Everything seems to be going John Kerry's way these days. Following his first-place finish in the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary, the Massachusetts senator is the leading Democratic presidential contender. In the first in an occasional series of interviews with the Democratic contenders, Kerry spoke with The Hollywood Reporter's Peter Kiefer about entertainment and media-related issues.

The Hollywood Reporter: What are your thoughts on media consolidation, and do you believe it has become a problem in the country?
John Kerry: I think it is a serious problem in the country, and I was against the FCC decision and efforts to narrow the ownership of media outlets in America. I think the consolidation of information is a dangerous trend in America because it has the ability to shape our Democracy and shape the flow of information. I believe you need real competition, and you need limitations on that ownership. I have always been in favor of the restraints on the cross-ownership. You know we opened up a little on the radio, and I thought that was appropriate. But look, there have been changes, legitimate changes in the marketplace that reflect real access to information and real access to competition. I am open-minded. I serve on the (Commerce) committee, I have actually voted on these issues, and my record is very clear about favoring real competition, being smart about transitions in the industry that you have to take into account. But I am not going to be hoodwinked into believing that we are in a place today where there is sufficient competition in some of these areas, where we should lift the rules and consolidate, and I am against it.

THR: How has media consolidation affected the political process?
Kerry: Well, look, the loss of equal time requirements, I think was a blow. I was for equal time requirements. Because I think what's happened is that we got networks that are almost providing a single point of view, and I don't think that is wise. The competitive instinct between entities and the bottom line make the courage to carry counterprogramming very difficult for people, and the trend appears to confirm that.

THR: If elected, would you consider more aggressive measures to break up the media conglomerates?
Kerry: Well, I will appoint people to the FCC who have the sensitivities to these issues, and I will certainly have an attorney general and a Justice Department that care about legitimate antitrust considerations in America. You know, Teddy Roosevelt had the courage to take on powerful economic interests as a Republican, and I have shown the courage and willingness to do that as a Democrat, and I would continue to do that as a president. I have a record of standing up against powerful interests that may affect my election or not affect it, but at least I have a record of doing it. I intend to continue to do that. I have voted against any number of inappropriate special interest measures.

THR: The RIAA recently filed suit against several hundred file sharers. How far should copyright holders be allowed to go to protect their products? And do you think that file sharers should be held liable?
Kerry: I think any kind of mass file sharing that goes beyond the normal college-dorm, room-to-room, person-to-person, friend-to-friend kind of sharing is a violation of the law. I believe in copyright. I think we would have complete disorder in the marketplace if you don't enforce copyright. Copyright is the way you create order out of chaos in the marketplace. Otherwise, you diminish the value of intellectual property and artistic property, and you wind up not enforcing the rules by which people are compensated for their work. I think the U.S. has been very lax in dealing with China and other countries on intellectual property regulations, and I have long argued that we ought to be enforcing those measures very, very strictly. Now, I have worked hard with the industry to try to find some ways to create an appropriate technology that allows people to share. The problem, obviously, in a digital world, is that one tap of a button on a Web site and you can transmit to millions of people a perfect copy. So I think we have to find a technological fix, and frankly, it has been economic self-interest that has prevented people at arriving at an appropriate compromise.

THR: How do you mean economic self-interest?
Kerry: Well, you've got different parties that are resisting doing things that could conceivably make it difficult for people to share or destroy or limit by virtue of technology the capacity for a CD to be recopied any number of times and so forth. There are economic interests out there that lobby against a reasonable compromise to protect the property. So even though you have competing interests -- and nobody has really sat down adequately within the governing classes to try to leverage an appropriate compromise. But I think it is important to enforce the concept of digital property right in the marketplace. At the same time, allowing the wholesale downloading of major music sharing is against the law; on the other hand, you ought to try to find some kind of compromise technology or methodology. You know, we used to borrow tapes, and you would tape over the tape, and nobody got too excited about it. But now, people are actually trying to avoid going down to Strawberry's or whatever it is and actually buying something, and that is inappropriate.

THR: Should the media have a code of conduct for violent and indecent content that makes its way into the public sphere?
Kerry: Well, I think they do, and I think they have been cooperating in their attempts to try to do that. I think that the government should not be the decider, and the government should not be forgetting the importance of First Amendment freedom. I don't think the government should be hypocritical about it, which I think they have been in some instances where they sort of beat up on creative artistry that is reflecting life rather than reflecting on what life itself is and how you might do something about it. So I think that it is good for the industry, and it was important to try to encourage the industry to be thoughtful about who sees what and under what conditions. It seems to me there has been a pretty legitimate effort to try to do that, and maybe with a tweak here and a tweak there, you could strengthen some of those ratings, etc. But it is up to parents and up to adults and others to be responsible about their children and what people see and how they see it. I do believe in the chips and in the blocking systems and those other things, and I think the easier and the more user-friendly you can make those, the better. But I think a lot of politicians tend to blame Hollywood and other people for some things that they are unwilling to take reasonable measures to deal with at a public level.

THR: Have the media gone too far with their depictions of sex and violence?
Kerry: Look, are there movies that I find objectionable on a personal level? Yeah. But you don't have to go see them. I think an honest appraisal suggests that it is not the government's place, nor will it ever succeed in eliminating something people want to do or see. We have seen that with drug trafficking; we have seen that for centuries with prostitution; we see it with a lot of things. So we have to deal with them, but you have to deal with them in a reasonable way. And I am not sure that Washington has always been very smart about doing that. I will give you an example: drug abuse in America. Why is it that Washington has never decided to have treatment on demand for drug abuse? Why is it that Washington still doesn't afford education adequately for our kids that provides them with after-school programs and alternatives and experiment with things which create a life that is reflected in art? So I think there has been a pretty legitimate effort to respond responsibly to some of the excesses.