lfnetwork.com mark read register faq members calendar
View Poll Results: What are y'all opinions on the FCC?
I hate it; time to take it outback and have it shot 3 20.00%
It's ok 3 20.00%
We need the FCC; for balance or to protect children's innocence 8 53.33%
It's got to go 1 6.67%
Voters: 15. You may not vote on this poll


Thread: Ok, what are y'all opinions on the FCC
Thread Tools Display Modes
Post a new thread. Sorry, this thread is closed. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Old 11-22-2006, 07:00 AM   #81
Ray Jones
[armleglegarmhead]
 
Ray Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: digital
Posts: 8,256
10 year veteran! LF Jester Helpful! Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jae Onasi
Well, Jimbo would be very upset if I went 'pissing' with another person, especially a man.
I, err..

So, .. what if Jimbo is with you two? Plus the waitress, the miaaoouuuw-cat, a frog, a Maglite and maybe a flower?



--

Hm. I personally have no problem with nudity, sexuality or cursing in general.

Cursing *is* use of speech, or freedom of speech. As I see it, proper use of language also includes the use of words like "****" and whatnot. Note: proper, not stupid.

However, I do not think it is appropriate (or proper use) to use this freedom of speech regardless of where I am, who I am talking to, etc. Also, the concept of morality applies to speech, too, so it maybe freedom of speech to spread Nazi ideas, but it's really amoral to do so.

And while I don't see a reason to "ban" the word "****" from my personal vocabulary, I see a lot of very valid reasons to use different phrasing in normal life to express myself. Some of my closest friends, however, are most likely to hear "dirty stuff" coming from me, but rather with deeper meanings around it than stupid "give me that ****ing microphone you m********ing ****ing suckerbada** son of a **otch" crap.

Also, being a father, I surely don't want my daughter to curse all the time, or to curse at all, but I am the hell aware of the fact that she will have contact to swearing, and will use it, so I think I'll let her know there is a proper way to do so and a wrong one. And one thing to achieve that is not to keep those things totally away from her, so she knows how to handle "expressive phrasing" right, right from the beginning. Of course, the use of words like "****", where she isn't able to differ between the "meanings" yet, would be most unfortunate and is therefore not practised. She just doesn't know enough about language to use those "proper". "Spoot", however, is something we use more often instead. :]

Basically, I teach her not to parrot everything she hears without thinking about.

Do I want or need bad language on TV? No. Except for some good movies, I've not seen "good" cursing on TV yet (it also isn't necessary), as it usually only occurs in those so called "afternoon talk shows", and seriously, these are blatant, ignorant **** and don't provide good use of language in general. And no, you cannot describe that more to the point.
I also doubt that Spongebob will ever provide extensive use of cursing, nor do I think that any discovery channel will do, except for documentary reasons, but that would be okay on the other hand. So that's basically our TV-prog anyway.

Naykeytey? I would not mind if my daughter sees a movie where people have no clothes on. Even the "normal" or documentary demonstration of sexual acts, genitals or sexuality would be no problem at all. However, useless, inappropriate "sexification" of things or topics, inappropriate, maybe rather unnatural exposure of bodyparts, all that goes the way of "saying oh-no and zapping away" rather than isolate her from it, which I cannot ensure totally, anyways. Also, this way I can avoid the stress of having to be all careful about those things all the time. My daughter will change the channel on her own (maybe also because it's not Mr. Squarepants, actually ;~).

So again, I want her to be able to deal with it, properly, instead of shying off.

As for the Superbowl incident, I don't see a problem with it, really, but seriously this is one stupid action, taken mainly to gain attention, in a way it shouldn't be done, especially not on an event like this, or by "celebrities" like those. My daughter will not be harmed by seeing such things, but learn from me that those things are useless and don't deserve attention. In the end this is what's the aim of it, attention, so "they" won't get it. A valid lesson, I think.


Overall, I don't mind censoring, as I have enough imagination to get over it, but by all means, it's completely useless to "protect" my children, not only because it's incomplete and inconsequent and there are tons of other "sources of evil things" which are not censored, but also because this is kind of overprotective behaviour. The way to go is not bleeping content, but changing content.

--

So, err.. me and my girl.. you know.. we go to the toilet now.



Last edited by Ray Jones; 11-22-2006 at 07:19 AM.
Ray Jones is offline   you may:
Old 11-24-2006, 12:35 AM   #82
Jae Onasi
Antiquis temporibus, nati tibi similes in rupibus ventosissimis exponebantur ad necem
 
Jae Onasi's Avatar
 
Status: Super Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 10,916
Current Game: Guild Wars 2, VtMB, TOR
Alderaan News Holopics contributor Helpful! LucasCast staff Veteran Fan Fic Author 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ray Jones
I, err..

