The FCC needs to be Destroyed

[kherma1]

It is plain and simple, if you are for the FCC, you are against freedom. If you are against freedom, that is fine, but stand up and proclaim yourself to be a fascist. If you don't like something, then don't look at it.

"In an attempt to justify why the FCC managed to rule a documentary on blues musicians indecent, new FCC Chairman Martin responded with this explanation: "It's really simple now. Just count the number of letters in every word you say on the air. If it's four, you're obscene."

http://www.firethefcc.com/fcc-rulings-criticism290306.shtml

:chains:

 

[dmp]

so what?

You don't have a clue. You're all bark, ya know? With great freedom comes great responsibility.

 

[kherma1]

Oh right, and your the responsible one. Like I said, if you don't like it, don't look at it. What is so difficult and so irresponsible about that.

 

[dmp]

Oh right, and your the responsible one. Like I said, if you don't like it, don't look at it. What is so difficult and so irresponsible about that.

it's 'you're'...not 'your'. WTF is up your butt? I bet...just bet this is a duplicate account...

 

[kherma1]

There isn't a need to talk down to others.

But on topic, since I think it is better to talk about those issues that matter, Thomas Jefferson once said,

"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have ... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases."

The FCC is an organization set up to take away freedom of expression in order to push the agenda of a minority of the people. Then through political pressure they convince many people that the organization is needed to maintain order in the world.

Most of us know, however, that there is no proof that obscene images on TV, or language on radio cause any type of sociological reprecussions, since a study can not take place due to the absence of information to do so. If there is an independent study showing this I am actually curious and would like to know where I could find that

 

[archangel]

There isn't a need to talk down to others.

But on topic, since I think it is better to talk about those issues that matter, Thomas Jefferson once said,

"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have ... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases."

The FCC is an organization set up to take away freedom of expression in order to push the agenda of a minority of the people. Then through political pressure they convince many people that the organization is needed to maintain order in the world.

Most of us know, however, that there is no proof that obscene images on TV, or language on radio cause any type of sociological reprecussions, since a study can not take place due to the absence of information to do so. If there is an independent study showing this I am actually curious and would like to know where I could find that

Just listen to Howard Stern for ten minutes...major migrain...baby!

 

[Hobbit]

And I suppose you think traffic laws, public nudity laws, slander laws, libel laws, and laws against terroristic threatening also violate your freedom of expression? There's got to be a limit somewhere, and just because you have to pay $20 a month for your nudie channel doesn't mean the FCC is violating Playboy's first ammendment rights.

 

[nosarcasm]

In Germany poor me was kindergardened by the government that I can't watch
violence on TV.

In the US the Kindergarden policy is no boobs and bad words.

In a perfect world its either no violence, no boobs and no bad words or

all of it.

Depends on your personality.

 

[5stringJeff]

I don't particularly care for the activists in the FCC. However, the government does, and should, regulate the public airwaves.

However, the FCC has absolutely no business regulating cable/satellite TV, satellite radio, PPV, the internet, etc.

 

[dmp]

this story sure fits here;

http://www.kirotv.com/mostpopular/8595870/detail.html

 

[Nuc]

I don't particularly care for the activists in the FCC. However, the government does, and should, regulate the public airwaves.

However, the FCC has absolutely no business regulating cable/satellite TV, satellite radio, PPV, the internet, etc.

Maybe they should regulate the public airwaves. But those airwaves are a public resource that the FCC literally gave away to a bunch of corporate assholes, which is the reason why almost everything you hear on the radio is crap. That's the FCC's biggest fault, not censorship. I would rather have censorship and listen to Mahler than free speech and listen to faux country, rap and Rush.

 

[dmp]

Maybe they should regulate the public airwaves. But those airwaves are a public resource that the FCC literally gave away to a bunch of corporate assholes, which is the reason why almost everything you hear on the radio is crap.

wtf are you talking about? lmao! Blaming the FCC for recording company or radio company programming?

hah

 

[5stringJeff]

Maybe they should regulate the public airwaves. But those airwaves are a public resource that the FCC literally gave away to a bunch of corporate assholes, which is the reason why almost everything you hear on the radio is crap. That's the FCC's biggest fault, not censorship. I would rather have censorship and listen to Mahler than free speech and listen to faux country, rap and Rush.

ClearChannel, my friend. Blame ClearChannel.

 

[Nuc]

wtf are you talking about? lmao! Blaming the FCC for recording company or radio company programming?

hah

I'm talking about the airwaves. They are a resource. The FCC grants licenses to scumbags and doesn't even get paid for them. So I blame the FCC for handing over the airwaves to a lot of losers who play bad music and stupid talk radio. They didn't have to do that. They could have made sure the airwaves had diversity and intelligence. It's like letting Burger King put a billboard on Mount Rushmore.

 

[Nuc]

ClearChannel, my friend. Blame ClearChannel.

They're bad, but they are just the culmination of the FCC's poor stewardship of the airwaves.

 

[5stringJeff]

I'm talking about the airwaves. They are a resource. The FCC grants licenses to scumbags and doesn't even get paid for them. So I blame the FCC for handing over the airwaves to a lot of losers who play bad music and stupid talk radio. They didn't have to do that. They could have made sure the airwaves had diversity and intelligence. It's like letting Burger King put a billboard on Mount Rushmore.

I understand what you're saying, but it sure sounds like you want to turn the FCC into the Ministry of Culture, or something like that.

 

[Nuc]

I understand what you're saying, but it sure sounds like you want to turn the FCC into the Ministry of Culture, or something like that.

I'm just saying that you don't turn over a national resource like the airwaves to the biggest pigs at the trough. They belong to the people. I don't think when I turn on the radio, "This serves the people". It serves corporate interests almost exclusively. The only exceptions are college and public stations, most of which run on 100 watts. A bunch of monsters like Clear Channel are making millions off of these airwaves which are not taxed and don't give anything back except disgusting music and talk.

 

[Annie]

I'm just saying that you don't turn over a national resource like the airwaves to the biggest pigs at the trough. They belong to the people. I don't think when I turn on the radio, "This serves the people". It serves corporate interests almost exclusively. The only exceptions are college and public stations, most of which run on 100 watts. A bunch of monsters like Clear Channel are making millions off of these airwaves which are not taxed and don't give anything back except disgusting music and talk.

I may be misunderstanding you, but with the exception of NPR and PBS, the rest are commercial stations? Money can only be made through the selling of commercials, the cost of which are determined by numbers and demographics.

 

[Bonnie]

I'm just saying that you don't turn over a national resource like the airwaves to the biggest pigs at the trough. They belong to the people. I don't think when I turn on the radio, "This serves the people". It serves corporate interests almost exclusively. The only exceptions are college and public stations, most of which run on 100 watts. A bunch of monsters like Clear Channel are making millions off of these airwaves which are not taxed and don't give anything back except disgusting music and talk.

Well someone is listening to Rush, many people I imagine, who support the corporations that finance shows like Rush. Yes it is a money making enterprise that is driven by the free market.

 

[Nuc]

Well someone is listening to Rush, many people I imagine, who support the corporations that finance shows like Rush. Yes it is a money making enterprise that is driven by the free market.

How do these stations get access to the airwaves? That's my point. Air space is like physical space. Why give space to people who use it for vulgar purposes? It's like turning the Library of Congress over to a porn corporation.