Could someone please show me a kid over the age of 7 that doesn’t know the word Fu*k, or the word Sh*t? They not only know the word, they know what it means and they know how to spell it (and it’s not *#@+! either). If you try to tell me that any 2nd grader doesn’t know these words, I’d say without a doubt, you don’t know your kids. They may be afraid to use them in front of you, but if they haven’t heard you use them under your breath, they’ve heard it on the school bus or even used it on the playground!
The majority of homes today have cable, which means that if you don’t think that they haven’t seen a bare breast, or heard a bad word on HBO or Cinemax by now, you’re fooling yourself! If you think you’re safe because you’ve programmed your TV’s V-chip so they can’t watch it, you’re in for a shock, because they probably learned how to override it faster than they mastered which button to push on the remote. So, of course, the briefest flash of Janet Jackson’s breast (which you had to do a stop-action pause to even see) earned CBS a $550,000 fine. Shows like Without A Trace are being fined outrageous amounts ($3.3 million) for suggestive scenes. Now the FCC comes along with even more big fines for the major networks for words inadvertently not bleeped during live broadcasts, or something that was said on NYPD Blue three years ago.
I remember a time when there were only three available channels to chose from, ABC, CBS, and NBC. The uproar over something Archie Bunker said, or the Smothers Brothers being driven off the air for being too political, or the gasps at Cher wearing those skintight gowns on the Sonny & Cher Show, look absolutely tame by comparison to today’s shows.
Howard Stern went to satellite radio and now his show is incredible, compared to when everything was censored and bleeped beyond making sense. Why? The answer is because if you pay for something to be piped into your home, the FCC can’t regulate it. I’m amazed that Sex in the City has actually made it to broadcast TV reasonably intact. Can you imagine an outstanding, popular, and award winning show like The Sopranos trying to make it over on CBS? It’d only be a half an hour long, and make no sense with all the things that’d have to be cut out of it!
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Jet in Columbus
Gee Baronius I hope you like this one better
2 - Joey
Do the majority of homes really have cable?
That's amazing.
My motto... Cable, never had it. Never will.
Oh I've seen it at the clubs, airport, hospital etc... but I'm not paying for signal.
I don't watch a lot of tv either. But I'll rent a movie once in a blue moon.
When I get sick I rent movies (usually academy recommendations) to catch up. I'm usually not impressed. But Traffic was cool.
I don't really care for obsenity in general. It demonstrates a lack of self control. People who swear incessantly have no class. I don't really care to hear it. It's trash.
So if network tv goes cable... adios, I'm still not getting cable. I have too much on my plate to take interest.
3 - Jet in Columbus
So let me see if I've got this right, out of everything I wrote, basically you took the time to write to tell me you don't have cable?
4 - Brent
The only problem with the networks fleeing to cable and satellite - besides the concept that a lot of people don't actually have cable or satellite of course which would hurt the revenue model - is that this would encourage people like the PTC to demand the regulation of cable and satellite channels. They already have as a matter of fact although for now, because people don't have to get cable or satellite in order to get at least some quality TV, Congress has been less than willing to regulate those channels. That changes if the networks go to cable and either shut down their over the air stations or "free" them to show syndicated programs. Better to agitate against the strictures of the FCC and the machinations of the PTC in support of the networks and sanity than to make it attractive for Congress to bring forward cable regulation.
5 - Jet in Columbus
Brent #4, true, but I could hope they'd leave say the Public Broadcasting Stations still broadcasting over the air, so the PTC could still watch Sesame street and Mr. Roger's Neigborhood.
I'm going to have to do some research, every community I've ever lived in and all my acquaintances have had cable. So I'll have to look at the percentages.
Thanks
6 - Joey
"So let me see if I've got this right, out of everything I wrote, basically you took the time to write to tell me you don't have cable?"
No. It was something akin to, the world doesn't revolve around TV. Further, I don't really care for TV or movies as I have more important things to do.
Like banter on this blog site with a cable/satellite freak.
actually I like getting my 2cents in about the culture of coachpotatoing.
7 - Jet in Columbus
Joey #6 Thanks, but I wrote this to protest the religious right taking over the FCC and dictating what can or can't be seen on TV, and trying to claim that this nation's children needed to be shielded from subjects and words that they already know about.
I do appreciate the input and the fact that you cared enough to share it with me, but why read my whole editorial, if you haven't the slightest interest in the subject?
