Personally, I don't' like that either. All the non-adult area content and reviews should be basically PG. Like movie trailers that are "approved for all audiences."

And besides, this isn't so much about the covers, but about having nudity in a review for the first time (that I'm aware of anyway) and having the link to it pop up in the normal review rotation with no warning.

Especially in this instance as it was a TV show that aired with the nudity blurred, so I imagine even people who had seen it and wanted to read the review could easily click on it and be surprised to get a screen full of nudity and work/wherever they are that such content is no appropriate.

That was all I meant to offer. I agree it's a compromise, and should be fair for everyone except those like Don that apparently want to turn this in to a full on adult site.

Again, I have no problem with any and all adult content on the site, but it should be in its own areas so the non-adult areas are work/kid/whatever safe.

I surf the net at work when I have down time. Doesn't mean I'm on there 9 hours a day. I get my work done but still have time for some surfing throughout the day. I'm sure I'm not alone.

If you are offended by it dont look at it.. As for me having a lame job.. no I rather enjoyed it and saw no need to surf the net when I had better thing to do and a staff to over look as well. College research which basically means diddly.. and that you have way too much time on your hands that you continue to ramble on aimlessly for no apparent reason than to hear or shall I say "see" yourself talking..

I guess I don't see all the bitching as you say. Some discussion, yes.

2 users complaining in this thread that I can tell (oops, maybe 3 now).

Wow.

I'm not complaining. I'm just trying to find out what is worksafe. From what I can gather, the main reviews page is no longer worksafe, correct? I'm not really interested in the morality debate. I just want to know what to stay away from. Thanks.

Same here.

Again, morals shmorals. I have no issues with adult content on this site. I'd just prefer it be kept separate to keep people from stumbling upon it, and irrespective of that issue I'd like Geoff to weigh in and answer:

1) Will the main reviews page be safe for work or not?

2) Will reviews covers running outside of the adult forum during the daytime contain nudity and other stuff not safe for work?

Funny, no one has commented about the fact we review horror, and that there are many horror reviews with gory imagery. Or is that safe for work?

Look this is all much ado about nothing. We have a general policy that if Amazon sells it we're running it throughout the site as a mainstream review. We do not make any claim that our site is safe for work and it's certainly not a site for non-adults.

I saw the images in the playboy series (which aired on E!) and thought they were pretty tame so I let them run. It's my call as the editor of the site. Funny that it's now the #1 most read review on the site right now...

In any case, adult is very intermingled on this site, from blurbs on the front page to listing of adult product on our review page. It's here and if that's a problem for some people we understand. But I have no plans to change the way we do things, and I always cringe when I see people getting all uppity over nudity and sex and never say a peep about gore and violence. But we're all adults here, so we believe in each adults intelligence in selecting which they want to read and what they don't. If you aren't interested in adult oriented content.. don't click on adult reviews (or reviews for shows with sexual themes). If you hate gore, then don't read our horror reviews...

It's as easy as that.

Once more, this isn't a moral complaint from your members. Nobody here has said that they're offended by the images. They simply said that they'd like the adult content to remain in the adult forum...or to at least come with a little bit of a warning. So perhaps you'd be better served sharing this observation with their employers, as they, and not your members, seem to be the ones you're baffled by.

The title is, indeed, listed on Amazon...but they seem to have had the foresight to refrain from posting large images of tits and ass on their site.

Will there be nude Christina Ricci screenshots in the Black Snake Moan review? Just curious.

It's not really funny, it's just the simple equation of:

tits = hits

If this isn't meant to be a worksafe site, why not add tits everywhere? It sure seems to be what the horndog masses want...

Exactly. Like I said, I'm all for adult content, I'd just rather see it better separated and less easy to stumble upon in inappropriate situations (work kids around etc.).

Same goes for the gore stuff.

Exactly. It doesn't add anything to the review IMO (other than adding some jerk off material to the site ) and obviously bothered a few members.


But anyway, thanks Geoff for taking the time to respond. I'm disappointed your stance changed from opposing a "mature" forum on the site many years ago in the aims of having a family friendly all the way to having the adult content "intermingled" on the site and stating "it's certainly not a site for non-adults."

But I guess that's the price you have to pay to make money on an internet site. Just seems like you could have the best of both worlds by just keeping the adult content a little more organized in its own areas that are less easy to stumble upon.

