DeeRay Posted November 11, 2004 Share Posted November 11, 2004 Yes - we're dreaming if we think we live in a "free" country. amen... free? nothing is free here... not with the taxes I pay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RaNdom Posted November 11, 2004 Share Posted November 11, 2004 Precisely. If someone tunes in to Howard Stern and is suprised to find out he's offensive...they are too stupid to live on my !@#$ing planet. Certain things in life are offensive. What those things are differs from person to person. It is the persons responsibility to avoid them, not the government's to make them less offensive. 113389[/snapback] what about protection of minors? since it's a public broadcast, are you sure you want impressionable minors listening/watching? there aren't many restrictions for what adults can do (i.e. pr0n within legal bounds), but i think they're merely being wary of what is publicly accessible to those that are not adults yet. a similar parallel would be, are you suggesting there not be any ratings systems and restrictions on movies? (R, NC-17, etc) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kasper13 Posted November 11, 2004 Share Posted November 11, 2004 ABC showed "Saving Private Ryan" uncut and unedited in 2001 and 2002 and did not receive more than a handful of complaints. It's quite a bit different showing this movie than a brief boob at the Super Bowl. Every kid in America should be made to sit down and watch this movie and see what War is like, what our soldiers did on D-Day and the sacrifices that were made during WWII. The fact the some TV stations aren't showing this movie is totally inane. If someone is offended by a swear word or violence- DON'T TURN ON THE FRICKIN TV. If a kid accidentally turns on ABC and watches this movie- GOOD. They should see why they are where they are today. If our soldiers didn't do what they did, this movie would be in German. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman's Helmet Posted November 11, 2004 Share Posted November 11, 2004 ABC showed "Saving Private Ryan" uncut and unedited in 2001 and 2002 and did not receive more than a handful of complaints. It's quite a bit different showing this movie than a brief boob at the Super Bowl. Every kid in America should be made to sit down and watch this movie and see what War is like, what our soldiers did on D-Day and the sacrifices that were made during WWII. The fact the some TV stations aren't showing this movie is totally inane. If someone is offended by a swear word or violence- DON'T TURN ON THE FRICKIN TV. If a kid accidentally turns on ABC and watches this movie- GOOD. They should see why they are where they are today. If our soldiers didn't do what they did, this movie would be in German. 113534[/snapback] But, But; SURVIVOR! JOEY! THE APPRENTICE! Wont somebody PLEASE think of the Reality TV series?????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven in MD Posted November 11, 2004 Share Posted November 11, 2004 what about protection of minors? since it's a public broadcast, are you sure you want impressionable minors listening/watching? there aren't many restrictions for what adults can do (i.e. pr0n within legal bounds), but i think they're merely being wary of what is publicly accessible to those that are not adults yet. a similar parallel would be, are you suggesting there not be any ratings systems and restrictions on movies? (R, NC-17, etc) 113521[/snapback] It is called parenting.....last time I checked minors who are that impressionable should not be left home alone. Bottom line...the govt needs to get the hell out of my bedroom, living room and car. If I CHOOSE to let me kids watch the movie it is not Michael Powells business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jarthur31 Posted November 11, 2004 Share Posted November 11, 2004 jeezuz god.... rent the damn movie if you're that pissed off. 113310[/snapback] It's about needless censorship. You would think that the Republicans running the show would be falling all over themselves to air this! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Gross Posted November 11, 2004 Share Posted November 11, 2004 It's about needless censorship. You would think that the Republicans running the show would be falling all over themselves to air this! 113593[/snapback] It's what's called collateral damage in the war against indecency. I heard the movie will actually be edited. There's apparently a scene in which there's a naked statue in the background. That scene has been digitally edited to add a robe to the statue.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fezmid Posted November 11, 2004 Share Posted November 11, 2004 It's what's called collateral damage in the war against indecency. I heard the movie will actually be edited. There's apparently a scene in which there's a naked statue in the background. That scene has been digitally edited to add a robe to the statue.... 