So, .. what if Jimbo is with you two? Plus the waitress, the miaaoouuuw-cat, a frog, a Maglite and maybe a flower?
I don't do menageries or menages a sept.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ray Jones
Hm. I personally have no problem with nudity, sexuality or cursing in general.
I don't have a particular problem with it in general, if it's done in the appropriate setting. We're built to have sex as part of our normal functions. A naked body's a naked body. Now, I do object to porn--it uses and abuses women (and sometimes men and children) for someone else's perverse gratification. I'm also not too excited about using sex--and always sexy women--to sell everything from SUVs to diet soda. I think this important function in life is worth a little more respect than being associated with something like a can of cheap beer.
Swearing--we don't allow them to use that language right now and we explain why to the degree that they can understand. I want them to learn how to speak appropriately in any given situation. When they reach an appropriate age, that restriction will be relaxed once they learn when and where expletives can be used or should not be used. Sometimes that means saying 'Mama just used a word that we really shouldn't be using.' There was one time when I nearly got hit by a car and my then-3 year old son was in the carseat in back. I was so scared about the near-accident that I let out a rather loud and emphatic Sh**! My son promptly and quite gleefully repeated, "Sh**! Sh**! Sh**!" It was all I could do not to laugh because it was so funny, but I knew if I did, he'd keep saying it....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ray Jones
However, I do not think it is appropriate (or proper use) to use this freedom of speech regardless of where I am, who I am talking to, etc.
On a purely rhetorical note just because it got brought up here--just because we have the 'right' to do something doesn't make it right to do so.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ray Jones
Naykeytey? I would not mind if my daughter sees a movie where people have no clothes on. Even the "normal" or documentary demonstration of sexual acts, genitals or sexuality would be no problem at all.
Depends on the context for me. Birthing babies? No problem. Explaining how body parts work? No problem. Watching Sharon Stone and Michael Douglas go at it in Basic Instinct? Not happening for them, even though I've seen the movie.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ray Jones
However, useless, inappropriate "sexification" of things or topics, inappropriate, maybe rather unnatural exposure of bodyparts, all that goes the way of "saying oh-no and zapping away" rather than isolate her from it,
So again, I want her to be able to deal with it, properly, instead of shying off.
Right now Spongebob and Bob and Larry and computer games are The Thing (though we really minimize the TV time). My son's at the age where kissing a girl is just sick and wrong (he covers his eyes and says 'Euwww, gross!' if he sees hubby and me kissing), so there's no danger of him watching a racy flick for any length of time. However it's still my responsibility to make sure that what they see in our home is appropriate. I can teach them to change the channel all I want, but it's better if I don't allow it in the house to begin with, there's no temptation issues because they won't see it. We're also careful about our kids not going in other people's homes--one of the kids mine play with is allowed as a 6 year old to view R-rated slasher movies, which I think is entirely inappropriate. Since I can't guarantee that my kids won't be exposed to something else inappropriate at their house, we've just decided they should all play outside instead. It's much better if they get some exercise and fresh air, anyway, and in this day and age, it's hard to separate the predators from the good guys. As the kids get older and spend more time with friends, we'll reinforce what we consider appropriate material and how to handle the inappropriate stuff. Mostly I plan on dealing with it in the junior/senior high years by having a safe place at our house for friends to come over and play games/do computer stuff/eat my fridge bare.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ray Jones
My daughter will not be harmed by seeing such things,
I don't know--had my son seen that, he would have learned that some people who are celebrities think it's OK to rip clothes off in public to get attention (and actually, it was her dancers that I found dressed more slutty and dancing in a very provocative manner). It's not something I want him to experience at this point in his life. Besides, it was just a badly done half-time show anyway, even if she hadn't pulled her stunt.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ray Jones
Overall, I don't mind censoring, as I have enough imagination to get over it, but by all means, it's completely useless to "protect" my children, not only because it's incomplete and inconsequent and there are tons of other "sources of evil things" which are not censored, but also because this is kind of overprotective behaviour.
It's not only useful to protect my children by censoring some language and content, regardless of incompleteness, but also it's my responsibility as their parent. I refuse to give up my duty to protect them just because I won't be able to do it 100% perfectly. I still need to try, even if I can't do everything perfect.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ray Jones
The way to go is not bleeping content, but changing content.
I agree with you completely on that, which is why I choose channels/videos/games without offensive content for my kids, and they don't watch things like CSI and Criminal Minds. I'm not terribly optimistic about the media getting less offensive, since I've only seen them getting worse over the years instead of better.


From MST3K's spoof of "Hercules Unchained"--heard as Roman medic soldiers carry off an unconscious Greek Hercules on a 1950's Army green canvas stretcher: "Hi, we're IX-I-I. Did somebody dial IX-I-I?"

Read The Adventures of Jolee Bindo and see the amazing Peep Surgery
Story WIP: The Dragonfighters
My blog: Confessions of a Geeky Mom--Latest post: Security Alerts!
Love Star Trek AND gaming? Check out Lotus Fleet.

Jae Onasi is offline   you may:
Old 11-24-2006, 02:01 AM   #83
Windu Chi
Banned
 
Windu Chi's Avatar
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Getting revenge on that traitor, Anakin.
Posts: 882
Cool Guy

Well, I have decided to be nice and not to leave you hanging, Jae.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jae Onasi
I'm not mad at you in the least. I just disagree with your opinion. Disagreement is not the same thing as anger.
Well, the way you came in here and snapped at me, really made me think so.
So, I had to go cool off a bit.
Before, I responded to your comments.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jae Onasi
Allowing porn and an endless parade of swear words _would_ be a corrupting influence on my kids. I don't want them using cuss words more frequently than any other kind of word.
You seem to think that my opinions is going to change the FCC rules.
They aren't going to change nothing because of my opinions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jae Onasi
Because you started the thread. Surely you have a reason for not liking censors?
Saying 'I think spinach sucks' is my opinion. Stating 'I think spinach sucks because the smell makes my so nauseous I want to barf' is explaining why I don't like spinach. So why don't you like censors? What is it about censors that you find so objectionable?
I don't hate you. I just want to understand how you developed your opinion.
As I have told Devon, censors make the movies and some programs, I watch seems artificial to me.
Now, if I got to explain this again, then it's pointless.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jae Onasi
You can have your opinions, but you need to also have a good reason for holding those opinions and be able to defend them.
Also, I'm not saying you are corrupting my kids. However, seeing sex, frank nudity, and hearing the f-bomb every third word is not good for my kids. They'll learn about sex when it's appropriate for them, not when the media decides it wants to titillate its audience for yet another buck of advertising items that have absolutely nothing to do with sex. They'll hear cuss words out in the real world, but they won't be using them at our house, at least not in my earshot, and they won't be getting additional and wholly unnecessary further exposure to it on TV.
The media industry has decided on a rating system, but someone has to enforce it so that I can trust that when a package or the warning at the beginning of a show says it doesn't have off-color language or naked people, that it really doesn't have those things. Otherwise, the rating is worthless.
The way you have responded here. It seem like you are telling me this, because it is like it's my burden responsibility alone, for the determination of what your kids watch on television.

