized by Chinese secret police. Controversial speech can be challenged with more speech, but a black whole merely sends a message that its attempted speaker is less than fully human. Such censorship does not protect any "public good". Instead, it is commercially convenient to unethical media whores, as it narrows and focuses the targets of marketing efforts. However, it can cause serious physical revulsion in the deep muscles of persons or members of groups told by devious denial of equal access to public resources that they don't qualify as real humans, entitled to equal protections for use of the airwaves just as they are to use the school, the park, and the sidewalk, or the same bus seats, lunch counters, and water fountains as any neighbor. It's because the public airwaves are just that, public, that they demand the same rights of equal access as any other public facility. In fact, it would be entirely reasonable for broadcast licensees to be fined, and licenses revoked, for failure to offer the same forms of equal access required of employers and "public accommodations", not government endorsed discrimination pandering to tyrannical religious hate cults and mobs of commercial interests which don't care about those biases, but find them convenient for financial reasons. There are two functional psychological reasons why censorship is favored by persons whose life skills are less than adequate or whose religious paths are defective, relative to the realities of our vastly diverse society. Diverse society inherently has a large degree of chaos, which is difficult for some personality types, and moreso for persons with certain psych disorders. That's a challenge for them to resolve as individuals, even if it means hiding in a gated private community, and is not an excuse to impose a medical disorder on all others. Some supremacist hate cults brey how they're the one and only of however many such one and only right way hate cults. It triggers serious cognitive dissonance and dysphoria in kids abused by such cults, often including as adults as well, to witness others with outward signs of values and life practices their arrogant, pathological ideologies declare to be incompatible with happy, healthy, or functional lifestyles. That's not because of any harm caused by a naturist on Main Street or seen on TV, or use of any particular words or cultural mannerisms, or religious rituals including visible sex on the beach at the merger of natural elements, but rather a conflict of fraudulent indoctrination and deprivation of basic life skills to cope with predictable issues of diversity and equal rights protections. In that context, even if it weren't grossly illegal, it's for all practical purposes impossible to oppress other supremacist hate cultists into one supposed exclusive lifestyle, before considering the far greater number of minorities demanding only protections to live as they choose, but not to coerce choices on others. In those cases, it's the parents and churches abusing kids with supremacist dogma at odds with functional realities of diverse society, with whom law should be concerned. The visible existence of different lifestyles and cultures harms no one, even if narrow minded cults do suffer the revelation of the fraud in their dogmas when persons on very different paths are visible living quite well. Beware the Christo-fascists, who have become more of political con artists, than examples of a religion they falsely claim, whose bible actually advises to pray in private, not prey on the public, and which defines its own jurisdiction to be limited, not as an excuse to prey on what it defines as the "other people". Anyone lacking the life skills to exist outside a misguided cult needs medical help dealing with psychiatric abuse issues, just as someone with other identified psych disorders. Our Founding Fathers in drafting the Bill of Rights no doubt were fully aware that some people had psych disorders, and many adopted religions which led them to campaigns of genocides and armed battles between Baptists and Anglicans, or states formed from feuds among Congregationalists, Methodists, and other sects. They didn't say Establishment neutrality or Free Exercise applied, except to select groups to be denied those rights (other than since changed "Indians not taxed"). The public arena demands not prejudices endorsed by law to favor the largest unruly mob with torches, but use of law to prevent exactly that, and protect minorities on a level playing field. It's well documented that hiding kids from reality stunts development, and causes far more harm, than most speech or lifestyle practices some claim they must never see. That includes sexuality in all its flavors, which the highly credentialled members of the now 49 year old Society for the Scientific Study of Sexuality have documented. US courts, and society, are merely delinquent, in how we harm juveniles in the guise of protecting minors. The only thing really at risk are religious frauds, and commercial or institutionalized counterparts, which defective values systems try to squash societal diversity rather than adapt to the functional needs of it. Responsible broadcasters would program content that helps society with that adaptation. Those who don't arguably fail to serve the very public interest, convenience, and necessity, absent which they fail the core legal tests for holding an FCC license for limited private control of a chunk of public commons radio spectrum. Whether in some markets it's convenient or controversial, profitable or risky, to serve those legal obligations, is secondary to the fact that those obligations are the first and foremost condition for having any broadcast license at all.
