Penises on Prime Time Programming TruTV

[Silhouette]

Youre missing the point. The exception is when subscription based cable channels rely on sponsors. They CAN show nudity if they want, but that kind of stuff generally turns off their sponsors, so they dont do it for the sake of profits.

If they showed nudity or other explicit adult content, you'd better believe the FCC wouldn't allow them 1. To not conspicuously warn viewers before each show and especially true if interwoven with kid-appealing shows and 2. To do so on packaged cable deals during prime time viewing for kids after school.

TruTV fucked up on this one. And I'm calling them out on it. I've endured more than I wanted to but waited to see if the problem would resolve itself. It hasn't. It's gotten worse. Their modis operandi seems to be pitching shows to draw in young viewers and then the minute the viewership is there like they want, they immediately start infusing escalating portions of adult content into those shows; normalizing it to young viewers. It isn't a mistake that this pattern is exactly the type of things pedophiles do when grooming children to soften them to the idea of sex at too early of an age, just under the radar of hassled, tired and overworked guardians..

TruTV wants to pitch itself as a network qualifying for open-package family type cable viewing, without explicit warnings, and at the same time be able to show explicit material where (and in this case particularly WHEN) they know kids will be watching.

Nope, you're wrong.

Actually, yes, I'm right. The FCC can and will clamp down on anyone not warning viewers in basic "family-type" packages for cable, showing explicit adult content during after-school viewing hours, regardless of parental controls. If a parent has no reason to suspect a network, and sees for all the evidence on cursory glances that network pitching itself as a family-package network, without warnings, then the FCC can step in and investigate potential exposure to children. I argue it's knowing exposure, calculated and manipulated precisely to fall under adult radar. There's the crime.

 

[Silhouette]

you could just stop ignoring the TV-14 rating.

Have erect penises been approved for 14 year olds? And if they have, is such a show to be interwoven on a basic package network during prime time child viewing? As I recall, that day it was preceded by The Carbanero Effect, which has a much tamer rating ( for younger kids ). The erect penises were aired on TruTV on a school day at 4pm, intermixed with prank type kid-draw comedy shows.

 

[Silhouette]

Another thought that occurred to me as to ratings etc. Impractical Jokers do a LOT of innuendo and bawdy references to the, shall we say, healthy sex life of an adult male American. However, and this is important as a distinction, they don't show (except one episode I remember and even then it was still an allusion and not an outright "dicks" reference) erect penises. When they did in that graph on Vitamin D intake in one of their bits, I thought, "well yeah, since the LGBT fake-gray hair unfunny operative kid imposed his presence in the show, tying the "funniness (popularity among kids) of IJ to all things queer" (the intent of his presence), the writing is taking that upward lewd curve like I've seen on other shows on their network."

One that particularly comes to mind is "Hack My Life". From its inception before it became popular, it always had this "tiptoe" into lewd content. Once the ratings started to climb, lockstep so did the sexual references until now they're just blatant about it.

But back to Paid Off's offense the other day. The actual showing of erect penises isn't merely bawdy comedy. It's meant to titillate. Pure and simple. So I'll ask again, is 14 year old rating inclusive of showing graphic sexually-ready (engorged) male genitals with the intent of titillating? Or does it merely include jokes about them in casual but not explicit reference? We all know the answer. It's a rhetorical question. And it's why I feel TruTV is going to get a punch in the chops for this one. They went too far, as usual.

 

[Silhouette]

Unfortunately, as a child, there was no cable. It was I Love Lucy reruns, Gunsmoke, Dick Van Dyke, etc. Now, there's just content galore. Parents need to be diligent.

Well since it’s such a morass to wade through, your argument supports my contention the it’s cable companies’ responsibility to help parents keep children from explicit content. The packages they sell FAMILIES can’t include networks that slip in erect penises under a 14 year old rating, mixed among child attracting shows of a more benign rating. Especially at prime child watching hours right after school. It’s insidious & I argue, purposeful.

 

[mdk]

TruTV doesn’t market itself as a family network. They market themselves as a reality television channel with a bent towards comedy. Nothing will come of this moaning to the FCC other than further demonstrating Sil’s need for a nanny state.

 

[Political Junky]

I recall a far right preacher who said that dads should shower with their sons to show them who's boss.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

The FCC has a function to regulate airwaves. Those go through cable lines too.

What part of "air" do you not understand? Cable is not "air".