Last edited by windu6; 11-24-2006 at 02:53 AM.
Windu Chi is offline   you may:
Old 11-24-2006, 02:52 AM   #84
Emperor Devon
36 Wings, 365 Eyes
 
Emperor Devon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 5,479
Current Game: Ass Effect
Contest winner - Fan Fiction 
Since my nemesis is ofline and I can't resist arguing...

Quote:
Originally Posted by windu6
They aren't going to change nothing because of my opinions.
Completely irrelevant.

Quote:
Originally Posted by windu6
As I have told Devon, censors make the movies and some programs, I watch seems artificial to me.
All right, you've finally given a reason. Now how is it a bad thing for movies and programs to seem artifical? Most already are.

Quote:
Originally Posted by windu6
The way you have responded here. It seem like you are telling me this, because it is like it's my burden responsibility alone, for the determination of what your kids watch on television.
Were your opinions real, it would affect what Jae's children see. (Or should I say no longer see?)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabretooth
We will be great failures one day, you and I
Emperor Devon is offline   you may:
Old 11-24-2006, 03:03 AM   #85
Windu Chi
Banned
 
Windu Chi's Avatar
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Getting revenge on that traitor, Anakin.
Posts: 882
Cool Guy

Oh, my annoying nemesis return for another battle.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Emperor Devon
Completely irrelevant.
Now, how is this irrelevant Devon ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Emperor Devon
All right, you've finally given a reason. Now how is it a bad thing for movies and programs to seem artifical? Most already are.
If you still don't understand, now.
Then it's pointless !



Quote:
Originally Posted by Emperor Devon
Were your opinions real, it would affect what Jae's children see. (Or should I say no longer see?)
It's not my damn responsibiliy for what her children see on T.V. .
Damn!
Windu Chi is offline   you may:
Old 11-24-2006, 03:46 AM   #86
Emperor Devon
36 Wings, 365 Eyes
 
Emperor Devon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 5,479
Current Game: Ass Effect
Contest winner - Fan Fiction 
Quote:
Originally Posted by windu6
Oh, my annoying nemesis return for another battle.
That title's taken.

Quote:
Originally Posted by windu6
Now, how is this irrelevant Devon ?
Because you obviously disagree with it, or you wouldn't have started this thread. People's interest in matters they can't change also has no relation to the FCC.

Quote:
Originally Posted by windu6
If you still don't understand, now.
How are movies and programs being artifical a bad thing? If you're correct, you should be able to provide me with reasons.

Quote:
Originally Posted by windu6
It's not my damn responsibiliy for what her children see on T.V.
Jae's probably very happy about that.

My point is, if your opinions were real, they would affect what many children see. Debates over issues like these deal with hypotheticals over a large scale.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabretooth
We will be great failures one day, you and I
Emperor Devon is offline   you may:
Old 11-24-2006, 06:11 AM   #87
Windu Chi
Banned
 
Windu Chi's Avatar
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Getting revenge on that traitor, Anakin.
Posts: 882
Cool Guy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Emperor Devon
That title's taken.
Face it sith lord, you have two nemesis now.
What? Don't tell me the great emperor can't handle two adversaries?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Emperor Devon
Because you obviously disagree with it, or you wouldn't have started this thread. People's interest in matters they can't change also has no relation to the FCC.
You know, other people here have comments why you don't go battle them.
Also what the hell do you mean, People's interest?
Haven't I been saying, they aren't going to change nothing for 3rd time.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Emperor Devon
How are movies and programs being artifical a bad thing? If you're correct, you should be able to provide me with reasons.
What do you mean, if I'm correct?
It's damn obvious that you don't agree with my opinions.
So, where do the ''If'' come from?



Quote:
Originally Posted by Emperor Devon
My point is, if your opinions were real, they would affect what many children see. Debates over issues like these deal with hypotheticals over a large scale.
Of course, it will affect...
So, what are you saying, that I don't care about the children.
Also they aren't going to change nothing, so no fear.
And this is relevant to the debating battle we are currently having, Devon.

Last edited by windu6; 11-24-2006 at 06:30 AM.
Windu Chi is offline   you may:
Old 11-24-2006, 06:48 AM   #88
Emperor Devon
36 Wings, 365 Eyes
 
Emperor Devon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 5,479
Current Game: Ass Effect
Contest winner - Fan Fiction 
Quote:
Originally Posted by windu6
Face it sith lord, {snip}
Impertinent.

Quote:
Originally Posted by windu6
You know, other people here have comments why you don't go battle them.
If I disagreed with them, I would. I don't argue with people based on who they are.

Quote:
Originally Posted by windu6
What do you mean, if I'm correct?
It's one way to use the English language. My sentence can be translated as "You aren't correct if you have no reasons."

Grammar aside, you have not answered my question. How is it a bad thing for movies and programs to be artifical?

For once, give me some geuine reasons why it's not good for movies and such to be artifical. Is it because the entertainment value of them goes down, for instance?

Quote:
Originally Posted by windu6
So, what are you saying, that I don't care about the children.
From my perspective and those of other parents, you don't seem to in this matter. How could it not be bad for children to see sex?

Quote:
Originally Posted by windu6
Also they aren't going to change nothing, so no fear.
Either going so long without sleep has finally gotten to me, or did you really mean that what children see doesn't influence their behavior?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabretooth
We will be great failures one day, you and I

Last edited by Emperor Devon; 11-24-2006 at 04:56 PM. Reason: lack of sleep
Emperor Devon is offline   you may:
Old 11-24-2006, 07:11 AM   #89
Windu Chi
Banned
 
Windu Chi's Avatar
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Getting revenge on that traitor, Anakin.
Posts: 882
Cool Guy

Ok, wait a minute! You still here!
Don't you have a empire to run.
Or, it's in shambles?



