Final answer:
The California Supreme Court deemed the broadcast in Shulman v. Group W as of legitimate public concern aligning with the First Amendment's press freedom; however, the FCC regulates indecency due to broadcasting's wide reach and potential harm to minors.
Step-by-step explanation:
The California Supreme Court in Shulman v. Group W ruled that the broadcast was of legitimate public concern because the broadcast media have a role in providing information that is pertinent to the public interest. This is consistent with the Supreme Court's general approach in supporting the freedom of the press and the First Amendment, with some exceptions focused on restraining indecency, obscenity, and defamation that conflict with societal norms or may be harmful, especially to minors.
The nature of broadcasting's pervasive reach and its potential to impact a broad audience, including children, is why the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) maintains certain indecency regulations over television and radio, as referenced in the context of decisions such as FCC v. Pacifica Foundation and Miller v. California. Moreover, where the broadcast content raises concerns over creating substantive evils that a regulatory body like Congress has the right to prevent, akin to the principles discussed in the Schenck v. United States, the balance between freedom of expression and public welfare is weighed.