113611[/snapback] That's completely false. Speilberg won't allow his movies to be edited (good for him). Why's everyone getting upset at the FCC in this case? As I posted earlier, this has NOTHING to do with the Superbowl halftime show. Superbowl: Expected to be clean, child-safe entertainment Private Ryan: Known to have gore, swear words, etc The FCC has never once said that they will fine anyone. They gave a "no comment" basically. The ABC affiliates are the ones being babies saying they won't show it. This is NOT the FCCs issue. To those who say "parents should be parents," that's exactly right - and exactly why the FCC handed out fines for the Superbowl "malfunction." Parents made the decision to say, "Yes, Billie can watch the Superbowl because it's a family sporting event," and then someone decides to get some free publicity and strip/be stripped on the stage. Completely different. So stop ragging on the FCC when this issue has nothing to do with them. CW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyWhite Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 anyone that's all that upset about this...can look straight to the White House. That's been an agenda for quite some time now. if you can't see it?...you're not looking. 4 more years, get used to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 anyone that's all that upset about this...can look straight to the White House. That's been an agenda for quite some time now. if you can't see it?...you're not looking. 4 more years, get used to it. 113725[/snapback] Yeah, the FCC didn't suck under President Clinton. Just ask Howard Stern. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lori Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 Last I checked, the FCC didn't even advise anyone against showing Saving Private Ryan uncut. Were they too, they would have by now. Not that I'm a big fan of the FCC...but it sounds like the affiliates are making this decision on their own without even discussing the matter with the FCC. Which kind of makes me wonder precisely why these stations are making that decision... 113316[/snapback] That's what I'm thinking, too. Interesting way for them to make a point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 The best explanation of what's happening is here There is a lot of unclarity about the new FCC regs. Thus, the stations (not owned by ABC) are preempting SPR on their own to force a fight about the standards. FCC is in the pickle. If it issues an ok before the airing, it's tantamount to a degree of censorship. But the stations won't air it without the pre-approval because they say they risk being fined if their air it. There you go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hollywood Donahoe Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 I'm glad Ashcroft is leaving. That guy is directly responsible for this new era of prudishness in the media and arts. Ashcroft runs the Justice Department and has nothing to do with the FCC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Griswold Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 Here's a good post indicating it's political on the part of stations. Althouse on Saving Private Ryan 1. This has nothing to do w/govt... the prog has aried before without any problems from the FCC 2. This has POSITIVELY nothing to do w/Ashcroft. heh heh heh... he's the Atty General for goodness sake. This mis-directed flame is what I'd expect from someone who lives in SF. Why not blame Karl Rove! 3. The seems to be a politcal stmt by the broadcasters, especially since ABC offered to cover the legal costs of any penealites. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SJ Bills backer Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 Damn - guess this means ABS will NOT be showing the movie "Shaving Ryan's privates"... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Gross Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 That's completely false. Speilberg won't allow his movies to be edited (good for him). Why's everyone getting upset at the FCC in this case? As I posted earlier, this has NOTHING to do with the Superbowl halftime show. Superbowl: Expected to be clean, child-safe entertainment Private Ryan: Known to have gore, swear words, etc The FCC has never once said that they will fine anyone. They gave a "no comment" basically. The ABC affiliates are the ones being babies saying they won't show it. This is NOT the FCCs issue. To those who say "parents should be parents," that's exactly right - and exactly why the FCC handed out fines for the Superbowl "malfunction." Parents made the decision to say, "Yes, Billie can watch the Superbowl because it's a family sporting event," and then someone decides to get some free publicity and strip/be stripped on the stage. Completely different. So stop ragging on the FCC when this issue has nothing to do with them. CW 113667[/snapback] It has everything to do with the Super Bowl half-time show. It became the "straw" that drove the FCC to over-react and come up with ludicrous fines for broadcasting "indecent" material (granted that Bill is stalled). What's indecent? Well, the FCC will tell you after you air it. Try to find out before (like the stations did), and you will get no comment. It doesn't matter who your target audience is, no matter who you expect to watch, it's who does watch, and if it is reported. http://www.fcc.gov/parents/content.html Though admittedly the true precedent was set by the "Bono" incident, where he dropped the F-Bomb at the Golden Globes. Though it was determined that the use was inappropriate, and would be fined under the current rules, the network was not fined, as they were not appropriately made aware of the new rules before the incident. BTW, I was kidding about the statue comment. An obvious bad effort to do an Ashcroft tie-in to the whole thing. Though the thought that seeing nudity and bad language somehow has a more dire consequence on our kids than violence really throws me. You can show what someone looks like dead, but you can't show them the way they came into the world. For all the hubbub about the Super Bowl halftime show, it was the trailer for "Van Helsing" that gave my daughter nightmares for a week.