PTC Offended by Freedom of Speech
Self-appointed guardian of the public morals, the Parents Television Council, has just issued a report which concludes that you have no right to watch what you want. You only have the right to watch what they want you to watch.
They’ve just released the results of a study of TV offensiveness, and boy, are they offended!
They’re hung up on something that they call “The Family Hour”. It’s the time slot of 8:00 to 9:00 PM (7:00 to 9:00 PM on Sundays). They’re acting like this is some sort of holy time period that should be limited to only showing programs like Father Knows Best and My Little Margie.
They’re pissing into the wind, however. There is no such thing as a Family Hour, and there hasn’t been for 30 years. Back in the 1970s, there was something called the Family Viewing Hour, but it only lasted two years. Some Activist Judge™ overturned it, because the FCC overstepped its authority when they implemented it. Apparently the PTC (Pinheads That Censor) never got the memo, and they’ve been acting like it’s still in force.
Periodically, the PTC issues another report screaming about how awful things are. Unfortunately, the PTC is one of the most effective and powerful pressure groups operating today. They’re responsible for almost all of the decency complaints that the FCC receives. Their pressure is responsible for the FCC’s crackdown on every little perceived indecency event on radio and TV.
Here’s their result at a glance:
Now let’s look at the report:
Traditionally known as the Family Hour, the 8 p.m. time slot was once a place for programming the whole family could enjoy.
By “traditionally”, they mean for a period of two years back in the 1970s.
As shown in the Parents Television Council’s previous studies of television content between 1999 and 2001, the Family Hour became increasingly lewd, profane and violent by the turn of the decade. Things are no better today. The steady stream of violence and death, sexual innuendo and crass words continue unabated.
Sweet! (BTW, the correct grammar is “The steady stream … continues unabated.” Maybe if they stopped watching so much TV, they’d have time to learn English.)
While mild expletives like “damn” and “crap” are declining in use, broadcasters are increasing the frequency of harsher language obscured by bleeps or partial editing.
So what are they saying? They want those words to not be bleeped?
For example, according to Nielsen Media Research, on Sunday, November 12, at 8:30 p.m., over 2 million children were in the viewing audience for an episode of the animated program American Dad on Fox which contained 37 instances of violence, foul language and sexual content in a show less than 30 minutes long.
Now we come to the crux of it. If children are watching American Dad, that’s the fault of their parents. It’s not the fault of Fox or the Liberal Media™ or Activist Judges™ or Hillary™. The program is clearly rated TV-14. All modern televisions, cable boxes, satellite receivers, and Tivos have V-Chips or similar parental controls.
Parents, who are immediately responsible for the welfare of their own children…
Finally! A sensible statement coming from these twits. Thank you for admitting that it is parents’ responsibility.
…can no longer count on the Family Hour to provide a safe haven.
By “no longer”, they mean for the last 30 years.
They cannot rely on a deeply-flawed content ratings system to help them monitor what their children watch.
It’s a fundamentally sound system. Any problems are minor and can be fixed with some industry tweaks. The system is not “deeply-flawed”. I don’t know where they’re getting their information. Oh, that’s right. They pull it out of their asses!
The American public is overwhelmingly concerned about this trend…. Other surveys have shown that parents would welcome more government regulation to rein in television content.
They don’t cite which survey yielded those results, and they don’t even say how many said that.
However, through responsible self-regulation, the entertainment industry might eliminate the need for further legislative or regulatory action.
Oh. For a minute there, I thought they were going to say “through responsible parenting, there is no need for further legislative or regulatory action.” Silly me.
Senators Joe Lieberman ([Republicans for Lieberman]-Conn.) and Sam Brownback (R-Kan.), both PTC Advisory Board Members…
Well there’s a freakin’ surprise! Joe Lieberman on the wrong side of the issues again!
…launched an effort to bring back the traditional Family Hour.
Blah, blah, blah. Let’s skip down a bit.
The PTC appealed to advertisers to stop underwriting adult-oriented programming during the Family Hour.
Really? They “appealed”? ‘Twas merely a polite request. Or maybe it was boycott! Quit trying to hide your poisonous actions and agenda, PTC.
Here they explain that they looked at three different two-week periods during the 2006–2007 TV season. They looked at “all six networks”. They’re including some sort of piece of crap network called MyNetworkTV that I’ve never heard of. It’s owned by Fox, so I’m sure they included it to bump up the offensiveness of their results.
All programming was recorded and then viewed by trained content analysts.
They’re so offended by this stuff that they train themselves on it! “Bob! I didn’t see a big enough look of shock on your face when Peter Griffin said ‘boobie’!”
For each scene within a program, the analyst coded every instance of foul language, violence, and sexual content.
Yes, they sit there and count and categorize every single instance. And if they think they missed one, they back up the recording and watch it again!
Foul language was coded for specific words uttered in programming and certain related euphemisms — such as the word “screw” when used as a euphemism for “fuck.”
Heaven forbid if the networks actually try to tone down the language!
