DVD Talk Forum - FCC is turning down indecency complaints about ABC's "Saving Private Ryan" broadcast

DVD Talk Forum (https://forum.dvdtalk.com/)

- TV Talk (https://forum.dvdtalk.com/tv-talk-14/)

- - FCC is turning down indecency complaints about ABC's "Saving Private Ryan" broadcast (https://forum.dvdtalk.com/tv-talk/406681-fcc-turning-down-indecency-complaints-about-abcs-saving-private-ryan-broadcast.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Red Dog

Meanwhile, Senator Ted Stevens is pushing for FCC content regs to cover cable and satellite. Like I have said - just a matter of time.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...-2005Mar1.html

That motherfucker. :grunt:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Red Dog

Meanwhile, Senator Ted Stevens is pushing for FCC content regs to cover cable and satellite. Like I have said - just a matter of time.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...-2005Mar1.html

bastards! I hate these fuckers. I think i'm old enough to watch bad words and tits.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MovieExchange

Screw the FCC. They could have easily announced before the airing of SPR that they would refuse any complaints, but instead gave the ambiguous "we'll have to wait and review the complaints" answer, which lead to so many stations cancelling their broadcast.

Agreed. I was looking forward to checking it out in HD, but nooooo, my local affiliate feels the need to police our city intead of the parents.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Giantrobo

bastards! I hate these fuckers. I think i'm old enough to watch bad words and tits.

You think you are, but clearly you need the government to protect you from your own weakness.

Jesus Christ what a fucked up country! -ohbfrank-

Quote:

The government can have control over whatever it wants.

Yeah. It'll be nice when government rewrites the entire checks and balances system while they're at it if they decide to regulate more than just public airways.

edited, i thought this was in political forum SORRY!

Hey, atleast they decided not to go after a canceled show..

http://www.cnn.com/2005/SHOWBIZ/TV/0....indecency.ap/

Quote:

FCC rejects complaint involving 'Angel'

Friday, February 25, 2005 Posted: 3:36 PM EST (2036 GMT)

WASHINGTON (AP) -- A love scene from the canceled TV show "Angel" that showed a female character turning into a vampire and biting her partner's neck did not overstep federal indecency rules, the Federal Communications Commission ruled Friday.

It was one of two scenes from a November 2003 episode of "Angel" that were not "sufficiently graphic or explicit to render the program patently offensive" by contemporary standards, the FCC said in denying an indecency complaint from the Parents Television Council.

"Angel," which was canceled by the WB last year after five seasons, starred David Boreanaz in the title role of an 18th-century vampire who tried to atone for past evil deeds in present day Los Angeles.

One scene involved Angel in an intimate moment with a female character in which Angel's hips are seen "moving back and forth," the Parents Television Council said in its complaint.

In the scene depicting the female vampire biting the neck of her partner, also a vampire, both characters had clothes on and "their breathing is heavy," the complaint said.

The episode aired at 9 p.m. EST on November 19, 2003. The indecency law bars nonsatellite radio and noncable television stations from airing between 6 a.m. and 10 p.m. indecent material such as references to sexual and excretory functions. Those are the hours when children are more likely to be watching TV.

But not all sexual and excretory references or scenes are considered indecent. The FCC must consider context and its decisions are subjective interpretations of the law.

The FCC said the "Angel" scenes were not patently offensive "as defined by commission precedent" and therefore were not indecent.

The complaint was officially filed against WBDC-TV in Washington, though the program aired on WB stations across the country. The FCC asks that indecency complaints include the call letters of a television or radio station.

I just don't have the words to describe how I feel about this. When does it stop? How far are they going to be able to go dictating what we see and hear on tv and radio? Who are the people that think this is a good idea? Does 51% of the country really think this is a good way to be heading?

Most cable networks self-censor to the point where they wouldn't run afoul of any new indenceny coverage, which says to me that the free market is already taking care of the supposed problem.

What happened to the belief in the free market in which conservatives (such as myself) used to believe so very deeply?

(By the way, it isn't just Republicans pushing the indecency stuff. Though this specific incidence is backed by a Republican, the House bill that would increase the FCC fines passed 389-38. There are only 231 Republican members of the House of Representatives).

Quote:

Most cable networks self-censor to the point where they wouldn't run afoul of any new indenceny coverage, which says to me that the free market is already taking care of the supposed problem.

They self-censor themselves to a point so advertisers will pay the channel money on their network to run ads. Unless you're a pay channel (such as HBO) or a channel that doesn't need to run consumer ads simply because who you're affiliated with (Disney Channel and TCM come to mind), most cable channels do need ad money to keep broadcasting ;)

Which is to say that the free market is taking care of the supposed problem.

I know they aren't self-censoring out of the goodness of their hearts. They do so to attract audiences or advertisers or whatever, but it's something that, to me, isn't exactly crying out for government intervention. The problem, even if you think of "indecency" as a problem, doesn't exist for the vast majority of the cable dial.