The FCC's regulatory powers extend only to over-the-air broadcasters, who transmit their programs via the publicly owned spectrum. In order to obtain the FCC's permission to use slivers of that spectrum, broadcasters agree to abide by the commission's rules, which include indecency standards. Cable, on the other hand, travels to American homes via privately built and maintained hardware. (The same goes for satellite services like the DISH Network, whose orbiting hardware is privately launched.) So, cable channels needn't strike a bargain with the FCC in order to operate.

Can the FCC crack down on cable?

 

[Silhouette]

The FCC has a function to regulate airwaves. Those go through cable lines too.

What part of "air" do you not understand? Cable is not "air".

The FCC's regulatory powers extend only to over-the-air broadcasters, who transmit their programs via the publicly owned spectrum. In order to obtain the FCC's permission to use slivers of that spectrum, broadcasters agree to abide by the commission's rules, which include indecency standards. Cable, on the other hand, travels to American homes via privately built and maintained hardware. (The same goes for satellite services like the DISH Network, whose orbiting hardware is privately launched.) So, cable channels needn't strike a bargain with the FCC in order to operate.

Can the FCC crack down on cable?

Cable is a type of transmitted communication. Ergo the FCC has authority to regulate it. The “file a complaint” section of their website has a category for cable TV. Sorry

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Ok I love the show “Impractical jokers”, pitched as a family show. It often involves kid actors & children subjects in jokes. I notice though that more and more sexualized “jokes” are being woven into the format. Bawdy guys are one thing, but there’s an element in the background that’s being written in that the jokers are becoming uncomfortable with.

Anyway, today in I think it was the 4 o’clock hour PST, exactly when most kids are flopped on the couch after school, TruTV was airing their game show to forgive student debt. One of the categories was “dicks over dictators”. The category showed illustrated erect penises & testicles superimposed over various dictators faces that contestants tried to guess. The host was talking about schlongs & whangers as the images shown on the screen.

So, kids tuning in at the peak hour for their viewing, hoping to find the very popular show Impractical Jokers, instead found brazen adult content masked as “a fun game show”.

Does the FCC even function anymore? It’s under the control of the current administration. I wonder if the conservatives realized that the game show interweaves itself with the very popular Impractical Jokers so that it can glean more gimme-freebie votes (forgive student debt) from IJ viewers, if they might have a stern talk or sanctions for Tru TV’s prime time kid/family hour sexualized content?

TruTV is constantly trying to interweave sexualized or adult content into shows or programming time slots where kids are sure to be drawn in. I think it’s time the FCC had a talk with them.

Your thoughts?

Such is the bane of the authoritarian social right: more government, bigger government interfering in citizens’ private lives; more regulation, more restrictions, further efforts to dictate through government authority subjective perceptions of ‘morality’ by conservatives.

So much for the conservative notion of ‘personal responsibility’ and ‘small government.’

 

[Silhouette]

Such is the bane of the authoritarian social right: more government, bigger government interfering in citizens’ private lives; more regulation, more restrictions, further efforts to dictate through government authority subjective perceptions of ‘morality’ by conservatives.

So much for the conservative notion of ‘personal responsibility’ and ‘small government.’

Who says the conservatives are the only ones who don't want their 8 year olds exposed to explicit smut on TV? You assume that all middle voters are on board with "dicks over dictators" at 4pm on a school day on TruTV?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

The FCC has a function to regulate airwaves. Those go through cable lines too.

What part of "air" do you not understand? Cable is not "air".

The FCC's regulatory powers extend only to over-the-air broadcasters, who transmit their programs via the publicly owned spectrum. In order to obtain the FCC's permission to use slivers of that spectrum, broadcasters agree to abide by the commission's rules, which include indecency standards. Cable, on the other hand, travels to American homes via privately built and maintained hardware. (The same goes for satellite services like the DISH Network, whose orbiting hardware is privately launched.) So, cable channels needn't strike a bargain with the FCC in order to operate.

Can the FCC crack down on cable?

Cable is a type of transmitted communication. Ergo the FCC has authority to regulate it. The “file a complaint” section of their website has a category for cable TV. Sorry

That only applies to networks that also broadcast over the airwaves. I gave you the link. Did you not read it?

 

[Silhouette]

Cable Television

"the Commission has reasonably concluded that regulatory authority over CATV is imperative if it is to perform with appropriate effectiveness certain of its responsibilities." The Court found the Commission needed authority over cable systems to assure the preservation of local broadcast service and to effect an equitable distribution of broadcast services among the various regions of the country.

...In adopting the 1992 Cable Act, Congress stated that it wanted to promote the availability of diverse views and information, to rely on the marketplace to the maximum extent possible to achieve that availability, to ensure cable operators continue to expand their capacity and program offerings, to ensure cable operators do not have undue market power, and to ensure consumer interests are protected in the receipt of cable service. The Commission has adopted regulations to implement these goals...

