On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 22:04:45 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

Is this where we are heading? Fear of showing a classy movie that
depicts the doggedness and bravery of our soldiers during World War II?


This is nothing more than a case of paranoia. Many TV execs are
nervous following the backlash from the FCC in the wake of that stupid
Janet Jackson stunt. The FCC made no comments about what it would do
for the "Ryan" movie specifically. It's just that the companies are
now more conscious of the consequences of going over the line.

I find it comforting that the gradual erosion of the limits of what we
consider to be material "not meant for TV" has been halted to some
degree.

We were not far from a point where naked people and graphic violence
would have been flashed on prime time TV, where children and other
people would be subject to it.

If the people who provide our entertainment cannot come up with shows
that do not have to rely on either graphic and gratuitous sex or
violence in order to gain popularity, then I would suggest they all
retire and find some more talented writers. They were around in great
numbers 40 years ago....

Dave

On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 11:47:10 -0500, Dave Hall
wrote:

On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 22:04:45 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

Is this where we are heading? Fear of showing a classy movie that
depicts the doggedness and bravery of our soldiers during World War II?


This is nothing more than a case of paranoia. Many TV execs are
nervous following the backlash from the FCC in the wake of that stupid
Janet Jackson stunt. The FCC made no comments about what it would do
for the "Ryan" movie specifically. It's just that the companies are
now more conscious of the consequences of going over the line.

I find it comforting that the gradual erosion of the limits of what we
consider to be material "not meant for TV" has been halted to some
degree.

We were not far from a point where naked people and graphic violence
would have been flashed on prime time TV, where children and other
people would be subject to it.

If the people who provide our entertainment cannot come up with shows
that do not have to rely on either graphic and gratuitous sex or
violence in order to gain popularity, then I would suggest they all
retire and find some more talented writers. They were around in great
numbers 40 years ago....

Dave

I don't believe it's paranoia at all. The movie has been shown before.
I believe it's a few stations trying to make a statement to the FCC.

Spielberg won't allow editing of the language in the movie. I think
the movie would be just as good without the foul language.

John H

On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD,
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...


We were not far from a point where naked people and graphic violence
would have been flashed on prime time TV, where children and other
people would be subject to it.

In all honesty, I think infants should be blindfolded while being breast
fed.

"We were not far from a point where naked people and graphic violence
would have been flashed on prime time TV, where children and other
people would be subject to it."

Now are the restraint devices in front of your tv leather or chains? I
was just wondering the comfort level of the children and people in your
household while they are "Forced" to watch these shows.

Come to think of it I don't like spinich. So be a dear and go throw
yours out.

Bottom line if ya don't like it don't watch it. The tv execs would not
put anything on the does not make a profit. They only put shows on that
the majority wants to see. If a show offends you CHANGE THE CHANNEL that
is your right but don't try to come into my house and steal my remote.

Dave Hall wrote:
On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 22:04:45 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:


Is this where we are heading? Fear of showing a classy movie that
depicts the doggedness and bravery of our soldiers during World War II?



This is nothing more than a case of paranoia. Many TV execs are
nervous following the backlash from the FCC in the wake of that stupid
Janet Jackson stunt. The FCC made no comments about what it would do
for the "Ryan" movie specifically. It's just that the companies are
now more conscious of the consequences of going over the line.

I find it comforting that the gradual erosion of the limits of what we
consider to be material "not meant for TV" has been halted to some
degree.

We were not far from a point where naked people and graphic violence
would have been flashed on prime time TV, where children and other
people would be subject to it.

If the people who provide our entertainment cannot come up with shows
that do not have to rely on either graphic and gratuitous sex or
violence in order to gain popularity, then I would suggest they all
retire and find some more talented writers. They were around in great
numbers 40 years ago....

Dave

Jim wrote:
"We were not far from a point where naked people and graphic violence
would have been flashed on prime time TV, where children and other
people would be subject to it."

Now are the restraint devices in front of your tv leather or chains? I
was just wondering the comfort level of the children and people in your
household while they are "Forced" to watch these shows.

Come to think of it I don't like spinich. So be a dear and go throw
yours out.

Bottom line if ya don't like it don't watch it. The tv execs would not
put anything on the does not make a profit. They only put shows on that
the majority wants to see. If a show offends you CHANGE THE CHANNEL that
is your right but don't try to come into my house and steal my remote.



I am curious. It's been a long, long time since Mrs. E and I spent a
couple of years living in Europe (Italy, but we traveled around a bit).
Have the generally accepted rules of morality, acceptance of what is
decent what is not and viewpoints on issues like gay marriages changed
much in Europe in the past 30 years or so? Are countries in Europe
arresting an increasing number of pedophile priests? Or is the US
atypical in having debates and problems with these issues?