Also coded were bleeped and otherwise obscured language…
Even if it isn’t broadcast, it still counts!
…including words that were partially obscured but identifiable, as well as words that were bleeped but could not be definitively determined by context or lip-reading.
That’s right. These people are so obsessed over dirty words that they have to bring in lip readers!
Analysts recorded all incidents of verbal and visual sexual material, including sexual references; anatomical references in a sexual context; allusions to specific sex acts like anal, oral, and kinky or fetishistic behavior; visual depictions of sex acts; sexually suggestive gestures; strippers; suggestive dancing; nudity and various forms of implied or pixilated nudity.
Make up your own jokes. This is pathetic.
Various forms of violent content were monitored, including … supernatural violence….
No! Not supernatural violence! That means we can’t broadcast any Bible stories!
Anyway, that’s the build-up to their results. Tomorrow, we look at what they actually found. Stay tuned!
September 7th, 2007 at 4:32 am
What’s really pathetic is something that you touched on briefly – they’re apparently counting on TV to be their only form of entertainment. I wonder how many of these parents had their kids sitting next to them while they counted every single time someone scratched themselves inappropriately or whatever.
There are plenty of other much more healthy and beneficial ways to get your entertainment. Why does it have to be TV? If you don’t like, don’t watch! It’s that simple!
September 7th, 2007 at 8:54 am
These are the same dolts who took their children several times to see Mel Gibson’s ultra-gory “passion of the crap”. I guess there is a special dispensation for Jesus-based violence.
September 7th, 2007 at 9:08 am
Family “hour” for us was whenever you woke up on Saturday until whenever breakfast was ready, and we solved the innappropriate language, etc. by watching kids’ channels.
I have been rather annoyed by some things in certain kids’ movies (particularly of Disney origin) that really shouldn’t be there, but I don’t think that’s a recent addition. An example is the new “That Darn Cat” (‘99 or so), in which there’s a scene where the guy is trying to lure the cat with a piece of meat. At one point he says something about his meat over a radio–something any juvenile would immediately catch onto, but is completely harmless taken in context. Not really a problem, but I would have re-worded the script anyway. Then, the other guy says something to the effect of “you shouldn’t talk like that with kids present!” (the girl was with him). That line was completely unnecessary, wasn’t funny (well, ok, it *is* a dumb movie), and points out that Disney intentionally put the part about “meat” in there as a specific sexual innuendo; something I don’t think belongs in a kids’ movie. To be fair it’s rated PG, but the movie is very obviously supposed to be a family movie.
Movies such as Shrek are “family” movies, but make no pretenses about their target of older kids and adults, and watching the previews should let any parent know they might want to review it before letting youngsters watch it. Plus, the movie is filled with that stuff; putting a single lewd comment in an otherwise benign movie is just dumb. Like The Black Stallion (I think number 2–been a long time since I’ve seen those), where they don’t use any kind of “offensive” language, then say “damn” right at the end. Really, even though the PG rating did reflect this, it’s unnecessary and offensive to some people, and again it’s a kids’ movie.
But obviously that has nothing to do with whether there is offensive content available on the TV during “family hour”. I don’t mind if they want to clean up certain kids’ channels to make them more kid-friendly, but if I were a TV watcher, I would be pissed if I couldn’t find anything but kids’ shows on any channel for an hour every night. Since I’m not a TV watcher, I wouldn’t mind the ban of MTV every night; that would give me a chance to play the XBOX once in a while.
September 7th, 2007 at 10:11 am
MichaelS:
I’ve noticed that trend of putting in one or two “mature” comments into an otherwise benign movie. I’m pretty sure they do that to get the PG rating. Being rated G is the kiss of death (I don’t know why; I never look at the ratings when I decide what to see.), so they deliberately throw in something to kick it up to a PG. I don’t think one “damn” or “meat” reference is going to hurt anyone, but it is unnecessary.
September 7th, 2007 at 1:06 pm
No, I don’t think it hurts anyone, but I know it makes some people uncomfortable. I just don’t see the need for that kind of thing, when you could have had the same movie, with the same story, that’s just as enjoyable, without having that awkward moment of uncomfortable for certain people.
September 8th, 2007 at 12:47 pm
…. or instead of dumping their children in front of a TV every day while they go out and picket, they could read a book together. How about that! Teaching your kids that electronic isn’t the only kind of entertainment. It’s depressing how many kids hate reading.
I think the reason kid’s movies often have some PG material thrown in is to make it bearable for adults sitting in the audience with their kids, not to grind their media axes.
September 9th, 2007 at 5:36 pm
These guys remind me of a certain senator, I think they are overdoing the “outrage” somewhat. Perhaps they should be reading to their children from the christian spanking manuals. Dont start me on Mel’s awful Passion movie, you could also add the hideous piece of crap that he did in south america. I think they would call that a documentry.
September 19th, 2007 at 5:44 am
@James Fellrath: You’re dead on. Why should we rely 100% on any one form of entertainment?
Also, the PTC would be a great parody if it wasn’t the genuine article.