TV-Y-- This program is designed to be appropriate for all children.


TV-Y7-- This program is designed for children age 7 and above. Note: For those programs where fantasy violence may be more intense or more combative than other programs in this category, such programs will be designated TV-Y7-FV.


TV-G-- Most parents would find this program suitable for all ages.


TV-PG-- This program contains some material that parents may find unsuitable for younger children. The program contains one or more of the following: moderate violence (V), some sexual situations (S), infrequent coarse language (L), or some suggestive dialogue (D).


TV-14-- This program contains some material that many parents would find unsuitable for children under 14 years of age. This program contains one or more of the following: intense violence (V), intense sexual situations (S), strong coarse language (L), or intensely suggestive dialogue (D).


TV-MA-- This program is specifically designed to be viewed by adults and therefore may be unsuitable for children under 17. This program contains one or more of the following: graphic violence (V), explicit sexual activity (S), or crude indecent language (L).

...
Program Content Regulations

Section 504 of the 1996 Act required a cable operator to fully scramble or block the audio and video portions of programming services not specifically subscribed to by a household. The cable operator must fully scramble or block the programming in question upon the request of the subscriber and at no charge to the subscriber. In addition, Section 505 states that cable operators or other multichannel video programming distributors who offer sexually explicit programming or other programming that is indecent on any channel(s) primarily dedicated to sexually-oriented programming must fully scramble or block both the audio and video portions of the channels so that someone who does not subscribe to the channel does not receive it. Until a multichannel video distributor complies with this provision, the distributor cannot provide the programming during hours when a significant number of children are likely to view it.


In 1996, the Commission adopted interim rules to implement Section 505 of the 1996 Act. The interim rules established the hours of 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. as those hours when a significant number of children are likely to have access to and view the programming. However, before the rules could take effect, Section 505 was challenged in the courts and a federal court in Delaware issued a decision (Playboy Entertainment Group v. U.S.) which determined that Section 505 is unconstitutional. An appeal of this decision was filed with the U.S. Supreme Court. In May 2000, the U.S. Supreme Court also determined that Section 505 is unconstitutional. Thus, the Commission’s rules implementing Section 505 cannot be enforced. However, persons who wish to prevent the viewing of such programming may do so by obtaining a “lockbox” or by exercising the options provided in Section 504 of the 1996 Act.

******

So your ilk fought and fought hard to bring smut to TV with the caveat of lockboxes. But, erect penises are under the "explicit" and not "intense" category for sexual content. So TruTV violated TV-14 ratings. The fact that they wove this content into prime time viewing for children seals the deal. They blew it.

I'd like to see the 1996 court ruling revisited. Playboy Entertainment is quite different than a network pitching kid-appealing shows weaving explicit content in with shows that otherwise more tamely pitch to youngsters; like curiosity shows and slapstick comedy. This Trojan Horse programming seeks to sexualize children at inappropriate ages.

When you see Playboy, you know what's coming. As a parent you immediately block it. But if Playboy started featuring shows pitched to kids and interweaving them with "skank sluts" or "intense anal", you've got pedophiles attempting to access children on a public wire-way regulated by the FCC. Do you suppose the USSC would've ruled the way they did if they knew Playboy Entertainment was also featuring shows pitched to kids? Nope.

So on TruTV, why are they beeping the words "****" and "shit" and "*****" on Impractical Jokers and then in the same after school hours, interwoven with tamer rated shows, showing explicit erect penis icons and joking about dicks, whangers and scholongs at 4pm in the afternoon?

 

[Skylar]

TruTV is a subscription based company and therefore not subject to those FCC rules. They could show naked people if they wanted.

Not intermixed with family type shows on prime time viewing or unannounced as to explicit content; which is what TruTV is doing right now. You'd better believe they are beholden to regulation under those violations. Especially when offered as part of an all-access cable package where kids can view at latchkey homes. The FCC has to assume for kids’ safety that during prime time; especially in hours like 4pm when parents or other adults with cable that kids have access to aren’t home, that kids will be watching. Protection of children doesn’t start or stop at their family’s threshold.

There are numerous state & federal laws requiring people to act just on the hunch that a child might be harmed. It is not unreasonable to assume that children during prime time would have access to any part of unrestricted cable packages. Especially featuring networks where content is not conspicuously marked; that has curiosity shows with brightly lit & colored sets. These monsters know exactly what they’re doing. They are using every loophole they can to expose little kids to smut. To normalize it to them. Just under parents/other adults’ radar. Just like a pedophile stalks his prey.