Quote:
Originally Posted by Emperor Devon
If I disagreed with them, I would. I don't argue with people
Uh, wow! What do you call this then?
It's a damn argument, which is a debate.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Emperor Devon
It's one way to use the English language. My sentence can be translated as "You aren't correct if you have no reasons."

Grammar aside, you have not answered my question. How is it a bad thing for movies and programs to be artifical?

For once, give me some geuine reasons why it's not good for movies and such to be artifical. Is it because the entertainment value of them goes down, for instance?
Yes, and the realism for me.
Windu Chi is offline   you may:
Old 11-24-2006, 06:32 PM   #90
Emperor Devon
36 Wings, 365 Eyes
 
Emperor Devon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 5,479
Current Game: Ass Effect
Contest winner - Fan Fiction 
Quote:
Originally Posted by windu6
Uh, wow! What do you call this then?
On my part, it was a lack of sleep and a typo.

Quote:
Originally Posted by windu6
Yes, and the realism for me.
Do you think it's bad for children to see extreme violence or sex?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabretooth
We will be great failures one day, you and I
Emperor Devon is offline   you may:
Old 11-24-2006, 06:47 PM   #91
Windu Chi
Banned
 
Windu Chi's Avatar
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Getting revenge on that traitor, Anakin.
Posts: 882
Cool Guy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Emperor Devon
On my part, it was a lack of sleep and a typo.



Do you think it's bad for children to see extreme violence or sex?
Violence no; sex, yes of course it is bad for little children, now teenagers are going to have sex, if you don't believe that then you're na´ve.
Now, I'm assuming you're going to debate me on the violence response.

Last edited by windu6; 11-24-2006 at 07:21 PM.
Windu Chi is offline   you may:
Old 11-24-2006, 08:38 PM   #92
Nancy Allen``
Banned
 
Nancy Allen``'s Avatar
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,948
The beheading of Nick Berg, explicit detail of what the Nazis subjected the Jews to, the graphic power of the Ghoul II engine used in Soldier of Fortune, are these things we should allow children to see?
Nancy Allen`` is offline   you may:
Old 11-24-2006, 08:48 PM   #93
Windu Chi
Banned
 
Windu Chi's Avatar
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Getting revenge on that traitor, Anakin.
Posts: 882
Cool Guy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nancy Allen``
The beheading of Nick Berg, explicit detail of what the Nazis subjected the Jews to, the graphic power of the Ghoul II engine used in Soldier of Fortune, are these things we should allow children to see?
Nick Berg beheading, hell no, I'm not even going to watch that, Soldier of Fortune is a game, only children with mental problems probably shouldn't watch it.
But for normal kids I don't think it is a big deal.
Well, for the the Holocaust, Nancy.
I have been watching that since I was 10 years of age.

Now, I hope you aren't mad with me now, Nancy.

Last edited by windu6; 11-24-2006 at 09:03 PM.
Windu Chi is offline   you may:
Old 11-24-2006, 09:20 PM   #94
Nancy Allen``
Banned
 
Nancy Allen``'s Avatar
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,948
No, but you understand what people are saying in terms of not exposing children to thid type of material?
Nancy Allen`` is offline   you may:
Old 11-24-2006, 09:23 PM   #95
Windu Chi
Banned
 
Windu Chi's Avatar
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Getting revenge on that traitor, Anakin.
Posts: 882
Cool Guy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nancy Allen``
No, but you understand what people are saying in terms of not exposing children to thid type of material?
Of course, I understand!
Windu Chi is offline   you may:
Old 11-24-2006, 09:27 PM   #96
Samuel Dravis
 
Samuel Dravis's Avatar
 
Status: Moderator
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 4,973
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nancy Allen``
The beheading of Nick Berg
Interesting point. All those videos, and the videos of soldiers being KIA'd, civilians being 'collateral damage' etc., are censored. Should they be? Should we be able to avoid the negative consequences of our actions by putting our collective heads into the ground? I mean, it's a lot easier to ignore a number on a death chart than it is seeing such a video. You can justify the people dying as comparatively 'small' numbers, but could you actually say that something like that happening in a video is a good thing?


"Words are deeds." - Wittgenstein
Samuel Dravis is offline   you may:
Old 11-24-2006, 09:27 PM   #97
Mace MacLeod
Food-based rocker
 
Mace MacLeod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Somewhere else. Probably.
Posts: 1,096
Current Game: World of Warcraft
Contest winner - Fan Fiction 
Well, there's another special case of selective censorship but of course, it's the White House doing it, not the FCC. All those flag-draped coffins of US soldiers being flown back in are never shown either. This has nothing to do with decency or standards or morals of any kind; it's that the White House doesn't want to remind the voters that their people are dying on a daily basis. Maybe it isn't the FCC you should be worried about...


Be considerate to others or I will bite your torso and give you a disease!
Mace MacLeod is offline   you may:
Old 11-24-2006, 10:20 PM   #98
Jae Onasi
Antiquis temporibus, nati tibi similes in rupibus ventosissimis exponebantur ad necem
 
Jae Onasi's Avatar
 
Status: Super Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 10,916
Current Game: Guild Wars 2, VtMB, TOR
Alderaan News Holopics contributor Helpful! LucasCast staff Veteran Fan Fic Author 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mace MacLeod
Well, there's another special case of selective censorship but of course, it's the White House doing it, not the FCC. All those flag-draped coffins of US soldiers being flown back in are never shown either. This has nothing to do with decency or standards or morals of any kind; it's that the White House doesn't want to remind the voters that their people are dying on a daily basis. Maybe it isn't the FCC you should be worried about...
There are a few reasons for not showing the coffins.
1. Respect for the dead
2. Respect for the families of the dead (I wouldn't want the world to have seen my great uncle's coffin on TV)
3. Morale
4. Sometimes the military hasn't been able to reach all the family members (happens sometimes when people are on vacation, are ill in the hospital, are staying with other members of the family, on business trips, that kind of thing). They don't want people learning about the deaths in their families by watching a news channel or seeing a picture of their loved one's coffin on the internet.


