FCC considering allowing profanity and non-sexual nudity (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 13, 2024, 04:26:35 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Debate (Moderator: Torie)
  FCC considering allowing profanity and non-sexual nudity (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: Do you agree?
#1
Yes (D)
 
#2
No (D)
 
#3
Yes (R)
 
#4
No (R)
 
#5
Yes (I/O)
 
#6
No (I/O)
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 87

Author Topic: FCC considering allowing profanity and non-sexual nudity  (Read 4852 times)
Grumpier Than Uncle Joe
GM3PRP
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 45,065
Greece
« on: April 17, 2013, 09:02:33 AM »

So the networks will be more lenient than the ToS here?  Who knew?
Logged
Grumpier Than Uncle Joe
GM3PRP
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 45,065
Greece
« Reply #1 on: May 07, 2013, 11:10:22 AM »


Awesome. Smiley
Logged
Grumpier Than Uncle Joe
GM3PRP
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 45,065
Greece
« Reply #2 on: May 07, 2013, 01:22:39 PM »

Totally agree. Bleeping minor swear words, even, is really annoying and a little antiquated. The FCC, especially in a digital age, should not feel compelled to protect virgin ears.

If the stopped bleeping and started using F[inks] Sh[inks] Mother F[inks]er or something like that, I could handle it better.
Logged
Grumpier Than Uncle Joe
GM3PRP
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 45,065
Greece
« Reply #3 on: June 03, 2013, 01:45:58 PM »

Ever watch an episode of Criminal Minds?  That's far more disturbing than tits and a few swear words.
Logged
Grumpier Than Uncle Joe
GM3PRP
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 45,065
Greece
« Reply #4 on: June 03, 2013, 02:09:42 PM »

Ever watch an episode of Criminal Minds?  That's far more disturbing than tits and a few swear words.

Call me an authoritarian, but I don't see how an existing problem of violence on television is solved by correcting a double standard related to nudity and profanity. If you agree that the violence is more of a problem than what we ban, why not regulate it? Is the implication that television writers will not have as much time for violence if we give them sex and vulgarity to work with? Unlikely.

My elusive point was far simpler.....considering the crap that's on TV now, it's no big whup if a few titties and a few of the 7 words you can't say on TV are said.
Logged
Grumpier Than Uncle Joe
GM3PRP
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 45,065
Greece
« Reply #5 on: June 03, 2013, 03:04:17 PM »

Ever watch an episode of Criminal Minds?  That's far more disturbing than tits and a few swear words.

Call me an authoritarian, but I don't see how an existing problem of violence on television is solved by correcting a double standard related to nudity and profanity. If you agree that the violence is more of a problem than what we ban, why not regulate it? Is the implication that television writers will not have as much time for violence if we give them sex and vulgarity to work with? Unlikely.

My elusive point was far simpler.....considering the crap that's on TV now, it's no big whup if a few titties and a few of the 7 words you can't say on TV are said.

You're right, but would you agree that that speaks a larger volume about the problems with television than it does the merits of relaxing broadcast regulations?

I can agree with that.  To me it's just bizarre that Janet Jackson's tit generates a whopper of a fine and some crazed psycho killer raping and slicing apart his victim is legit.  If they're not going to tighten up on the violence then ridding ourselves of some antiquated prude rules won't cause further problems, IMO.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.026 seconds with 14 queries.