Turning down the volume on TV commercials

[Anguille]

We're going from "inconvenience" because "we shouldn't have to listen to it" ... to "protecting eardrums".

This gets better everyday

I took my cue to exaggerate from you, Paulie.

oh waaahhh waaaaahhh my TV viewing is being disrupted for 60 seconds with extra volume, how will I ever be able to cope!!

 

[manifold]

The FCC already regulates television, including commercial volume levels.

Arguing against this bill on the basis that "Government shouldn't be wasting it's time like this" is akin to arguing that the FCC (a government agency) should not be subject to congressional oversight.

And that's just ridiculous.

That analogy doesn't make any sense. It's more like arguing that the FCC shouldn't exist at all.

I thought we were keeping the discussion within the constraints of pragmatic reality.

My bad!

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

The FCC already regulates television, including commercial volume levels.

Arguing against this bill on the basis that "Government shouldn't be wasting it's time like this" is akin to arguing that the FCC (a government agency) should not be subject to congressional oversight.

And that's just ridiculous.

That analogy doesn't make any sense. It's more like arguing that the FCC shouldn't exist at all.

I thought we were keeping the discussion within the constraints of pragmatic reality.

My bad!

If that were the case I'd have no reason to post anything, because the pragmatic reality is that the government is going to grow and do whatever it wants whenever it wants.

 

[Paulie]

We're going from "inconvenience" because "we shouldn't have to listen to it" ... to "protecting eardrums".

This gets better everyday

I took my cue to exaggerate from you, Paulie.

oh waaahhh waaaaahhh my TV viewing is being disrupted for 60 seconds with extra volume, how will I ever be able to cope!!

Based on that post from me that you quoted, what was an exaggeration?

The average commercial from a major company lasts about 60 seconds, and many last even less than that.

It's YOU guys who are exaggerating, trying to claim that there's more than an occasional commercial with that much extra volume. The majority of commercials are not that loud, Ang.

I could almost see your point if they were, but they simply aren't.

 

[tigerbob]

Reporting from Washington - Rep. Anna G. Eshoo (D-Menlo Park) wanted advertisers to hear her loud and clear. So she introduced the Commercial Advertisement Loudness Mitigation -- or CALM -- Act, aimed at lowering the volume on televised sales pitches.

"In my 17 years in the House of Representatives, I've never carried a bill which has been received with so much enthusiasm," Eshoo said. "Only the do-not-call list has even come close."

Turning down the volume on TV commercials -- latimes.com

Unconstitutional waste of time.

Fuck the constitution.

 

[manifold]

That analogy doesn't make any sense. It's more like arguing that the FCC shouldn't exist at all.

I thought we were keeping the discussion within the constraints of pragmatic reality.

My bad!

If that were the case I'd have no reason to post anything, because the pragmatic reality is that the government is going to grow and do whatever it wants whenever it wants.

Touché!

 

[RadiomanATL]

Um, the broadcasters can quit accepting highly compressed ads.

The Brits passed similar laws last year and I've heard nothing about the total collapse of the broadcasting and/or commercial industry.

We haven't required the Brits to tell us how to live since 1776.

And, for the record, if you think the Brit ads are any better, they aren't....

Thats 'cuz its pretty much an unenforceable "law". Totally subjective, and hence unenforceable.

 

[RadiomanATL]

Yuh...actually I read up on it and the Brits haven't enforced it...but they are starting to get a lot of pressure over it. Maybe the Brit taxpayers own their airwaves, too.

No, the Brits are just lazy. They like the government having control of their lives. We are not British, Ravi, we are Americans. We are not supposed to follow them.... we are supposed to be leaders, not followers.

I posted that because Radioboy seems to think it is impossible to make the broadcasters comply.

They are complying with the law is what I have been saying. And what I have posted examples of at least twice.

 

[Ravi]

No, the Brits are just lazy. They like the government having control of their lives. We are not British, Ravi, we are Americans. We are not supposed to follow them.... we are supposed to be leaders, not followers.

I posted that because Radioboy seems to think it is impossible to make the broadcasters comply.

They are complying with the law is what I have been saying. And what I have posted examples of at least twice.

Yes, they are complying with the law as it is currently written. Which is why the law is being changed...because it was poorly written to begin with.

 

[RadiomanATL]

I posted that because Radioboy seems to think it is impossible to make the broadcasters comply.

They are complying with the law is what I have been saying. And what I have posted examples of at least twice.

Yes, they are complying with the law as it is currently written. Which is why the law is being changed...because it was poorly written to begin with.

You forgot to add: And it's being written in such a way as to be effectively unenforceable, like the UK version.

Like I said, this is nothing but a feelgood, ineffective, look-at-me-and-reelect-me piece of junk legislation.

 

[Ravi]

They are complying with the law is what I have been saying. And what I have posted examples of at least twice.

Yes, they are complying with the law as it is currently written. Which is why the law is being changed...because it was poorly written to begin with.

You forgot to add: And it's being written in such a way as to be effectively unenforceable, like the UK version.

Like I said, this is nothing but a feelgood, ineffective, look-at-me-and-reelect-me piece of junk legislation.

The UK law is enforceable...they just haven't bothered enforcing it.

 

[Modbert]

Fuck, this thread is still going?

 

[Anguille]

You forgot to add: And it's being written in such a way as to be effectively unenforceable, like the UK version.

Like I said, this is nothing but a feelgood, ineffective, look-at-me-and-reelect-me piece of junk legislation.

I think you will be proved wrong about that, but time will tell.

 

[RadiomanATL]

You forgot to add: And it's being written in such a way as to be effectively unenforceable, like the UK version.

Like I said, this is nothing but a feelgood, ineffective, look-at-me-and-reelect-me piece of junk legislation.

I think you will be proved wrong about that, but time will tell.

We'll see then.

 

[Anguille]

You forgot to add: And it's being written in such a way as to be effectively unenforceable, like the UK version.

Like I said, this is nothing but a feelgood, ineffective, look-at-me-and-reelect-me piece of junk legislation.

I think you will be proved wrong about that, but time will tell.

We'll see then.

Just curious, will you be glad if it does work?

 

[RadiomanATL]

I think you will be proved wrong about that, but time will tell.

We'll see then.

Just curious, will you be glad if it does work?

Don't care if it does. I DVR everything and skip through most of the commercials. I'm just sayin' it won't work.

 

[Anguille]

We'll see then.

Just curious, will you be glad if it does work?

Don't care if it does. I DVR everything and skip through most of the commercials. I'm just sayin' it won't work.

Well be glad for my sake then, if it does work. I don't have fancy equipment.