From MST3K's spoof of "Hercules Unchained"--heard as Roman medic soldiers carry off an unconscious Greek Hercules on a 1950's Army green canvas stretcher: "Hi, we're IX-I-I. Did somebody dial IX-I-I?"

Read The Adventures of Jolee Bindo and see the amazing Peep Surgery
Story WIP: The Dragonfighters
My blog: Confessions of a Geeky Mom--Latest post: Security Alerts!
Love Star Trek AND gaming? Check out Lotus Fleet.

Jae Onasi is offline   you may:
Old 11-24-2006, 10:29 PM   #99
Samuel Dravis
 
Samuel Dravis's Avatar
 
Status: Moderator
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 4,973
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jae Onasi
There are a few reasons for not showing the coffins.
1. Respect for the dead
Personally I value the living more.

Quote:
2. Respect for the families of the dead (I wouldn't want the world to have seen my great uncle's coffin on TV)
4. Sometimes the military hasn't been able to reach all the family members (happens sometimes when people are on vacation, are ill in the hospital, are staying with other members of the family, on business trips, that kind of thing). They don't want people learning about the deaths in their families by watching a news channel or seeing a picture of their loved one's coffin on the internet.
They needn't be identified.

Quote:
3. Morale
I'd ask what purpose this morale serves but that'd go a bit far from the original topic. I don't think there's a good reason that this type of censorship should occur, and I think it would be a good thing for reality to hit people once in a while.


"Words are deeds." - Wittgenstein
Samuel Dravis is offline   you may:
Old 11-25-2006, 12:33 AM   #100
Nancy Allen``
Banned
 
Nancy Allen``'s Avatar
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,948
I'm not sure about the thread heading into a 'we should be showing things that make America look bad' direction, but since the question of whether or not news events, footage of war, ect should be edited, here's my answer. There's a lot of good reasons for war footage to be either edited or simply not shown, and not just for the reasons already given, or because it might make America look bad. Remember Saving Private Ryan? Remember the footage of soldiers being ripped apart by bullets, blown up, burnt alive, one survivor searching for and picking up his arm, medics desperately trying to save them as their entrails are spilling out, priests given them the last rites? I doubt anybody would want their families confronted by such images as they have their dinner watching the evening news. There's also the issue of what news footage might be captured that were it broadcast might tell the enemy something. One such example would be if full unedited footage of a Delta Force mission could be taken and shown, people could watch it and pick up on tactics Delta uses, what weapons and equipment they use, formation, how they attack a target, ect. This isn't just an excuse, games such as Rainbow Six were questioned because of how realistic they were on whether terrorists could possibly use them as a training tool, or to counter stratergies against them. To be honest I consider the likelihood of someone being able to become an effective soldier, or an effective gunsmen, from reading a book or playing a game to be quite low, but there's research in that field, there's serious questions about this after Columbine, enough so for people in the military to take the matter seriously, so maybe.
Nancy Allen`` is offline   you may:
Old 11-25-2006, 12:38 AM   #101
Emperor Devon
36 Wings, 365 Eyes
 
Emperor Devon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 5,479
Current Game: Ass Effect
Contest winner - Fan Fiction 
Quote:
Originally Posted by windu6
sex, yes of course it is bad for little children,
Okay... Explain how this is consistent with your views that there should be absolutely no form of censoring. If something on TV is bad for children to see, it's only logical it should be blocked in some way.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabretooth
We will be great failures one day, you and I
Emperor Devon is offline   you may:
Old 11-25-2006, 12:43 AM   #102
Samnmax221
I never Kipled
 
Samnmax221's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: My hovercraft is full of eels
Posts: 5,784
Current Game: Sex with women
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emperor Devon
Okay... Explain how this is consistent with your views that there should be absolutely no form of censoring. If something on TV is bad for children to see, it's only logical it should be blocked in some way.
And the parents can do that, unless of course they are incompetent, and in that case it isn't my problem, it isn't your problem, and it's certainly not the governments problem.
Samnmax221 is offline   you may:
Old 11-25-2006, 01:30 AM   #103
Samuel Dravis
 
Samuel Dravis's Avatar
 
Status: Moderator
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 4,973
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nancy Allen``
I'm not sure about the thread heading into a 'we should be showing things that make America look bad' direction, but since the question of whether or not news events, footage of war, ect should be edited, here's my answer. There's a lot of good reasons for war footage to be either edited or simply not shown, and not just for the reasons already given, or because it might make America look bad. Remember Saving Private Ryan? Remember the footage of soldiers being ripped apart by bullets, blown up, burnt alive, one survivor searching for and picking up his arm, medics desperately trying to save them as their entrails are spilling out, priests given them the last rites? I doubt anybody would want their families confronted by such images as they have their dinner watching the evening news.
No, they wouldn't want to watch that. I agree. I hold that the way that the U.S. media portrays the war right now, it's all too easy to be complacent about the fact we're even in a war. The war doesn't affect anyone if they don't want to let themselves be affected. They will watch their newscasts, read their newspaper, and not one thing in it will be abnormally disturbing to them. Because that's the way they want it.

I don't really want to see guts on the TV either. In fact, it's not really necessary. All it would need is to convey to the viewer that someone just died. That it wasn't just a number under the list marked 'casualties.' There are some of this type of videos on the internet, taken from bomber planes and the like. It's incredibly disturbing even though there is no blood or gore visible.

