[quote="Sgt>Stackem":1ca7d]there has to be limits on public radio or TV. What those limits are is up for discussion. Howard Stren should be censored. ( I do listen to him) Limits have to be there. Now if it is a pay service then its no holds barred[/quote:1ca7d]
My only concern is that these limits are at the sole discretion of appointed, not elected, officials. So, as buttocks alluded to, if you have a religious zealot in the position of FCC chaiman, do you want this individual deciding what is OK for you to listen to or watch?
Man you need to release that dont let it build up like that
two words : jerk off
HAW HAW!
Blue Nuit = hardcore programming from Quebec on Friday nights rock:
heh I thought it was fancy canadian talk for blue nuts aka blue balls
"I'm a dog chasing cars. I wouldn't know what to do if I caught one. I just *do* things. I'm a wrench in the gears. I *hate* plans." - The Joker http://pressthenyckbutton.blogspot.com/
FCC should be more concerned about stuff like Viagra adds and Victoria's Secret commercials during baseball games and stuff which little kids actually watch.
Saving Private Ryan is no worse than desparate housewives or the OC and its the parents job to make sure the right aged kids watch these shows.
[quote="9mm BeRetTa":2bd49]FCC should be more concerned about stuff like Viagra adds and Victoria's Secret commercials during baseball games and stuff which little kids actually watch.
Saving Private Ryan is no worse than desparate housewives or the OC and its the parents job to make sure the right aged kids watch these shows.[/quote:2bd49]
It was an sexual explicit segment DURING a sporting game. . .this is their JOB. . .jesus - how is that hard to understand. All this "lighten up" bullshit - if it were something that bothered you you wouldnt have this same attitude. Folks dont understand its NOT about sex. . .its about decency standards and the ability to be able to watch a game without being forced to subscribe to whatever social mores the OTHER GUY wants.
[quote="TGB!":a899f]It was an sexual explicit segment DURING a sporting game. . .this is their JOB. . .jesus - how is that hard to understand. All this "lighten up" bullshit - if it were something that bothered you you wouldnt have this same attitude. Folks dont understand its NOT about sex. . .its about decency standards and the ability to be able to watch a game without being forced to subscribe to whatever social mores the OTHER GUY wants. [/quote:a899f]
Can you kinda reexplain that? I am having trouble following, just PM if you want. I think what you are trying to say makes sense, just... eh... I am not a very good reader. oOo:
[quote="TGB!":f8058]It was an sexual explicit segment DURING a sporting game. . .this is their JOB. . .jesus - how is that hard to understand. All this "lighten up" bullshit - if it were something that bothered you you wouldnt have this same attitude. Folks dont understand its NOT about sex. . .its about decency standards and the ability to be able to watch a game without being forced to subscribe to whatever social mores the OTHER GUY wants. [/quote:f8058]
I am not trying to deny that the super bowl incident was bad. Its the other things that are done wrong such as the fining of Howard Stern and the ABC movie problem.
And about that "if it were something that bothered you" I said what bothers me, the ads and commercials they play during sporting events, not the TV that comes on after 8pm (excluding super bowl, world series etc...)
There was no ABC movie problem (they self-censored themselves - and the FCC went out and said they would have had no problem with SPR airing) and Howard Stern CROSSED the line of decency which is spelled out in the laws set in 1979. He HAD It coming 9MM - for years. . .its just he enjoyed quite a bit of protection under Clintons FCC. . .what if someone put up hate speech against you and your family - and they said "ahh cmon - its just in good fun" - would you accept that? Or would you want some justice.