?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Indecency on cable? No, THIS is indecency!

[And even more indecent is the fact that instead of preview, I just hit reset and am having to write this whole entry all over again. Sigh.]

FCC to crack down on cable? [Direct Salon.com link.]

I'm so glad I live in the land of the free. You know, here we have so much freedom from oppression terrorist attacks boobies and naughty words.

During the long hot summer in Washington, [Kevin J. Martin, FCC chairman] has been quietly meeting with religious activists and industry leaders to organize a push for new standards for broadcast, cable and satellite television. At the same time, Martin's allies in the Senate have been considering new laws that could increase broadcast indecency fines, break up cable TV offerings to allow parents to cut off racy channels, and -- most controversially -- give the FCC the power to fine basic cable programs, like MTV's "Real World" and Comedy Central's "Daily Show," for crude and lewd content.
I'm not even going to touch on the freedom of speech part. What happened to that other ammendment? Something about not letting the government be run by religious nuts? Oh, right, we did away with that one. Oh well, we didn't need it anyway. But seriously, I'm all for a 'pay by channel' structure for cable. I was telling Pega the other day that I would love to just be able to pay for Sci Fi Channel, Animal Planet, Comedy Central, Discovery, History, Spike TV and maybe a handful of others and get rid of all the CNN celebrity sport religious crap. But it's not going to happen. Not even for the fundies.

Martin has asked media companies to offer a new "family-friendly" tier of cable programming, a package that would likely exclude channels like MTV and Spike TV.
Yes, because GOD FORBID the kiddies be exposed to 5 hours of Star Trek a day. Not to mention that sick MacGyver fellow, what with being smart and fixing things and... oh wait, Mac's a liberal hippie pinko douche. Yes, let's keep him away from America's god-fearing jingo kiddies.

Worried about the bottom line, the cable and satellite industry has responded by launching a campaign to educate parents about available technology, like the V-Chip, that can block certain channels from any single television. The campaign has been opposed by a powerful coterie of family advocacy groups and activists with close ties to major evangelical ministries and the Bush White House. "It will be war," says Schatz, of the coming battle over cable and satellite regulation. "There will be tremendous grass-roots pressure brought to bear."
Yes! Down with the V-chip! Down with parents actually having the ability to parent! Who do they think they are.... parents? *snerk* The fundies just don't want non-christian heathen parents blocking Pat Robertson's Assassination Prayer Brigade from their tv's.

This summer, Martin hired one of the activists, Penny Nance, to work in the FCC's Office of Strategic Planning and Policy Analysis, a position that will allow her to advise on indecency issues. Nance founded the Kids First Coalition, a group that fights abortion, cloning and indecency in the name of "pro-child, pro-family public policy." She has long been one of the nation's leading anti-pornography crusaders, testifying repeatedly before Congress. During the last presidential campaign, she appeared on Fox News as a "suburban stay-at-home mom" to say that women believe President Bush will "protect our children."
Yes, Bush will protect your kiddies from all kinds of original thought, long enough for them to turn 18 so he can send them to die in some pointless war. But he can send them to fight the clones! And she'll kill two birds with one lightsabre stone.

In public talks, she describes herself as a "victim of pornography" because she says a man who once tried to rape her watched porn.
*snickersnort* I know I shouldn't be laughing at rape but... *lmao* oh come on! What about the millions of porn watchers who've never raped anyone?

Among other items, the group plans to discuss state or federal legislation that would redefine as obscene any close-up shots of vaginal intercourse or oral sex. If passed, and upheld by the courts, Burress said he hopes the new laws, which have not yet been introduced, will outlaw much of mainstream pornography, including programs delivered over pay-per-view cable and satellite networks. "I disconnected my cable," Burress said. "It got so bad that you couldn't even watch a football game."
With liberty and pornography for NO ONE. *facepalms* Bloody puritans. I don't blame England for letting them go in the first place, but now they're our problem and can't England just take them back? They can have a good ol' medieval execution and rid the world of crazy.

Also, maybe I don't watch enough late-night tv, but I've never seen close up vaginas or blowjobs on basic cable. Maybe they do that sort of thing on Showtime, but not on MTV. That I've seen.

Under the current rules, material is indecent if it is "offensive as measured by contemporary community standards." But standards vary widely from community to community, household to household.
THANK YOU! The law is too subjective to be useful, so it should be done away with completely.

There is little doubt that Martin knows the political stakes of the coming fight. In 2003, he shared his concerns over indecency in a letter to the Parents Television Council, a group that has called for a boycott of shows like the WB's "Everwood" because it features adults who encourage teenage characters to use birth control and, in one case, have an abortion.
I rest my case.

----

Tags:

Comments

( 8 comments — Leave a comment )
ginalin
Aug. 30th, 2005 03:21 pm (UTC)
Ooh, because no one in real life uses birth control or has an abortion!

