Political Correctness and the FCC

[NeoEllis]

Why is that?

[The Giant-Size Man Thing]

Because we allow the government to infringe upon in, Raz. That's the whole problem.

[Juan]

You are really, free to say anything. However, that doesn't mean there won't be consequences.

[NeoEllis]

And so the point is; if we do consider ourselves to be living in a free society, then we should do our best to remove these consequences to the greatest degree possible.

[Juan]

Well, think about it. I am technically free to say "I'm going to hunt down your sister and kill her in her sleep", however, there are consequences. You would likely ban me or perhaps call the cops, perhaps.

There are consequences for every action, for every action there is a reaction. Something people seem to forget.

[NeoEllis]

"I'm going to hunt down your sister and kill her in her sleep" is a threat, it's the same as the "Yelling 'Fire!' in a crowded theater” adage.

I'm speaking in terms of views on life and fictional events. Ergo, seeing a towel drop and the back of a naked woman cannot realistically harm a person.

[Ai]

Otaku said:

Ergo, seeing a towel drop and the back of a naked woman cannot realistically harm a person.

Oh, yes it does. You must be an ignorant, horrible person to allow nudity.






That was sarcasm, if you dumbasses couldn't tell.

[Infested Manae]

Jack said:

A minority, Goji. Even in such as censored a society we have, we've had plenty of very stupid children in lamence terms "losing it". I don't see a problem wiht mature programming, but I don't think we should have like a "mature" commercial in the middle of say Blues Clues or something. Why not have the mature programming around like eight or nine or something, when the more impressionable youth are sleeping? I mean, its good for both sides.

However, excessive vulgarity is a bit too much. I mean, I don't want to watch a normal show on TV like say, CSI, where all of a sudden one cop like turns to the other and says "I want to fuck your mothers cunt til she bleeds". I mean, really. Because you would be able to have stuff like that doesn't mean itwouldn't be tactless.

Come on. This is slippery slope through and through, and you know it. If regulations were removed, you wouldn't have Steve "looking for Blue's fucking clues." You wouldn't see stupid, non-sensical outburts like you 'quoted.' Maybe a guy getting grilled would tell them to 'leave him the fuck alone!' or something, but you could expect that. Kids shouldn't be watched CSI anyway, right? Nobody said we need to change schedules.

As to saying small children will do things despite what their parents tell them about it is completely stupid. Yeah, I could see it happening... to those parents who don't care enough to raise their kids and rely on the government to do it like they do now. Egads! That's right! We already said parents need to shape up for this to happen.

Also, saying about kids making out on the playgrounds... holy shit. That's even more slippery than your other arguements. Cripes. Make logically arguements, eh?

[The Giant-Size Man Thing]

I thought of it as a Strawman, myself. We weren't making an arguement for showing pornography to children, but he made it seem like we did and attacked a point we didn't create.

And I think Ai and I are kind of guilty of trying to use ourselves as examples, when we might be a minority. But when Zorak used the fact that his religious relatives voting for Kerry as a generalization for all Christians, even though there are hard numbers against this.

Article

Religious groups vowed that gay marriage would send evangelicals flocking to the voting booth. Exit polls showed that 22 percent of voters named "moral values" as the most important issue to them—ranking it higher than the economy and the Iraq war. Of them, 79 percent voted for President Bush. In Ohio, 24 percent of those surveyed identified themselves as "white evangelical/born-again Christians."

Other fun articles:

www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/11/05/1099547388194.html?from=storylhs&oneclick=true

www.freep.com/news/politics/values4e_20041104.htm

www.nationalreview.com/kudlow/kudlow200411031343.asp

[Raz V5.0]

Zorak, you only proved me right. The fact that there are consequences, doesn't make it free; it makes it restricted.

[Pkmatrix]

Raz said:

Zorak, you only proved me right. The fact that there are consequences, doesn't make it free; it makes it restricted.

But then...that makes freedom of ANYTHING impossible, because in order for it to be totally "free" you would have to eliminate ALL consequences, which is totally unrealistic and impossible. Unless you're living on a desert island by yourself. Then, the only consequences would be your own reactions to your own states.

I don't know what you imagine Freedom of Speech to be, Raz, but what you've described so far can only exist in a vacuum.

A minority, Goji. Even in such as censored a society we have, we've had plenty of very stupid children in lamence terms "losing it". I don't see a problem wiht mature programming, but I don't think we should have like a "mature" commercial in the middle of say Blues Clues or something. Why not have the mature programming around like eight or nine or something, when the more impressionable youth are sleeping? I mean, its good for both sides.

Okay, realistically, even IF all of the FCC's regulations were suspended, that would NEVER happen anyway. Why? Because there is no audience for a Mature Ad during that timeslot! There is no point in advertising a product aimed at 20 year olds to a bunch of 5-year olds! A lot of what determines when programming comes on is the advertising and who the advertising is aimed at. I'm sure this is common sense already, but I just felt compelled to shoot down a bad example.

[The Giant-Size Man Thing]

Yes, there are consequences for what you say, it's just that the Government cannot impose any consequences on you (unless you scream fire in a crowded building or something of that nature). It's right there in the fucking Constitution, for Cripe's sake!

Oh, and PK, maybe they would try getting to stoner demographic if they showed more mature advertisements during children's shows?

[Pkmatrix]

Well, technically, the FCC isn't restricting what we can say. They're telling us WHEN and WHERE to say it.

Wow...I'm suddenly reminded of those "Freedom Zones" from the Republican National Convention...

*Shivers*

I'm shocked nobody sued over that...

EDIT:

Oh, and PK, maybe they would try getting to stoner demographic if they showed more mature advertisements during children's shows?

I doubt that. There are better shows to advertise during to get stoners than Blue's Clues. I wouldn't know what shows, off the top of my head, but a simple survey would be able to...

Wait a second! STONERS?! What the hell is being advertised here...?!

[The Giant-Size Man Thing]

Pkmatrix said:

Well, technically, the FCC isn't restricting what we can say. They're telling us WHEN and WHERE to say it.

Wow...I'm suddenly reminded of those "Freedom Zones" from the Republican National Convention...

*Shivers*

I'm shocked nobody sued over that...

Still restricting. Telling you when and where you can say something is limiting your freedom of speech.

[Pkmatrix]

Gojira said:

Still restricting. Telling you when and where you can say something is limiting your freedom of speech.

I understand what you mean, but Constitution also says: "Congress has the power to do whatever is "necessary and proper" to carry out its enumerated powers". This "Necessary and Proper Clause" is the main basis for the existence of the FCC. Apparently, the FCC is needed in order to "regulate the flow of information through the communication mediums to the American public", meaning controlling in what manner (not really what) info comes through the TV, Radio, Movies, and (technically) the Internet.

Of course, thanks to the Freedom of the Press, the FCC can't touch anything printed. We have other things to deal with that. -_-

So, in short, yeah, you're right.