Dollars BBS | News

feed-icon

Main

News

Animation

Art

Comics

Films

Food

Games

Literature

Music

Personal

Sports

Technology

Random

Supreme Court Axes FCC's TV Obscenity Rules (8)

1 Name: *insertnamehere*!!mhJDjCwh : 2012-06-28 01:37 ID:pv60CXBG [Del]

On June 21st the U.S. Supreme Court released a ruling that significantly scales back the FCC's censorship authority. In the case Federal Communications Commission, et al. v. Fox Television Stations, Inc., et al. the highest court in the land refused to assess the constitutionality of U.S. federal law that prohibits broadcasted obscenities. However, it did deal FCC efforts a blow by finding it illegal for the FCC to fine TV broadcaster who air obscenity or nudity during daytime hours.

http://www.dailytech.com/America+Fk+Yeah+Supreme+Court+Axes+FCCs+TV+Obscenity+Rules/article24991.htm

FUCK YEAH BITCHES, SHOW ME THE NUDIES AND FUCK THE BITCHES AND---Ahh fuck it. Anyways, discuss, yo.

2 Name: Chrome !CgbeICNblQ : 2012-06-29 04:04 ID:QNAf1RrL [Del]

I can see boobies on day time tele now?!?!?!?

/whatajoyousday

3 Name: The Doctor : 2012-06-29 06:00 ID:fLA8qSac [Del]

.... sigh..... really? Is it that important to get rid of standards? I'm all for nudity and profanity, but there's a time and a place for that. Daytime use to be a time when you could let your kids watch any station channels with no worries. Anything that had subtle adult content, they found boring and switched to something else. Would you want kids to see Dora the Explorer swear..... Okay, that would be funny, but not appropriate for kids, and that's what that was for, to prevent kids from being exposed to harsh language and sex, PARTIALLY. While it is the parent's responsibility, at least the FCC tried to lend a hand.
Not like the episode of family guy, where they went too far, but sometimes limits are needed.

Now I know some kid is going to rip on me saying something like "you're a mindless drone following the system" or something like that.

Once again, Yes, it is the parent's responsibility to monitor what kids watch, but the FCC limits kind of gives them a sort of break. Now they can probably show South Park uncensored and parents will have to watch their kids 24-7
besides, sometimes the bleeps make the jokes funnier.

4 Name: Josh : 2012-06-29 09:56 ID:KXvEwIuT [Del]

I agree with Doctor on this one,save the Boobs and sex for late night television

5 Name: Ayanavi : 2012-06-29 17:06 ID:l85NfySW [Del]

I disagree with Doctor, children and kids/teens at this point in time are far more aware of the things that people keep trying to shelter them from than ever before.

With access to the internet, any knowledge they want on almost any topic is available to someone instantly - without censors, unless the parents go the extra step to engage internet parental censorship, at which point the parents would have been pro-active enough that this amendment doesn't mean anything to the child's watching habits.

The FCC has really done nothing I've approved of in the last decade or so. It isn't necessary to have a media watchdog if you don't need it watched in the first place - And the FCC never truly had a reason to step in as an organization since it's foundation beyond horrendously outrageous parents who sought to fully mandate and control that their kids had access to.

My opinion, in short, is that the FCC is a horribly outdated organization that never had a real reason to exist. They've been outdated since their creation - It was a reaction by older, more conservative members getting scared off by the emerging freedom of information that technology provided. It was a safety-blanket for the elder generation to try and stay in a comfort zone for "possible" problems that would arise... which rarely ever did.

The cases that did arrive could easily have been solved on a personal matter - some were - and the FCC turned into one of the most annoying little factions that did things just to remind people that "hey, we're here".

6 Name: Meow : 2012-06-29 21:20 ID:/YCaN6EB [Del]

>>3
Save those things for the people who really want to watch them. I for one wouldn't want to see that stuff on air at mid-morning.

7 Name: Thiamor !yZIDc0XLZY : 2012-06-30 00:46 ID:3T0123EG [Del]

They probably did away with it, for a budget cut, and figured stopping the blocking/censoring of "inappropriate" Television was worth the saved money.

8 Name: The Doctor : 2012-06-30 05:11 ID:fLA8qSac [Del]

Well, this doesn't mean that stations will immediately air PORN and HBO shows on regular T.V. The stations themselves have their own standards, and I think that the real intent was to prevent them from being able to fine stations that host LIVE events, such as Super Bowl (that one), or SNL, where some things happen at random, like a slip of the tongue or a tear in a blouse, which isn't the stations fault. That, I can see makes sense.