8 - Joey
I have interest in obsenity over the airwaves.
And people have to realize that "turn the channel if you don't like it" is not an option if every channel contains trash talking dialog.
I really don't think it's a religious matter. Foul language doesn't just offend religious people. I think you may have drawn boundries around the subject which were inadequate regarding the depth and scope of the offended.
Take the office, for example. Stern is (was) really not the considerate radio show to listen to in a mixed working environment. Just as bikini screen savers, posters, whatever... if people find those types of things offensive, or if they feel that they create a "hostile" work place, then they are offensive and by law, will not be displayed.
It's a good law. Everyone behaves and the atmosphere in the workplace is elevated to professional, emotionally safe, and non-hostile.
There is nothing wrong with that. If I turn on a radio, or television I like to see interesting viewing. I don't need smut in my household, I don't care for trashy subject matter. I really don't like seeing or hearing it at public displays or in public places where the tv is on.
Perhaps that's why CNN or ESPN is usually up on the screen in waiting rooms etc... it's neutral, it doesn't offend.
Am I being prudish? Perish the thought. I'm being civilized thank you, and I care deeply about other people and their feelings, however, if someone really wants to get in my face, I will answer in kind, but I refuse to lower the bar on any discussion regarding poor behavior.
It's poor behavior, and as a civilized society it shouldn't be tolarated.
If you want to purchase cable and listen to strings of oaths, foul language, insulting dialog, feel free to do that. Public airwaves are another matter alltogether.
Personnally, I believe that substituting good writing (ads, etc...) with dirty, suggestive inuendo etc... displays a lack of creativity and skill in the art of writing. Maybe it's indicative of the education our paid professional marketers receive at institutions of higher learning.
So, yes Jet, it doesn't interest me, in that I won't purchase cable, but it bothers me that a pitch is being made that it's perfectly okay, or harmless, when I feel that it is neither. Especially on airwaves which really are public domain. Then it becomes like the professional office, where there really is no place for poor manners and foul language.
Does that answer your question?
Now, answer mine.
Do the majority of homes really have cable?
9 - Jet in Columbus
POSTED: 10:29 a.m. EST February 25, 2004
More U.S. households now have access to the Internet than to cable television, according to a report by Web researchers.
Statistics firm eMarketer said that nearly 68 percent of homes have an Internet connection; 65.8 percent receive cable television. Geoffrey Ramsey, chief executive officer of eMarketer, also pointed out that while cable's penetration rate has been steady, Internet use continues to grow.
The analysis is based on data from a variety of groups that study television viewing or Internet use.
While more people have access to the online world, however, they still spent much more time with TV. On average, people spend less than 5 percent of their time online, but more than 26 percent watching cable television.
Yes, at 68.5 percent,the majority of homes have cable.
10 - Victor Plenty
Look it up, Joey. Don't be a twit.
Jet asked you a question that only you can answer. Nobody else knows what motivated you to comment on this story, so he was right to ask you for that information.
If you really care that much about how many households have cable, look it up. Don't demand that he answer a question you could answer for yourself.
11 - Jet in Columbus
Victor #10. I guess we posted at the same time, thanks. See #9. It was a simple thing to Google it, but then a simple mind would have trouble doing things like that.
Thanks again. His response should be interesting
12 - Jet in Columbus
Joey, the answer you're so fixated on is on Comment #9
13 - RJ Elliott
"a simple mind would have trouble doing things like that."
Why the personal attack?
14 - Jet in Columbus
RJ, I refer you to Victor's Comment #10.
Rather than move on, he became fixated over and over on one question which would've been relatively easy to have ascertained on his own. "do the majority of homes have cable?"
It's my belief that he was only doing this to annoy, since on another string of mine, at the same time, he wrote the following...
"sometimes when I take a glance at something, the article and thread just cries out for me to smash and twist it so it issues the essence of the underlying vomitus muck from whence it spawned"
I believe that answers your question.
Any comments on the subject ot this one?
15 - Bliffle
Joey: "I don't really care for obsenity in general. It demonstrates a lack of self control. People who swear incessantly have no class. I don't really care to hear it. It's trash."
I agree. Few people I know swear. Nobody swears at the dinner table. I'm trying to remember, and I think it was a couple months ago someone accidentally hammered their thumb and swore. I don't swear. There are better ways to express yourself, and you don't want to use up your quota of violent metaphor stupidly when you might need it for a special occasion.