Seems like those interested would still view it just as much, read as many reviews, view and click as many adult ads etc.

But again your site, your rules. I won't be using any affiliate links or clicking any ads if you chose to run it this way though.

Done! (and for the record, I did not ask him to jump into the thread)

Keep in mind that there are various levels of "adult content"; the "adult" reviews are generally considered the "porn" reviews whereas other titles containing mature or "adult" content might simply be an R rated movie. Should all R or unrated movies be tossed into the "porn" category? As far as suggesting G! add yet another task to his near endless list (ie: reorganizing the entire website to suit the limited few); there are so many higher priority projects in need of his attention that I'd be lying if I thought that was even in the top thousand.

I'm of the opinion that most of this is friendly discussion (yay Cow!). I'm also of the opinion that no matter what course of action is taken, some will find fault with it or consider it to not be enough to placate their version of what DVD Talk should look like. The call is G!'s to make and I will support whatever stance he takes; largely basing my comments and actions on what he has said in the past on related subjects (I spent a fair amount of time researching it the last several times the topic or related topics came up so I'm not exactly winging it here).

Should any review with a cover that might possibly offend a reader in say...The Middle East who works for a Muslim cleric be sent off to this porn section a few of you have worked out? Playboy is not porn except to a very tiny portion of the population (and I live in the Bible Belt so I'm quite familiar with the mindset even though many attacking porn these days are from the left wing these days) but the concept extends to other titles too. I'm not going to start preaching about the horrors of censorship (I've witnessed people trying to ban books like Catcher in the Rye, The Outsiders, and many other well regarded works based on the possibility that it might offend a limited subset of the population so I could defend from that angle very easily if need be) but there is no EASY line to define what might offend the most touchy person who happens upon the website so we'll just have to stick with G!'s stated opinion yet again... Otherwise, one of the benefits of being what amounts to the largest, most comprehensive DVD review website is how adults can act like adults and skip material they should know might offend them.

Well, he has now stepped in to address your concern but I suggest that a few of you were selectively reading what he said last August and took what was discussed out of context. People were even complaining about an anime cover of a gal in a swimsuit being too much for their workplace. I suggest that if you may be in trouble for something like that, you work for people that don't value your services very much if they'd fire you for it. Otherwise, the adult covers on the main review page have been there for a very long time so simply accessing the page would cause your computer to have the covers on your hard drive.

As I stated before, other mainstream reviews have had nudity in them. You've been on record in the past as saying you didn't read the reviews here so I believe you when you claim that you haven't seen them but anything from Wild Things 2(?), Basic Instinct, some of the National Lampoon movies, and a number of others have had what amount to screen captures that might offend a sheltered nun or some of these oppressive work places a few of you appear to work in.

One of the biggest, most frequent questions I've had as a reviewer of TV on DVD shows is whether or not the show removed the mosaic/pixels covering the nudity; like on The Man Show titles I've reviewed. That someone familiar with the show knows the thematic subject matter and fact that the show has nudity (albeit blurred out a bit) should be enough for them to weigh reading a review of it at a time and place that might not be in their best long term interests (like in front of young children, at a NOW meeting, or at work).

I have no desire or intention of doing this and to say it like that looks more like a debating tactic to marginalize my position than add constructive criticism to the discussion. This IS an adult website though, run by adults, with adults in mind so a limited number of people wanting contributors to jump through an ever restrictive series of hoops to appease their personal taste or the taste they would impose on others strikes me as problematic.

Yeah but women are probably more comfortable with tasteful nudity and probably have a lot more experience seeing breasts than a few of these guys do. (ducking...)

For someone with "no issues", you sure seem to have spent a lot of time raising them. Again, I'm fine with you doing so but you'd probably come across better if you didn't keep saying you had no problems on one hand and then going into great detail about problems right afterward. One last time though, the main review page, when you scroll down past the fold has had porn covers for some time now. This is not new, as some of you have been suggesting against all evidence to the contrary, and a number of those covers are far more explicit than any screen captures used by the reviewers.

I might have to change my signature line to this one (I didn't know changing it to Adam's excellent quote would alter all my past post sig's...sniff). It sums up so much, so quickly, that I almost wish it was part of the registration process.

Ahhh, the poetry of this one works for me too.

I'd think that the word "Playboy" would serve as a pretty strong warning that the review had a sexual theme to it. If you're suggesting DVD Talk adopts a coding system like TV shows (with the numerous acronyms that are as confusing as heck to some people), I think you're in for a lengthy wait.