Quote:
There's also the issue of what news footage might be captured that were it broadcast might tell the enemy something. One such example would be if full unedited footage of a Delta Force mission could be taken and shown, people could watch it and pick up on tactics Delta uses, what weapons and equipment they use, formation, how they attack a target, ect. This isn't just an excuse, games such as Rainbow Six were questioned because of how realistic they were on whether terrorists could possibly use them as a training tool, or to counter stratergies against them. To be honest I consider the likelihood of someone being able to become an effective soldier, or an effective gunsmen, from reading a book or playing a game to be quite low, but there's research in that field, there's serious questions about this after Columbine, enough so for people in the military to take the matter seriously, so maybe.
The military has to take any scenario seriously, whether it warrants it or not. They even have a plan for invading Canada. Still, if there was real concern about it I'd have thought they would shut down places like this first.


"Words are deeds." - Wittgenstein
Samuel Dravis is offline   you may:
Old 11-25-2006, 01:33 AM   #104
Samuel Dravis
 
Samuel Dravis's Avatar
 
Status: Moderator
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 4,973
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nancy Allen``
I'm not sure about the thread heading into a 'we should be showing things that make America look bad' direction, but since the question of whether or not news events, footage of war, ect should be edited, here's my answer. There's a lot of good reasons for war footage to be either edited or simply not shown, and not just for the reasons already given, or because it might make America look bad. Remember Saving Private Ryan? Remember the footage of soldiers being ripped apart by bullets, blown up, burnt alive, one survivor searching for and picking up his arm, medics desperately trying to save them as their entrails are spilling out, priests given them the last rites? I doubt anybody would want their families confronted by such images as they have their dinner watching the evening news.
No, they wouldn't want to watch that. I agree. I hold that the way that the U.S. media portrays the war right now, it's all too easy to be complacent about the fact we're even in a war. The war doesn't affect anyone if they don't want to let themselves be affected. They will watch their newscasts, read their newspaper, and not one thing in it will be abnormally disturbing to them. Because that's the way they want it.

I don't really want to see guts on the TV either. In fact, it's not really necessary. All it would need is to convey to the viewer that someone just died. That it wasn't just a number under the list marked 'casualties,' 'kills,' 'estimated civilian deaths.' There are some of this type of videos on the internet, taken from bomber planes and the like. It's incredibly disturbing even though there is no blood or gore visible. I mean disturbing in that antiabortion video that's floating around somewhere kind of way.

Quote:
There's also the issue of what news footage might be captured that were it broadcast might tell the enemy something. One such example would be if full unedited footage of a Delta Force mission could be taken and shown, people could watch it and pick up on tactics Delta uses, what weapons and equipment they use, formation, how they attack a target, ect. This isn't just an excuse, games such as Rainbow Six were questioned because of how realistic they were on whether terrorists could possibly use them as a training tool, or to counter stratergies against them. To be honest I consider the likelihood of someone being able to become an effective soldier, or an effective gunsmen, from reading a book or playing a game to be quite low, but there's research in that field, there's serious questions about this after Columbine, enough so for people in the military to take the matter seriously, so maybe.
The military has to take any scenario seriously, whether it warrants it or not. They even have a plan for invading Canada. Still, if there was any real concern about it I'd have thought they would shut down places like this first.


"Words are deeds." - Wittgenstein
Samuel Dravis is offline   you may:
Old 11-25-2006, 01:36 AM   #105
Windu Chi
Banned
 
Windu Chi's Avatar
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Getting revenge on that traitor, Anakin.
Posts: 882
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by Emperor Devon
Okay... Explain how this is consistent with your views that there should be absolutely no form of censoring. If something on TV is bad for children to see, it's only logical it should be blocked in some way.

This is not my problem, what other people kids see.
I'm still not going to change my mind, that I don't want no censors in my movies and tv programs.
So, you're just going to have to deal with it.
But, for violence I still don't see the big deal, Myself, my sister and brother with their friends grew up looking at violence on TV, we didn't turn out evil or violent.
Also growing up in the hood, violence was a routine phenomenon.
But, by not being inherently violent don't mean we are pure pacifists; me, my sister and brother will surely kick serious ass, to protect ourselves.

Last edited by windu6; 11-25-2006 at 02:26 AM.
Windu Chi is offline   you may:
Old 11-25-2006, 01:37 AM   #106
Samnmax221
I never Kipled
 
Samnmax221's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: My hovercraft is full of eels
Posts: 5,784
Current Game: Sex with women
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samuel Dravis
The military has to take any scenario seriously, whether it warrants it or not. They even have a plan for invading Canada. Still, if there was real concern about it I'd have thought they would shut down places like this first.
Well , War Plan Orange was shelved for years. It eventually did come in handy, albeit I don't think I could ever imagine Canada being anything like early 20th century Japan.
Samnmax221 is offline   you may:
Old 11-25-2006, 01:54 AM   #107
Nancy Allen``
Banned
 
