Ad question: Topless Academy's Guide to Bartending
 

Geoff,

I keep getting this ad when in the Movie and TV areas. Is that right? At first glance I think it's an adult title with a well placed arm and drink.

http://www.dvdtalk.com/covers/ts1081784667.jpg

I thought maybe this ad slipped out of its "show-after-9-PM" slot.

Just wondering.

Nope, just a Schlocky one reviewed in this week's <a href="http://dvdtalk.com/cineschlock/light3/index.html">CineSchlock-O-Rama</a>

Just curious, but if that picture or something similar was posted in Other, it'd be moved to Mature post-haste, correct?

This topic comes up every few months:

http://www.dvdtalk.com/forum/showthr...hreadid=342133

I really would love to see some way that these 'questionable' covers could be prevented from coming up while you're surfing the forums. I personally spend quite a bit of time here, but things like the image above are just not appropriate to be displayed in the workplace or, honestly, around several of my family members.

It just seems to me that there is an inconsistency in what we are allowed to show/discuss in the forums and what the reviews on this site are allowed to show/discuss.

I mentioned in another thread that some of the screenshots in the reviews are getting a bit risque for my taste (see Wild Things). I know a lot of people disagree, but I used to feel comfortable opening pretty much any thread or review here (at work or anywhere). Now I have to think twice.

[Not that I have a problem with boobies. I just like knowing when they are about to show up on my screen.]

I have to agree. I browse only from work (gave up having home internet access) and I share a small office with a female. I don't like having stuff like that pop up on my screen.

And I agree about the inconsistency. It really needs to be all or nothing. You can't limit pics like that to be posted by members only in the mature area, and then have review pics like that popping up everywhere.

It comes across as very hypocritical, which is unfortunate as I've been here a long time and never known Geoff to be a hypocrit.

This topic has actually been discussed before at legnth:
http://www.dvdtalk.com/forum/showthr...ghlight=mature

The policy I came up with then is the same I'm using now. We'll disply the covers for 'R' Rated movies reviewed including ones which are 'sexy' as long as they aren't simply soft-core porn (which we now don't really even cover).

wouldnt it make more sense to block covers taht wouldnt be allowed to be posted in a thread in Other?


i just saw a cover for bumshots.com or something

When I went to CineSchlock (following a semi-tame cover) I get a fairly large picture of a girl behind a bar cupping her naked breasts. This is definitely not a work-safe picture, yeah there is no nips but geez, luckily no one was around me at the time.

Talemyn gets told to link the Britney spears pic in Otter earlier and this (below) picture is shown on the regular site with no warning?

NOT WORK SAFE: http://dvdtalk.com/cineschlock/light...ess_promo2.jpg

These are some pics that are in the Wild Things review (that was linked with an article from the DVDTalk main page):

http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/image...1080267545.jpg
http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/image...1080267581.jpg
http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/image...1080251130.jpg
http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/image...1080251114.jpg

When I commented about these last month, pretty much everyone responded with 'give me a break' and 'hey that's no big deal'. But my general point was that I no longer feel comfortable reading DVDTalk in a public area (with co-workers or family around).

People (reviewers, etc.) seem to feel that if there are no nipples showing, the images are fine. But I don't feel that's the case.

Re: Ad question: Topless Academy's Guide to Bartending
 

It always surprises me that people will get concerned about:

http://www.dvdtalk.com/covers/ts1081784667.jpg

But not:
http://www.dvdtalk.com/covers/B00008V2UT.jpg

DVD Talk is a site which covers 'R' Rated movies, both violent and sexy. We do our best to keep it Safe For Work, but by the very nature of covering R rated DVDs we may have covers and content on the site which should not be viewed at work

What Geoff said.

Perhaps people should start actually working while at work....it isn't dvdtalks responsibility to make the site rated G to make it safe for you to waste your employers time and money....it is however, their responsibility to try and include as much coverage of dvdland as possible - including R-rated sexy and violent films with sexy and violent covers. If that causes problems, then don't surf at work - problem solved.

I guess I've made my point clear and it appears obvious that Geoff disagrees... so I just make one final comment and be done with it.