"So if network tv goes cable... adios, I'm still not getting cable. I have too much on my plate to take interest."
Yeah, I don't like cable/satellite either. If they removed all the advertisements and commercials from the content I'd be interested. As it is, I mostly watch PBS and the few commercial programs I watch I pre-record (TiVo or DVR) and view at my liesure without commercials. And I watch fewer of those every week. Right now I'm down to the original "Law and Order" and "House".
I can't imagine that there are enough folks out there who want to hear a regular stream of blue curse words and are willing to buy cable in large numbers.
16 - Jet in Columbus
Thank you Bliffle #15. An opposing comment that wasn't framed as a smartass remark like others I could name. I respect you and your viewpoint.
Jet
17 - gonzo marx
what the fuck are you talking about?
fucking obscenities?
god damn, some bastard act like little bitches when some motherfucker tosses around words...mere dick-skinning words...and spews out the "obscene" labelling...
fuck that...they are just words
Carlin said it fucking best...
"there are two knobs on the radio...one changes the station.....the other one turns it off"
nuff fucking said?
Excelsior!
18 - Matthew T. Sussman
fuck
19 - Jet in Columbus
Thank you for joining us today boys and girls. Mr. Rogers has some new words for you today!
20 - Matt Paprocki
Here's my thought, and the only thought.
When a show is going to realism, say 24, and someone gets shot in the leg, do you honestly think the first thing from their mouth would be "Ow! You hurt me!"
No, it wouldn't be.
I challenge anyone who doesn't want profanity on TV to do one of two things:
Get shot in the leg and see what the first thing out of your mouth is
or:
Get a V-chip.
That is all.
21 - Jet in Columbus
MY GOD... SOMEONE ACTUALLY GOT WHAT I WAS WRITING ABOUT
"It's the big one 'lizabeth!!!! I I'm comin' for ya honey!
Thanks Matt #20
22 - Joey
Gonzo,
I always knew you were a classless society in your own right.
Never been shot in the leg.... but I broke both of them in a M/C wreak about 20 years ago. I don't remember much of anything. But I do remember waking up 3 days later... and I will NEVER forget the Grand Mal seizure I had about 9 months after that. All I said was "wow" at least that's what the people I was with stated.
And yes I could have googled the stats on cable, and did... but Jet presented a "fact" without validating it. I really wanted to see if he made a prior investigation into the content of the article, or was merely yammering away.
And yes I can comment, and do, and choose to read and comment on any blog I please. Thank you, which includes disagreement.
I'm sure the ripest amoung you has done the same. So back away from your conceit and admit it. Jet, I do admire the fact that you haven't censored anything on this particular piece yet. It shows restraint.
23 - gonzo marx
why, fucking thanks Joey!
for Matt the game guru...every Tv made after 1996 already has a v-chip in it....all digital cable boxxes and satelite dishes have parental controls built in
if you are concerned about what your kids see on the TV...then be Parents, utilize the tech given to block channels, supervise what and when they watch, put their computers in a common area and supervise that usage too (yes, there is filter software for the Net as well)
THAT is the Answer...NOT asking big Daddy Uncle Sam to dumb down everything to make it safe for 8 year olds...but PARENTS being parents...
that fucking simple and clear enough?
Excelsior!
24 - Jet in Columbus
Joey, repeatedly demanding facts that you already know, and would be obvious to any moron, is not contributing, it's intentionally attempting to annoy, distract and disrupt.
I always welcome opposing viewpoints, but if you expend me to bend to your point of view, I expect you to bend to mine.
Gee, how unfair that sounds, doesn't it?
25 - Jet in Columbus
Gonzo 23. Everytime I try to bring up "the lowest common denominator" argument I get distracted. Thanks.
It's completely unfair that the general viewing public should be forced to watch the lowest common denominator in terms of what I view on TV.
The reason so many people have fled to cable, and shows like the Sopranos and Queer as Folk, is because a chosen few might be "offended". It gives them the feeling of power to know that in their tiny powerless world, they can control something they shouldn't be able to.
Joey whines about us forcing gay rights, or abortion or our "leftist liberal" views down his throats, and yet that's exactly what he's trying to do by forcing us to watch programs suited for a six-year-old or younger.
In effect what he's saying is that any opinions that I have that he doesn't agree with are irrelevant, because he says so.
I'll listen to him, but he isn't listening to me.
typical