They don't have 'family type' programming. They're a comedy channel. Which you ignored. And the show in question is rated TV-14. Which you ignored. They have the word 'WARNING' written in a 50 point bold font as the show opens. Which you ignored. They warn that the show is graphic. Which you ignored.

Then, laughably, you insist that because you ignored the network, the kind of shows they offer, the TV rating, and every warning the show offered you......that the network has commited a violation and should be punished.

Nope.

Your willful ignorance doesn't create a 'FCC violation'. And the FCC will do nothing to protect you from your own willful ignorance. You'll need to take some personal responsibility for yourself.

 

[Skylar]

Cable Television

"the Commission has reasonably concluded that regulatory authority over CATV is imperative if it is to perform with appropriate effectiveness certain of its responsibilities." The Court found the Commission needed authority over cable systems to assure the preservation of local broadcast service and to effect an equitable distribution of broadcast services among the various regions of the country.

...In adopting the 1992 Cable Act, Congress stated that it wanted to promote the availability of diverse views and information, to rely on the marketplace to the maximum extent possible to achieve that availability, to ensure cable operators continue to expand their capacity and program offerings, to ensure cable operators do not have undue market power, and to ensure consumer interests are protected in the receipt of cable service. The Commission has adopted regulations to implement these goals...

TV-Y-- This program is designed to be appropriate for all children.


TV-Y7-- This program is designed for children age 7 and above. Note: For those programs where fantasy violence may be more intense or more combative than other programs in this category, such programs will be designated TV-Y7-FV.


TV-G-- Most parents would find this program suitable for all ages.


TV-PG-- This program contains some material that parents may find unsuitable for younger children. The program contains one or more of the following: moderate violence (V), some sexual situations (S), infrequent coarse language (L), or some suggestive dialogue (D).


TV-14-- This program contains some material that many parents would find unsuitable for children under 14 years of age. This program contains one or more of the following: intense violence (V), intense sexual situations (S), strong coarse language (L), or intensely suggestive dialogue (D).


TV-MA-- This program is specifically designed to be viewed by adults and therefore may be unsuitable for children under 17. This program contains one or more of the following: graphic violence (V), explicit sexual activity (S), or crude indecent language (L).

...
Program Content Regulations

Section 504 of the 1996 Act required a cable operator to fully scramble or block the audio and video portions of programming services not specifically subscribed to by a household. The cable operator must fully scramble or block the programming in question upon the request of the subscriber and at no charge to the subscriber. In addition, Section 505 states that cable operators or other multichannel video programming distributors who offer sexually explicit programming or other programming that is indecent on any channel(s) primarily dedicated to sexually-oriented programming must fully scramble or block both the audio and video portions of the channels so that someone who does not subscribe to the channel does not receive it. Until a multichannel video distributor complies with this provision, the distributor cannot provide the programming during hours when a significant number of children are likely to view it.


In 1996, the Commission adopted interim rules to implement Section 505 of the 1996 Act. The interim rules established the hours of 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. as those hours when a significant number of children are likely to have access to and view the programming. However, before the rules could take effect, Section 505 was challenged in the courts and a federal court in Delaware issued a decision (Playboy Entertainment Group v. U.S.) which determined that Section 505 is unconstitutional. An appeal of this decision was filed with the U.S. Supreme Court. In May 2000, the U.S. Supreme Court also determined that Section 505 is unconstitutional. Thus, the Commission’s rules implementing Section 505 cannot be enforced. However, persons who wish to prevent the viewing of such programming may do so by obtaining a “lockbox” or by exercising the options provided in Section 504 of the 1996 Act.

******

So your ilk fought and fought hard to bring smut to TV with the caveat of lockboxes. But, erect penises are under the "explicit" and not "intense" category for sexual content. So TruTV violated TV-14 ratings. The fact that they wove this content into prime time viewing for children seals the deal. They blew it.

I'd like to see the 1996 court ruling revisited. Playboy Entertainment is quite different than a network pitching kid-appealing shows weaving explicit content in with shows that otherwise more tamely pitch to youngsters; like curiosity shows and slapstick comedy. This Trojan Horse programming seeks to sexualize children at inappropriate ages.

When you see Playboy, you know what's coming. As a parent you immediately block it. But if Playboy started featuring shows pitched to kids and interweaving them with "skank sluts" or "intense anal", you've got pedophiles attempting to access children on a public wire-way regulated by the FCC. Do you suppose the USSC would've ruled the way they did if they knew Playboy Entertainment was also featuring shows pitched to kids? Nope.