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 ABC is the most liberal station in the USA and they have an agenda. I doubt highly that there motive for showing Saving Private Ryan is altruistic. I feel ABC is merely trying to break down the production code using Veterans Day as an excuse. By showing foul language and violence, etc before 10 PM they are setting a precedent and then can accuse the FCC of a double standard when they are not allowed to show nudity, profanity, graphic violence in the future. Fug ABC- they suck! I see right through this half cocked scheme. As a sidenote I will never forgive ABC for ruining Sportscenter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fake-Fat Sunny Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 ABC is the most liberal station in the USA and they have an agenda. I doubt highly that there motive for showing Saving Private Ryan is altruistic. I feel ABC is merely trying to break down the production code using Veterans Day as an excuse. By showing foul language and violence, etc before 10 PM they are setting a precedent and then can accuse the FCC of a double standard when they are not allowed to show nudity, profanity, graphic violence in the future. Fug ABC- they suck! I see right through this half cocked scheme. As a sidenote I will never forgive ABC for ruining Sportscenter 113935[/snapback] Actually, to be accurate about this. ABC is not a station at all, it is a network which owns a few stations (there use to be a limit on the number they could actually pwn and control, but under de-regulation this limit has been removed or greatly curtailed) but has affliate agreements with hundreds of other companies which actually are the stations. ABC, like other networks takes a history of taking a variety of actions which for reasons one can see as altruistic or as curing favor with the public to make money are presented as ABC's desire to honor the troops which protect our country and ABC's ability to make big bucks. Generally, from what I see and hear a vast majority of folks seem to take a showing of Saving Private Ryan as honoring out troops. This is in part because of its realistic as movie's can get depiction of WWII and war in general (people for instance tend to use profanity when someone is trying to kill them). Moving along a spectrum, it was ABC which ran a showing of all the pictures of all of our troops who had paid the ultimate sacrifice for their country on Nightline. Some viewed this an appropriate honor and the least we could do given US citizens have been asked to do our part for the war effort by shopping rather than undergo the sacrifices our parents endured when our country was at war. Some stations refused to broadcast the reading as they took it as an attack on the war in Iraq. The entire issie is muddy on my view because there is no agreement among Americans as to what is right and what is wrong on this issue. We all generally have our individual opinions on what is right or what is wrong, but there is no consensus. The real issue it strikes me is not over the question of what is right and what is wrong, but what do we do as a society on issues for which there is no clear consensus, what do we do on issues where a strong majority may feel a particular way, but a significant minority feels differently and perhaps most difficult what do we do when even a small minority feels very strongly about their views but the majority disagrees with them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Florida_BillsFan Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 jeezuz god.... rent the damn movie if you're that pissed off. 113310[/snapback] .... and don't worry about having your rights trampled on - just go back to sleep. the Republicans will see to your morality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted November 12, 2004 Share Posted November 12, 2004 I heard recently, that the vocabulary of the average high school graduate these days is around 1,000 words, and it was close to 8,000 forty years ago. The influence of tv and the widespread use of obscenities were mentioned as factors. It sometimes seems like everywhere, in any situation (almost always inappropriate) the response to anything is "F-you" or "This Su*ks" or some such. Someone mentioned "Reality" shows - nice stuff - let's make everything in-your-face and confrontational. If someone dropped a coin and I picked it up to return to them, I would not be surprised if I was accused of theft, sworn at profusely, and threatened with violence. So "express yourself" - enjoy your freedom - but don't be surprised if in the future, your society is something akin to that depicted in the movie, "Blade Runner". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts