More First Amendment Issues

In a recent article I read, the government is now trying to decide further of what can be restricted and what shouldn't be, most specifically on broadcast. In 1978 there was a Supreme Court ruling "letting the Federal Communications Commission ban "indecent but not obscene" material from radio and television" because they deemed it to be inappropriate for children. This ruling is now being called into question to try and make the boundaries for broadcast a little more clear than "indecent but not obscene". The case is F.C.C. vs. Fox, and the argument for the change in the 1978 ruling is that its "unconstitutional because its impermissibly vague". I agree with Fox for appealing the previous ruling, because the argument of the F.C.C. is based around the fact that they don't want kids to see or hear profanity, but in this day and age, parents can block what their children can see with Parent block, a common function on most televisions.
I believe that the line has to be drawn somewhere, and in 1978 that might have been the correct decision. As times change though, the restrictions on what is acceptable and unacceptable must adapt to the times as well. Although it might be challenging to draft new restrictions for first amendment issues, its necessary because the old restrictions become out dated. Fox should win this case, and broadcast restrictions should be more lenient.
What do you think should and shouldn't be restricted in terms of broadcast? Do the old rules still work?