Nancy Allen``'s Avatar
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,948
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samuel Dravis
No, they wouldn't want to watch that. I agree. I hold that the way that the U.S. media portrays the war right now, it's all too easy to be complacent about the fact we're even in a war. The war doesn't affect anyone if they don't want to let themselves be affected. They will watch their newscasts, read their newspaper, and not one thing in it will be abnormally disturbing to them. Because that's the way they want it.
There's so many reasons for us to be blase to it all, from being desensitised by the media, films and video games, blind support or opposition to war, not knowing anyone serving over there. On some level I agree that we choose to shut it out because we hear about it so much, but I think it'd be very sad if it were true that we simply stopped caring about it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Samuel Dravis
I don't really want to see guts on the TV either. In fact, it's not really necessary. All it would need is to convey to the viewer that someone just died. That it wasn't just a number under the list marked 'casualties,' 'kills,' 'estimated civilian deaths.' There are some of this type of videos on the internet, taken from bomber planes and the like. It's incredibly disturbing even though there is no blood or gore visible. I mean disturbing in that antiabortion video that's floating around somewhere kind of way.
Mulan, if you hadn't seen it, shows the aftermath of battles including villages burnt to the ground and dead soldiers in the snow. Even though there's nothing graphic about these images they're effective, I read especially on older audiances because they have a much better grasp on life, death and war. I'm not sure if showing anything like this would be of any great benefit, I'd want to respect the families of those who had died, but by the same token and to be fair you can use these arguements for things such as showing Insurgent attacks and building a case for how evil they are.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Samuel Dravis
The military has to take any scenario seriously, whether it warrants it or not. They even have a plan for invading Canada. Still, if there was any real concern about it I'd have thought they would shut down places like this first.
Give us a look at this. Yeah, given how even fictional works have real life details changed you have to wonder about something like this. I wouldn't mind trying it myself actually but if it's really ex Delta guys teaching Delta secrets, it's probably not the best thing to have.
Nancy Allen`` is offline   you may:
Old 11-25-2006, 02:33 AM   #108
Emperor Devon
36 Wings, 365 Eyes
 
Emperor Devon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 5,479
Current Game: Ass Effect
Contest winner - Fan Fiction 
Quote:
Originally Posted by windu6
This is not my problem, what other people kids see.
Then tell me how you can believe children shouldn't be allowed to see sex while disagreeing with the means that prevents them from seeing it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabretooth
We will be great failures one day, you and I
Emperor Devon is offline   you may:
Old 11-25-2006, 02:49 AM   #109
Windu Chi
Banned
 
Windu Chi's Avatar
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Getting revenge on that traitor, Anakin.
Posts: 882
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by Emperor Devon
Then tell me how you can believe children shouldn't be allowed to see sex while disagreeing with the means that prevents them from seeing it.
Look, I'm not going to change my mind.
I don't want no censors in my damn movies and tv programs.

Are you deviously trying to manipulate me into changing my opinions with logic?
Because, I have contradictions in my arguments.
It's not going to happen.
So, stop trying.
Windu Chi is offline   you may:
Old 11-25-2006, 09:34 AM   #110
Mace MacLeod
Food-based rocker
 
Mace MacLeod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Somewhere else. Probably.
Posts: 1,096
Current Game: World of Warcraft
Contest winner - Fan Fiction 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jae Onasi
There are a few reasons for not showing the coffins.
1. Respect for the dead
2. Respect for the families of the dead (I wouldn't want the world to have seen my great uncle's coffin on TV)
3. Morale
4. Sometimes the military hasn't been able to reach all the family members (happens sometimes when people are on vacation, are ill in the hospital, are staying with other members of the family, on business trips, that kind of thing). They don't want people learning about the deaths in their families by watching a news channel or seeing a picture of their loved one's coffin on the internet.
I think not showing them does a tremendous disservice both to the dead and their families. Instead of honouring their sacrifices, the government is sweeping them under the rug and treating them like a dirty little secret that shouldn't ever be shown or mentioned. By doing so, they're just trying to keep the voting public confronted with as few reminders as possible that the war the US started really is a shooting war, not just some abstract concept of something going on "over there", far away from anyone's daily life. And the more remote and abstract it becomes in the public's mind, the less important it becomes to stop it or pay close attention to just what the US government is running around doing.


Be considerate to others or I will bite your torso and give you a disease!
Mace MacLeod is offline   you may:
Old 11-25-2006, 02:46 PM   #111
Nancy Allen``
Banned
 
Nancy Allen``'s Avatar
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,948
Given how Americans have voted in the last election it seems to be a very important issue, so I wouldn't worry too much that we are not seeing Insurgents gun down American soldiers on TV, the point of how much of a mistake Iraq was is still getting through.
Nancy Allen`` is offline   you may:
Old 11-25-2006, 03:35 PM   #112
Samuel Dravis
 
Samuel Dravis's Avatar
 
Status: Moderator
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 4,973
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nancy Allen``
Given how Americans have voted in the last election it seems to be a very important issue, so I wouldn't worry too much that we are not seeing Insurgents gun down American soldiers on TV, the point of how much of a mistake Iraq was is still getting through.
It has taken four years, twenty-one thousand, seven hundred seventy-eight wounded and two thousand, eight hundred seventy-two dead Americans for it to get through. There have been a minimum of forty-seven thousand seven hundred eighty-one dead Iraqi civilians. I'd say it hasn't got through fast enough.


"Words are deeds." - Wittgenstein
Samuel Dravis is offline   you may:
Old 11-25-2006, 03:39 PM   #113
Nancy Allen``
Banned
 
Nancy Allen``'s Avatar
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,948
Why are you so desperate to have dead American soldiers and footage of soldiers being killed shown on TV? The Democrats have power in the Senate, you don't think they'd be trying to pull the troops out of Iraq if they could?
Nancy Allen`` is offline   you may:
Old 11-25-2006, 03:43 PM   #114
Emperor Devon
36 Wings, 365 Eyes
 
Emperor Devon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 5,479
Current Game: Ass Effect
Contest winner - Fan Fiction 
Quote:
Originally Posted by windu6
Look, I'm not going to change my mind.
Personally, it doesn't matter to me at all if you change your mind or not. I just like discussing the topic.

Quote:
Originally Posted by windu6
Because, I have contradictions in my arguments.
Explain how you can have these contradictions while claiming to hold a valid opinion.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabretooth
We will be great failures one day, you and I
Emperor Devon is offline   you may:
Old 11-25-2006, 03:54 PM   #115
Samuel Dravis
 
Samuel Dravis's Avatar
 
Status: Moderator
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 4,973
Because I don't want my sister's fiancee to die. I don't want his friends to die. I don't want his countrymen to die. I don't want those civilians to die. I don't even really want those insane extremists to die either. The worst thing about it is that I haven't been able to discover a single good reason for them to be dead or endangered.

