Some censorship has been removed

mattskramer

Senior Member
Apr 11, 2004
5,852
362
48
Texas
I remember hearing that once upon a time situation comedies on television were not allowed to show married couples sleeping in the same bed. People were not even supposed to use the word "Pregnant" on television.

I remember hearing about the surprise everyone felt when the white-skinned character Kirk kissed the black-skinned character Uhura on the TV show "Star Trek". Then there was the time when Rosanne kissed a lesbian character on the "Rosanne" show. People must have thought fire and brimstone was going to fall from the sky.

Today, such old taboos don't seem to be of much importance. Hopefully the FCC will lighten up and more silly restrictions will be lifted in time.
 
FCC isnt the real threat. Senator Harkin snuck an ammendment to a military appropriations bill banning Rush from Armed service radio. That is censorship.
 
Originally posted by Avatar4321
FCC isnt the real threat. Senator Harkin snuck an ammendment to a military appropriations bill banning Rush from Armed service radio. That is censorship.

Hey. I'm opposed to that amendment too.
 
Personally, I wish they would tighten up the restrictions on TV ..
I am sick of hearing curse words and skin on my tv... I am trying to raise decent children and I have to limit so much that is on tv that the only thing my kids watch out of 200 channels is Disney and Game show network, Nick & Discover channels... That is pathetic !
 
I have no problem with soldiers listening to Rush, so long as they have the option of listening to "The O'Franken Factor" and other shows that come from an opposing viewpoint as Rush.

As for the FCC, they simply bow to political pressure. Janet Jackson's breast has caused all sorts of problems for them. I find it hard to believe that in 2004 people are getting so upset over a millisecond glimpse of a woman's breast. Evidently these people have never taken their kids to an art gallery/museum with Renaissance Art - many bible themed paintings with nudity. Uh oh, don't take the kids there - we wouldn't want their minds warped by 500 year old perverts. How about a nice drive down a country road - oops there are cows with their teats showing - can't go there either. I guess we'll just keep the kids under lock and key in the house - that way we can protect them from everything.

acludem
 
the thing is mate, the reason why people were so upset about the janet jackson thingy, is because people are feeling like they dont have control over what they watch. IF u want to see boobies, go ahead and watch porn, but if u just want to watch sumthin like the superbowl, u should have the assurance that there wont be boobies for ur 2 year old horny son to see.
 
Originally posted by mattskramer
I remember hearing that once upon a time situation comedies on television were not allowed to show married couples sleeping in the same bed. People were not even supposed to use the word "Pregnant" on television.

I remember hearing about the surprise everyone felt when the white-skinned character Kirk kissed the black-skinned character Uhura on the TV show "Star Trek". Then there was the time when Rosanne kissed a lesbian character on the "Rosanne" show. People must have thought fire and brimstone was going to fall from the sky.

Today, such old taboos don't seem to be of much importance. Hopefully the FCC will lighten up and more silly restrictions will be lifted in time.

Yeah hell matts, let's let it all hang out.... let's just put HARD CORE PORN on prime time T.V. Why all the him hawin' around. Let's get right to the filth. This nation is in a swan dive towards the toilet anyway with people like that filthy hippie slick willie teaching America blow jobs in the White House Oval Office weren't sex. Let's just all say fuck it and give in to every little immoral urge we have. Hey, there's a nice looking chick that sits beside at school in class. I think me and her ought to just FUCK right there on the bench in class. The HELL with anybody that's offended.

Your idea of what this country should be and mine are two ENORMOUSLY different things.

Thank GOD there's people like ME around to balance out the whacko's like you.
 
Originally posted by Sandy73
Personally, I wish they would tighten up the restrictions on TV ..
I am sick of hearing curse words and skin on my tv... I am trying to raise decent children and I have to limit so much that is on tv that the only thing my kids watch out of 200 channels is Disney and Game show network, Nick & Discover channels... That is pathetic !

All my dad seems to watch anymore is disney and fox news lol. but then disney does have some good cartoons. a lot of lame ones but some good ones too.
 
Originally posted by acludem
I have no problem with soldiers listening to Rush, so long as they have the option of listening to "The O'Franken Factor" and other shows that come from an opposing viewpoint as Rush.

Im not sure they can have an option to listen to a show that isnt going to survive anyway. They already have a large amount of liberal programming to choose from. They can only listen to an hour of Rush.

My view, they should be able to listen to anyone they want. and the senator shouldnt have any say in it.
 
Originally posted by Sandy73
Personally, I wish they would tighten up the restrictions on TV ..
I am sick of hearing curse words and skin on my tv... I am trying to raise decent children and I have to limit so much that is on tv that the only thing my kids watch out of 200 channels is Disney and Game show network, Nick & Discover channels... That is pathetic !

animal planet baby. steve irwin kicks croc butt. If you can handle words like naughty, bloke, sheila, and mate you'll be just fine. :D
 
Originally posted by acludem
As for the FCC, they simply bow to political pressure. Janet Jackson's breast has caused all sorts of problems for them. I find it hard to believe that in 2004 people are getting so upset over a millisecond glimpse of a woman's breast. Evidently these people have never taken their kids to an art gallery/museum with Renaissance Art - many bible themed paintings with nudity. Uh oh, don't take the kids there - we wouldn't want their minds warped by 500 year old perverts. How about a nice drive down a country road - oops there are cows with their teats showing - can't go there either. I guess we'll just keep the kids under lock and key in the house - that way we can protect them from everything.