Aside from all the constitutional and legal issues, doesn't it just piss you off to be treated like a child?

I thought part of the definition of being a grown up human being was being able to determine for myself what is appropriate for me to be watching, doing, ingesting and reading. Apparently not. I wonder if they'd like to come over and make sure I wipe properly and brush my teeth, too?

What's so hard about turning the channel? Isn't is easier than making a bunch of unenforceable laws that half the people don't give a damn about anyway? Why are Mr. and Mrs. Puritanical unable to use their remote to change the channel like everyone else? Does it bother them that much that someone else might be watching something they don't approve of? I guess so. Keep your hands off my remote! I'm grown!

It's interesting that in Japan, where they have more porn available than any place on earth, they have a lot less violent sexual crime than in America.

Porn doesn't create rapists, but I sometimes wonder if making some people feel overly guilty and conflicted about porn does?

And, how about all that rape that occurred in all the centuries before the Spice channel was available? Explain to me where all the rapists got their ideas before porn on cable?
elven_wolf
Aug. 30th, 2005 03:30 pm (UTC)
It's interesting that in Japan, where they have more porn available than any place on earth, they have a lot less violent sexual crime than in America.

They not only have more porn, they have cartoon!porn. Which the puritans are trying to keep from American adults as well. *shakes head*
tylers_abyss
Aug. 30th, 2005 03:27 pm (UTC)
Yes, damn Jon Stewart and his terrorist Jewiness! Damn him to hell with his making fun of Bush and the Christian network... "Yeah, I think the government should be in charge of keeping us from bursting into flame on Earth and that's it." *argh* This is why I'm anti-religion. Well, fundamentalist psycho religion anyway.

Oh, the evils of Spike TV. That evil man who goes back in time without God's permission, and those uber-harmful CSI bits where they solve crime without God's help, and MacGyver! Let's not even GO there! Remember the time he pretended to be a priest? Disgraceful! And how we never see him actually *at* Church every Sunday? And how he helps people of different races and beliefs without prejudice, I mean what is up with that?

And I notice that kids like him a little *too* much-- children should only love Jesus.

*/end sarcasm*

How crude and lewd is The Daily Show on a bad day anyway?! And it's on at what, midnight? Kiddies wouldn't understand it anyway. And dude-- what are parents thinking encouraging their kids to practice safe sex; they should be letting them get pregnant with no knowledge of what they're doing... ... ... Okay, maybe the sarcasm wasn't over. *mutters*

This is what the Film Rating Board is for. If it's rated R, then the censoring job is done. It's not the creator's fault that the parents who are supposed to be watching the kids are out back smoking crack and letting the TV do the parenting.

*cough* Sorry, rant unnecessary in vicinity of like-minded you. In summation: *snickers at idiotic philosophies presented*
elven_wolf
Aug. 30th, 2005 03:32 pm (UTC)
*snickers* Hey, it was an amusing rant, so it wasn't wasted. And I forgot all about the non-God-approved-humanitarian-time-travel. The shame.
tylers_abyss
Aug. 30th, 2005 05:45 pm (UTC)
Phew; it's sad when that happens.

Oh yes, I don't know how those actors and writers can live with themselves. It's unethical to write science fiction; it wasn't created by God. Like Michael Jackson.
neviachiel
Aug. 30th, 2005 03:58 pm (UTC)
"I disconnected my cable," Burress said. "It got so bad that you couldn't even watch a football game."

Hey, what football is he watching? I've never seen full out sex when *I* watch football games...

You know, when I was a kid, my parents never let me watch R rated movies, didn't let me watch unappropriate television, and didn't let me stay up late enough to be exposed to the Daily Show and the like. And once again, the point is made that parents should try out parenting before they whine about the state of things.

What makes me laugh is the "stay at home mom" who seems to want to rely on Bush to "protect" her children. Uh, isn't she right there to decide what her children should or should not be watching? I might expect monitoring to be a little more lax in homes where both parents work, and maybe expect Bush supporters in that category to say something like that, but a stay at home mom? Perhaps she should turn off Days of Our Lives and turn on Nickelodean. Or better yet, maybe she should make her children read a book. Novel (pun intended) idea.
neviachiel
Aug. 30th, 2005 04:02 pm (UTC)
And that word would be *inappropriate*. Yeah, I attended skewl.
elven_wolf
Aug. 30th, 2005 04:39 pm (UTC)
Maybe he meant the Desperate Housewife that ran up to the football player naked. Though I seem to recall there were more rednecks upset that she was white and he was black and they didn't want their kids seeing that sort of nonsense than by the fact that she was naked.

Nah, the 'stay at home mom' is too busy praying to parent. *snerk*
( 8 comments — Leave a comment )

Latest Month

August 2014
S M T W T F S
     12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31      

Tags

Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Tiffany Chow