Oh, I agree that the dems will attempt to get them out, but it's unlikely they're going to get anywhere without the cooperation of the Republicans. That cooperation will probably not come with this censorship in place.


"Words are deeds." - Wittgenstein
Samuel Dravis is offline   you may:
Old 11-25-2006, 04:00 PM   #116
Nancy Allen``
Banned
 
Nancy Allen``'s Avatar
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,948
So, by having footage of soldiers gunned down by Insurgents, them being captured and tortured to death, you hope that enough pressure will be placed on Bush for him to abandon the Iraqi people and bring the troops home? Iraq was a mistake, no question, but wouldn't there then be a massive backlash for not trying to fix the mess that was created by going into Iraq in the first place?
Nancy Allen`` is offline   you may:
Old 11-25-2006, 04:20 PM   #117
Spider AL
A well-spoken villain...
 
Spider AL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Help, help, I'm stapled to my workstation.
Posts: 2,162
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nancy Allen``:

So, by having footage of soldiers gunned down by Insurgents, them being captured and tortured to death, you hope that enough pressure will be placed on Bush for him to abandon the Iraqi people and bring the troops home? Iraq was a mistake, no question,
First of all, you keep obsessively focussing on one man: Bush. He's one man, he's a figurehead, it's doubtful that he even influences policy decisions in any meaningful way. Stop obsessing over Bush.

And frankly, anyone who believes that US atrocities abroad will be mitigated to any appreciable degree by the Democrats getting back into power is simply deluding themselves. Much of the damage done to Iraq was done during the Clinton regime's tenure, with bombings and sanctions taking a terrible toll on the Iraqi people. Democrats are usually as damaging as Republicans... they're just quieter about it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nancy Allen``:

but wouldn't there then be a massive backlash for not trying to fix the mess that was created by going into Iraq in the first place?
As established in earlier threads, the "mess" isn't going to be fixed by a US presence in Iraq, (US presence is merely a focus for violence) and the American people would NEVER accept the spending of the huge amount of money it would take to repair the damage caused by decades of sanctions and now three years of an invading force ruining the Iraqi infrastructure. This paltry spending that we've done in Iraq is like trying to put out a forest fire by urinating at it.

And even the money we HAVE sent in has been misused and/or misplaced.


[FW] Spider AL
--
Hewwo, meesa Jar-Jar Binks. Yeah. Excusing me, but me needs to go bust meesa head in with dissa claw-hammer, because yousa have stripped away meesa will to living.
Spider AL is offline   you may:
Old 11-25-2006, 04:23 PM   #118
Nancy Allen``
Banned
 
Nancy Allen``'s Avatar
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,948
Okay, how do you propose we solve the problem then?
Nancy Allen`` is offline   you may:
Old 11-25-2006, 04:34 PM   #119
Windu Chi
Banned
 
Windu Chi's Avatar
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Getting revenge on that traitor, Anakin.
Posts: 882
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by Emperor Devon
Explain how you can have these contradictions while claiming to hold a valid opinion.
You want argue about contradictions in my opinions.
Then explain Good God in your quote below, you are a atheist you don't believe in God so how can you called it good.
And don't come up with that bullsh*t that this is impertinent.
This is a contradiction in your opinion that you don't believe in God.
Which, I mean everybody opinions have some contradictions, because their opinions are base on the specific belief and experience of the individuals, which, is bias.
Bias, because the emotions of the specific individuals and their individual experiences.

You don't see me posting nothing good about that thing, because I hate it.
All my posts about God are angry hateful thoughts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emperor Devon
Good God. The first one definitely got me. I actually screamed out loud, and started sweating. If only I had a picture...

Lord Darth Bane, I am going to hunt you down, throw you into a small pit, and have screaming noises loud enough to shatter windows play anywhere from several minutes to three months. After twenty years, I will end your suffering. With a spoon.

Edit: Oh, here's the car commercial.

Last edited by windu6; 11-25-2006 at 04:59 PM.
Windu Chi is offline   you may:
Old 11-25-2006, 04:35 PM   #120
Spider AL
A well-spoken villain...
 
Spider AL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Help, help, I'm stapled to my workstation.
Posts: 2,162
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nancy Allen``:

Okay, how do you propose we solve the problem then?
Let's first define the problem: We illegally invaded a country, after battering the same for a decade with barbarically damaging sanctions. Now, the people of this country have no infrastructure, no safety and little in the way of basic amenities.

How could we solve this problem?

Let's ask the Iraqi people. The Iraqi people don't want us there in the way that we are currently there. They view us as an occupying force, and they're not wrong. So first step: Leave. We have no rights over there, we have only one responsibility: Do as our victims TELL us to do. But we're unlikely to leave until we've made sure that our puppet regime isn't going to be toppled by freedom fighters as soon as we're gone. That's why we have recently making approaches to places like Iran for assistance.

Secondly as aggressors we should pay out LOADS of money to make amends for our transgression. But that's not going to happen, as the amount of money we'd have to spend would probably be unprecedented in size, as has been stated before.

So there are several ways to solve the problem we have created... but we're not going to do it! Oh happy day!


[FW] Spider AL
--
Hewwo, meesa Jar-Jar Binks. Yeah. Excusing me, but me needs to go bust meesa head in with dissa claw-hammer, because yousa have stripped away meesa will to living.
Spider AL is offline   you may:
Post a new thread. Sorry, this thread is closed. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Go Back   LucasForums > Network > JediKnight Series > Community > Senate Chambers > Ok, what are y'all opinions on the FCC

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:51 AM.

LFNetwork, LLC ©2002-2011 - All rights reserved.
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.