I dont think the breast was as much as an issue as it was inappropriate at the time. There are times to see nice round breasts. Its not in the middle of the Super bowl, which is family televion. and its certainly not appropriate to have a man expose her in a way that boarders sexual assault. (why is it no one gets on his back for doing it to begin with). There is also a difference between art and indecency. it may be a fine line sometimes but there is a difference.
 
Take responsibility for yourself and your own children. There are plenty of wholesome shows on TV. Take charge. Don't cry to government to baby-sit you and your children. There are many ways in which you can limit your children's TV watching.

As far as surprises go, sometimes they are unavoidable. Even government, as powerful as it is, can't control every second of every individual's behavior or utterance. Yet, if a show goes "over the line" in your opinion, there are several simple things that you can do. Concerning the Janet Jackson/Superbowl incident - I'm sure that people have been traumatized for life - Yeah - right. (Who would allow their children to watch the violence of football to begin with?) Anyway in cases of fraud you can sue just as people did with Firestone tires. It was understood that Firestone tires were not supposed to blow out under normal wear and tear. Likewise, it was understood that the Super bowl was not expected to provide a boobie show (no matter now brief it was). Those who were physically hurt due to Firestone tires are have sued and are being compensated. Likewise, all those who were mentally hurt (traumatized) by the revelation of Janet's breast may sue for damages. For those who are so concerned I recommend that you boycott Janet Jackson merchandise, MTV, the TV station(s) that aired the show and the NFL. You can write letters, organize boycotts, boycott supporters and do a variety of things. Better yet, get up and do some exercise.
 
Originally posted by mattskramer
For those who are so concerned I recommend that you boycott Janet Jackson merchandise, MTV, the TV station(s) that aired the show and the NFL. You can write letters, organize boycotts, boycott supporters and do a variety of things. Better yet, get up and do some exercise.

I suspect you'd be complaining that those actions constitute censorship as well.

I don't understand why you seem to feel that it is necessary to allow any kind of conduct on television or radio. There was a time when there were programs which actually had PLOTS, which were well written and superbly acted. Which were funny without being vulgar. Mary Tyler Moore, WKRP in Cincinnati, MASH, All in the Family, Sanford and Son, just to name a few.

But today it seems that every program follows the same formula - explicit sexual comments and there has to be a pervert in the mix somewhere.

No, the FCC doesn't need to lighten up, it needs to tighten up. Those of you who get your jollies from sleaze can always watch Howard Stern. Either that or go to you local adult video arcade and drop a few quarters.
 
Originally posted by Merlin1047
I suspect you'd be complaining that those actions constitute censorship as well.

Censorship and Boycott are two different things. A group of citizens can decide not to support advertisers of a "bad" show. The advertisers may still choose to support the show. The show might ask for different advertisers. Those responsible for the show may still CHOOSE to run the show. On the other hand censorship is when government PROHIBITS (via jails or prohibitive fines) those responsible for the show from running the show.

I don't understand why you seem to feel that it is necessary to allow any kind of conduct on television or radio. There was a time when there were programs which actually had PLOTS, which were well written and superbly acted. Which were funny without being vulgar. Mary Tyler Moore, WKRP in Cincinnati, MASH, All in the Family, Sanford and Son, just to name a few.

Awww. Poor baby. Go cry to government to take care of you. Say, what if I didn't want people exposed to the biggotry (sarcastic though it may be) of Archie Bunker. Perhaps I didn't what the public to see the humor of a Korean war medic center (as fictionally as it may have been depicted). Should I have gone crying to government to practically outlaw such shows so that even you (who may have wanted to see "All in the Family" or "MASH") wouldn't have the opportunity to see them for yourself?

But today it seems that every program follows the same formula - explicit sexual comments and there has to be a pervert in the mix somewhere.

There are plenty of good wholesome shows available for those interested. If you want more of such shows, call producers and distributors, make donations, and get involved.

No, the FCC doesn't need to lighten up, it needs to tighten up. Those of you who get your jollies from sleaze can always watch Howard Stern. Either that or go to you local adult video arcade and drop a few quarters.

By the way, thanks to the FCC, many stations are thinking about removing Howard Stern from their programming.
 
Originally posted by DKSuddeth
animal planet baby. steve irwin kicks croc butt. If you can handle words like naughty, bloke, sheila, and mate you'll be just fine. :D

Oh yeah they love the animal planet also ! I personally like the Pet cop shows ! Its horrible to see how creul people can be but it makes me appreciate my animals much better...
 

Forum List

Back
Top