I know what it was like there 30 years ago. I just wonder if the rest of
the world is going through all this BS.

Eisboch

In article ,
Eisboch wrote:


Jim wrote:
"We were not far from a point where naked people and graphic violence
would have been flashed on prime time TV, where children and other
people would be subject to it."

Now are the restraint devices in front of your tv leather or chains? I
was just wondering the comfort level of the children and people in your
household while they are "Forced" to watch these shows.

Come to think of it I don't like spinich. So be a dear and go throw
yours out.

Bottom line if ya don't like it don't watch it. The tv execs would not
put anything on the does not make a profit. They only put shows on that
the majority wants to see. If a show offends you CHANGE THE CHANNEL that
is your right but don't try to come into my house and steal my remote.



I am curious. It's been a long, long time since Mrs. E and I spent a
couple of years living in Europe (Italy, but we traveled around a bit).
Have the generally accepted rules of morality, acceptance of what is
decent what is not and viewpoints on issues like gay marriages changed
much in Europe in the past 30 years or so? Are countries in Europe
arresting an increasing number of pedophile priests? Or is the US
atypical in having debates and problems with these issues?

I know what it was like there 30 years ago. I just wonder if the rest of
the world is going through all this BS.

Eisboch

Pedophilia in the pristhood has been going on for a LOT longer than 30
years, and it is just as bad (if not worse) in Europe than it is/was here.

The difference is that far fewer people go to prison and get sued out of
existence for that behavior in Europe, and it is more often buried "under
the rug" where nobody talks about it - but its still going on.

--
--
Karl Denninger ) Internet Consultant & Kids Rights Activist
http://www.denninger.net My home on the net - links to everything I do!
http://scubaforum.org Your UNCENSORED place to talk about DIVING!
http://www.spamcuda.net SPAM FREE mailboxes - FREE FOR A LIMITED TIME!
http://genesis3.blogspot.com Musings Of A Sentient Mind

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
news:2vinifF2lpnh4U1@uni-

Is this where we are heading? Fear of showing a classy movie that
depicts the doggedness and bravery of our soldiers during World War II?


LOS ANGELES, Nov. 11 (Xinhuanet) -- More than 20 ABC television
affiliates banned broadcasting the Hollywood war movie "Saving Private
Ryan" to mark the Veterans Day Thursday for fear that it could lead to
indecency fines.

Red Herring. Affiliate execs have acknowledged that they were not concerned
with violation fines, as Private Ryan had been shown before and was not at
issue. They were merely trying to make a political point to the FCC,
contending that the FCC responded to heavily to Janet Jackson's boob, et
al. -- in short, protesting that the country is trying to return to some
kind of standard, as opposed to none at all. So they did what broadcast
media almost always does when they want to make a point on their agenda.
They lied.

On 11/11/2004 7:24 PM, CCred68046 wrote:

Is this where we are heading? Fear of showing a classy movie that
depicts the doggedness and bravery of our soldiers during World War II?


Its obvious. They could show that movie, its been on TV before. And it could
have been edited for television easily.

It could have been edited easily... if ABC wasn't under a contractual
agreement with Spielberg to air it unedited.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...toryId=4165613

--
~/Garth - 1966 Glastron V-142 Skiflite: "Blue-Boat"
"There is nothing - absolutely nothing - half so much worth doing
as simply messing about in boats."
-Kenneth Grahame, The Wind in the Willows

On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 22:04:45 -0500, Harry Krause wrote:

Is this where we are heading? Fear of showing a classy movie that
depicts the doggedness and bravery of our soldiers during World War II?


Wow, am I ever glad I live in Canada! If you want cuss-words, try
"Trailer-Park Boys". Gore? "CSI". Sex? "Kink". And iirc, "Saving Private
Ryan" as been on, uncut, many times.

And we wondered what all the fuss was about at the Superbowl - it's a
boob. Live with it!

Lloyd Sumpter
Canadian.

Lloyd Sumpter wrote:
On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 22:04:45 -0500, Harry Krause wrote:

Is this where we are heading? Fear of showing a classy movie that
depicts the doggedness and bravery of our soldiers during World War II?


Wow, am I ever glad I live in Canada! If you want cuss-words, try
"Trailer-Park Boys". Gore? "CSI". Sex? "Kink". And iirc, "Saving Private
Ryan" as been on, uncut, many times.

And we wondered what all the fuss was about at the Superbowl - it's a
boob. Live with it!

Lloyd Sumpter
Canadian.


It's the price we pay for living in uptightsville.