| Tuesday, March 09, 2004 |
Say What?
Or, "Won't someone please think of the children..." Several publications including Reuters, the Washington Post and Forbes.com reported that a U.S. Senate panel is moving to limit TV and radio indecency. Apparently the Senate committee voted unanimously "to tighten the reins on radio and television broadcasters that cross the line and air indecent material" by increasing the severity of the fines the FCC may impose on indecency violators and bringing license suspension into the mix. Here are a few of the choice excerpts that stood out to me as I read them (Forbes.com): The Senate bill includes measures reinstating tighter media ownership limits, pending a study, and another aimed at limiting violence on television.Um, yeah. Sure, they say "violence" but what they mean is "sex." This all got kicked into gear over a bare breast*--it's the sex, not the violence that's got the senators all worked up. Federal rules bar the airing of obscene speech and limit indecent material -- that containing sexual or excretory references in a patently offensive manner -- to late night hours, when children are less likely to be listening or watching.So does this mean the networks can't air the Presidential debates in prime time? After all, these will include a couple of boobs talking a lot of crap. "The country said 'I'm tired of it,'" said Senator Sam Brownback, a Kansas Republican and a primary author of the legislation. "I think we need to act."The country said what? The country did. Was I absent that day? 'cause...nobody asked me, and I'm part of the country. I sure as shit didn't say it. (I'm makin' a point, son.) The Reuters.com recap includes another direct quote from a senator regarding pay/subscription tv: "The truth is the majority of the problems that we're facing are on cable and direct (satellite) television," said Senator John Breaux, a Louisiana Democrat who offered the amendment to expand indecency regulations.Wow, now that's a statement. And one that was apparently made in response to some concerns express by members of the Senate committee that the attempted measure "could violate free speech rights." Oooooooohhhhhh, they're not going to try and drag the Constitution into this, are they? I mean, every time the government tries to censor speech or expression, someone's always there whipping out the Bill of Rights. So, in conclusion allow me to freely express myself: "FCC, F-U." *NOTE: It is the (missionary) position of this blogger that a breast (especially a 2-second flash of one covered) is not "sexual" in and of itself...and especially not Janet's, but I won't go there. ALSO NOTE: Senator Brownback, who recently commended President Bush for his endorsement of the Federal Marriage Amendment, has been a congressional member for a decade. Senator Breaux has been one for more than THREE decades having been elected for the first time in 1972 (I was 2!) when he was 28 years old. He's been suck on the for more than half his life. [ ] |
| Available
for purchase from Amazon.com Book and magazine list coming soon!
| |
