Stop the FCC!!!!!!!

[Lohman446]

Accident? Are not questions of fact meant for a jury to decide. Sorry, this is ridiculous I know, and maybe it should be legally let go, but that whole show was, in my opinion, not decent for broadcast television during prime time.

[MayAMonkeyBeYourPinata]

Originally posted by 1stdeadeye
Accident my butt!

She was wearing nipple jewelry.

We have started down the slippery slope. Look at the new Milk ads:

I think it was staged as well, I was just trying to state some possible reasons as to why they weren't arrested.

And nice ad

[1stdeadeye]

Originally posted by Target Practice
Let us not forget that this could (and will) affect the internet as well. Humor sites such as SomethingAwful, Damntheworld, and Hamncheez may be targeted. Now, I certainly don't like furries, and I don't condone making fun of retarded people. But I am not about to keep them from speaking their mind.

I am sure that there are people out there that think of AO as a breeding-ground of militant ideas just waiting to corrupt their child's mind. And, I assume, we all will let them have that opinion. But what if (extreme example) the FCC decided to take action against AO? What if it decided that paintball was a...oh, I don't know...sport that promoted teen violence and vandalism? We sure as hell know that that isn't true.

My point is this. The FCC has not yet put forward their proposal of what is "decent". If we had more of a concrete example of what will and will not be tolerated, the bill would probably be less alarming than it appears.

We are on a private members only forum. Think about us like cable. We can do pretty much whatever the owner of the forum allows uninterupted. We are not being broadcast into millions of homes!

[MayAMonkeyBeYourPinata]

Originally posted by Cryer
I agree with you in this case, pinata. It's just... your user name is really long... it messes up the nice, neat lines around your posts...

My goal all along.

Distrupting neat little forum boxes everywhere muwhahaha

[Tyger]

For refrence :

Several radio stations have pulled music out of their rotations becasue of the FCC's stance. Among them, Nine Inch Nails "Closer" radio edit.

If he FCC law goes the way they want it, shows like "Seinfeld", "Friends" and the like will not be able to air. (From "Capitol Hill Blue" : ) "The FCC defines obscene material as describing sexual conduct "in a patently offensive way" and lacking "serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value." Indecent material is not as offensive but still contains references to sex or excretions." I think this pretty much tosses a lot of shows like Seinfeld out the window. So, that's out of syndication.

And, from "Variety" : "Even more controversial, the bill would direct another unspecified portion to help underwrite programs selected by the faith-based Initiative Office of the White House, one of Brownback's favorite administration projects. Democratic opponents of the faith-based initiative are sure to take exception to the language and work to strike it from the bill the committee passes."

And Cable isn't safe either. From Reuters :
"The Senate committee narrowly defeated an attempt to add a measure that would have applied indecency rules to pay television services. Those opposed to doing so warned that it could violate free speech rights.

"The truth is the majority of the problems that we're facing are on cable and direct (satellite) television," said Sen. John Breaux, a Louisiana Democrat who offered the amendment to expand indecency regulations"

I'm not happy with the reaction here. There's better ways to do it than this whole "Knee-jerk" reaction they're doing.

Oh, and to put a political bend on this :
"The FCC is directed by five Commissioners appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate for 5-year terms, except when filling an unexpired term. The President designates one of the Commissioners to serve as Chairperson. " (http://www.fcc.gov/aboutus.html) Translation : George W. put the ENTIRE Commissioners into the office. I checked. Make of it what you will.

-Tyger

[Lohman446]

Had the same thing happened on MTV (like everyday) then I could not care less. IT did not, it happened on a broadcast channel.

Had the same thing happened on Cartoon Network I would not be able to complain to the FCC... its not a broadcast channel, the only thing I could do is not get Cartoon Network anymore.

The point is... the FCC is there to regulate broadcast channels - as long as they dont interfere with freedom of speech in political issues (which is what freedom of speech was supposed to protect) than I think they are required to do it.

[1stdeadeye]

Originally posted by Lohman446
Had the same thing happened on MTV (like everyday) then I could not care less. IT did not, it happened on a broadcast channel.

AMEN! THis is what I have been saying!!!!!!

Had the same thing happened on Cartoon Network I would not be able to complain to the FCC... its not a broadcast channel, the only thing I could do is not get Cartoon Network anymore.

The point is... the FCC is there to regulate broadcast channels - as long as they dont interfere with freedom of speech in political issues (which is what freedom of speech was supposed to protect) than I think they are required to do it.

Exactly! Well said.

Again as long as judicial relief is available, then there are checks and balances to this law.

FCC commisioners are appointed and confirmed. Sounds like a federal Judge too, eh?

[Target Practice]

1stdeadeye, I see your point...and I agree with it. I guess I am more concerned with the radio and the internet. As was previously said on this thread, most radio stations are pretty good about warning listeners of mature content. And on the internet, it is almost completely controllable (i.e. parental control programs). These sites, I feel, do not need to be regulated. These are the venues that I am concerned with.

[1stdeadeye]

Originally posted by Target Practice
1stdeadeye, I see your point...and I agree with it. I guess I am more concerned with the radio and the internet. As was previously said on this thread, most radio stations are pretty good about warning listeners of mature content. And on the internet, it is almost completely controllable (i.e. parental control programs). These sites, I feel, do not need to be regulated. These are the venues that I am concerned with.

Thanks. I really feel this is a making a mountain out of a molehill.

Just put warnings out before you broadcast. I'll do my job as a parent, just don't ambush me!