So on TruTV, why are they beeping the words "****" and "shit" and "*****" on Impractical Jokers and then in the same after school hours, interwoven with tamer rated shows, showing explicit erect penis icons and joking about dicks, whangers and scholongs at 4pm in the afternoon?

The Supreme Court in 1996......greatly restricted the FCC's regulation of subscription services like cable. Holding any such regulation to the highest and most strigent standard: the Strict Scrutiny Standard. This is the standard that weights most powerfully toward free speech and weighted least toward regulation.

The show warned you it was TV-14. You ignored the warning.

That alone negates your entire argument.

They put a giant WARNING on the screen. You ignored that too. They were clear that the show had 'graphic' content. You ignored that.

The FCC will take no action against TruTV.....as your willful ignorance isn't a standard that Tru TV is held to. You will have to take some personal responsibility for your own choices rather than demanding that the FCC do it for you.

 

[Skylar]

If they showed nudity or other explicit adult content, you'd better believe the FCC wouldn't allow them

1. To not conspicuously warn viewers before each show and especially true if interwoven with kid-appealing shows

Pure Imagination. 1) There is no such restriction. 2) Tru-TV doesn't have a single kids show in its entire line up.

You're not citing the FCC. You're citing your imagination. Which has zero regulatory authority.

And 2. To do so on packaged cable deals during prime time viewing for kids after school.

Pure Imagination. There is no such restriction to cable TV lines ups. As demonstrated elegantly by the TV-14 shows being put on during the very era you insist only kids programming is allowed.

You simply don't know what you're talking about and are citing your imagination as a regulatory authority.

It isn't.

TruTV fucked up on this one.

Nope. You did by ignoring the TV-14 rating, ignoring the giant word WARNING on the screen and the description of the show as having 'graphic' content. The TV-14 rating alone ends any regulatory conflict. The additional obvious warnings that you ignored make your position silly.

Tru-TV met its every regulatory obligation. It was you that failed your grandkids by ignoring the warnings and information they provided. Do better in the future.

 

[karpenter]

Both Marxists Obama and Hillary raised their arms covenanting to uphold the Constitution of the United States. Then they broke that solemn oath by following Saul Alinsky’s plan to destroy it (numbered below). 1. Healthcare - Control healthcare and you control the people 2. Poverty - Increase the poverty level as high as possible; poor people are easier to control and will not fight back if you are providing everything for them to live. 3. Debt - Increase the debt to an unsustainable level. That way you are able to increase taxes, and this will produce more poverty. 4. Gun Control - Remove the ability of the citizens to defend themselves from the government. That way you are able to create a police state. 5. Welfare - Take control of every aspect of their lives (Food, Housing, and Income). 6. Education - Take control of what people read and listen to - take control of what children learn in school. 7. Religion - Remove the belief in God from the government and schools. 8. Class Warfare - Divide the people into the wealthy and the poor. This will cause more discontent and it will be easier to tax the wealthy

Thing Is
Folks On The Left Have Been Living This So Long
They Don't Know Where It's From
Or What It's For
They Just Think It's The Normal, Moral Way To Live

Yell, Yell, Yell
Fight, Fight, Fight
Protest And Protest Some More
If There's Nothing Wrong, Create It

My, How They Do Love To Struggle

 

[Silhouette]

Erect penises and referencing them as “schlongs” & “whangers” is explicit material; which is disallowed on TV 14 rating. Worse, it was shown sandwiched between tamer rated kid-lure shows at 4pm on a school day.

FCC needs to fine that network.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Erect penises and referencing them as “schlongs” & “whangers” is explicit material; which is disallowed on TV 14 rating. Worse, it was shown sandwiched between tamer rated kid-lure shows at 4pm on a school day.

FCC needs to fine that network.

They can't.

It was already shown to you in this thread. It had a warning of explicit material, did it not?

The fault is yours, not anyone else's.

 

[WheelieAddict]

Lol@old ass baby boomers outraged at tv turning smutty when they promoted free drugs and sex.

 

[Silhouette]

It was already shown to you in this thread. It had a warning of explicit material, did it not?

The fault is yours, not anyone else's.

Correct. It did NOT have a warning for explicit material. It was rated TV 14 which doesn’t allow erect penises to be viewed. Worse,, it was interwoven with much tamer kid-lure type shows & aired at 4pm on a school day. They’re not getting off the hook on this one.

Glad to see you’re conceding that the FCC does have authority on cable TV. The spin that they don’t has finally died.