I find it very hard to take the above statement at face value when reviewers are allowed to include images like this

http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/image...1080251130.jpg http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/image...1080251114.jpg

in their reviews. Was it not possible to include only screenshots like this one

http://dvdtalk.com/reviews/images/re...1080267518.jpg

that give a sense of the movie?

I guess I just don't see this as an either-or type of situation. I think it is possible to review 'violent' and 'sexy' R-rated material on a web site without sprinkling the screen with images that will raise eyebrows if someone glances at a monitor. Most of the other DVD review sites seem to pull this off nicely.

In fairness, I don't think anyone interested in Wild Things wants to pick it up for the scene where Neve Campbell and Denise Richards listen in on a phone call. :D

I'm more concerned that the reviewer didn't resize their images to the proper aspect ratio. :tsk tsk:

Look I criticized the site for reviewing and puting porn titles in rotation (the soft-core ones that just cut out penetration shots) but bashing Wild Things is just out of control. You are at work, so I assume you are an adult. As an adult you should know better that Wild Things review will have some sexual content in it. If it bothered you so bad, once you saw the first photo listed in the review, you can leave. All of the photos weren't at the top, so if you saw an objectionalbe photo, its real easy to click out of the thread.

I am interested in seeing if "Topless Bartending" is rated. I doubt it, so there is a bit of credibility gap there on "R rated movies) But I don't find the small thumbnail ot "Topless' to be an issue.

I was more concerned about the soft-core porn movies that showed graphic sex (without penetration) had found their way into the mainstream reviews...so I guess you can call me a bit of a hypocrite.

I'm more concerned with dvdtalk reviewing shitty movies.

I too clicked on the Wild Things review at work and was shocked by the lewd pictures.

I couldn't believe Maurice Sendak would sell out like that! :(

Re: Re: Ad question: Topless Academy's Guide to Bartending
 

i can't really tell what's going on in the 2nd picture so it doesnt bother me. plus to be fair, you know how american society is. if my boss so a breat on my computer he'd be more offended than if he saw a sawed off hand.


I dont think its too much to just take the "offensive" covers off rotation from the ads.

I agree that Geoff can run his site however he wants but a huge percentage of the traffic comes from people at work and I doubt he wants to lose that.

Re: Re: Re: Ad question: Topless Academy's Guide to Bartending
 

The second picture has some kind of bird eating the eye of a decapited(?) and very surprised head, with a trail of blood...

okay, i see it now

I think it'd be wonderful if the paid member service had the option of turning off the reviews section - not that I don't appreciate the work put in writing the reviews. I'm just sayin'.

Clicking on a Cineschlock review and being surprised at finding lewd pictures in the review is like walking into the "steam room" of your local used book store and being surprised at being surrounded by porn.

"Wild Things"? "Topless Academy"? If you're that concerned about what people might see you looking at on your PC at work, why are you clicking on these titles in the first place? And those thumbnails are small enough to give you plenty of time to scroll the screen down before anyone could see them.

Geoff does his best to make this place work safe, but I think we have to take some responsibility for ourselves too and put some thought into the links we click on.

I'm moved, Blade. I may just send that quote to my sainted mother. Drop me an email! I'd like to send you a DVD from my Gunnysack of Goodies as a small token of appreciation.

I agree. An option to have these review photo's not displayed (along with all ads which is already in the current plan) and the mature forum taken out of the drop down menu's would be the only reason's I consider paying up.

You can surf the net at work while not wasting your employer's time or money. Like now, I'm surfing on my lunch break as I bring lunch and eat at my desk most days. I also stick around afterwork sometimes to use the net to do some research for my grad school studies, or to just surf some as I don't have internet access at home.

And what about those who have complained here about not wanting those covers popping up at home when their kids, wives, and other family members might walk by, notice it and be upset?

Re: Re: Ad question: Topless Academy's Guide to Bartending
 

Come on, you know we live in America where most people are uptight about sex, but not violence. I"m not personally offended by either, but no most people around my office (as well as family members) would be more upset by the sexual content if they walked by and noticed it.

The second argument is just plain BS IMO. Newspapers and other media sources review/cover R rated movies all the time with out displaying any content that "should not be viewed at work." The images aren't a requirement of reviewing the movies.