I can pass on your request to whomever gets the DVD if you'd like me to do so. I haven't seen ANY screen captures on Amazon though, PG or otherwise so perhaps your faith in their foresight is just a bit misplaced. Can I make the observation that Joe, Josh, NBT, Gold, and others reading this thread are now on notice from the owner that such content is, to an admittedly limited extent and subject to editorial approval, addressed? As much as I like discussing the evolution of DVD Talk, it gets old when the same people make the same basic arguments repeatedly. Look, if a reviewer starts publishing hardcore screen shots, email G! and he'll take care of it. If you think one of us steps over the line, send an email or ask about the review but at least we have a written guideline to point to now.

PS: Some of the points raised in opposition to my stance were pretty decent and I appreciate them. If you ever think I went too far with something, email me and say so; I promise I'll consider what was said or displayed with an open mind. Fair?

You need to work on your reading comprehension Don.

I said I have no issues with adult content on DVD Talk.

However, what I do have issues with is the adult content not being well separated in some cases. (i.e. things like nudity in mainstream reviews, which you were right, I hadn't seen those few you listed both because I seldom read the reviews and those were all titles I had zero interest in besides that).

The two points aren't mutually exclusive, and my points were made very clearly IMO, especially since several people have made the exact same argument in this thread and the one in the Adult forum.

No one has expressed any objection to DVD Talk containing nudity. We've just expressed concern at where nudity is displayed.


But Geoff has spoke, so it's a moot point. Best I can do is show my disapproval by not doing anything that provides revenue to the site.

So, due to one review you're not going to support to keep the site free? Seems a little childish to me.

This issue wasn't an issue with me but I do have a few with the site. But I also like the fact that the site is here and it's free. I'll click a few extra ads each day just for you

Be sure to add some for me too.

(ignoring personal attack)
Well, maybe the RIF program fell out of favor when you made it through school but your entire premise has been an "issue" with adult content; ie: where it is located. That IS an "issue" (and one worth discussing like an adult, not full of sour grapes) as they go hand in hand.

As one of the leading contributors (out of many by the way) here of adult and mature content, I have a vested interest in keeping up on the matter. A handful of names always seem to arise when discussing adult content and issues relating to it so I've paid particular attention to what these few people have said (finding the "new members" that magically register to complain in the same way, using similar grammar and giving the appearance of a shill registration to be extremely likely at times); much like salesmen for a company would become familiar with their competitor's product or a politician would become acquainted with their opponent's stances on various topics over time.

A few of you, you in particular Josh, have made it seem like a simple reorganization of content would solve all the problems and I disagree. There are 620+ "mature" titles that are NOT porn, 3500+ R rated titles, ~10,800 "Unrated" titles, and a couple dozen NC-17 that all could potentially have something to offend a reader on top of the ~6600 straight porn titles and 364 gay titles. I think the review in question (http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/read.php?ID=27830) lets the pictures "prove" that it is uncensored; the biggest question a fan of the series looking to buy the DVD set would have; adding value to the TV on DVD set (great extras too). Why should a reader interested in the title have to lose out simply because a few of you want to be able to read this FREE site at work and in front of children without disabling covers as Adam suggested?

Anyway, if you really want to show your disapproval, stop posting messages and deny us all the benefit of your wisdom in the future (Gold too). We'd eventually get over the tragic loss somehow but it'd be our cross to bear. Happy Mother's Day!

It is simple. All porn titles would go in the adult section. The only other thing that would go there is any other review with nudity in the review. No need to do it by ratings. Just porn and reviews with nude shots in the adult section, everything else in the regular DVD reviews. i.e. if if there are two Black Snake Moan reviews, one with nude screens and one without, the one with nudes goes in adult and the other in the normal review section and if the covers for both have to be in rotations make sure the one with nudes is labled in the review shot as "Black Snake Moan (adult)."

But again, moot point as Geoff has spoken and its his site.

Hope you're enjoying patting yourself on the back Don.

Not just one review, but rather this whole long ongoing movement towards "intermingling" adult content on the site rather than keeping it clearly separated from the regular content.

This one instance was just the final straw.

I don't really care about the site being free. I said before I'd happily pay to be rid of all the ads (though now I'd only pay if it got rid of the DVD review cover pics as well).

I'm going to close this thread. The issue has been raised and responded to.