Is USA censorship GOING CRAZY?

Well said. I had similar reaction to the halftime show.

KenEis said:

We all saw the
Jackson flesh incident at the end but by that time we were numb.

Click to expand...

I quit watching before the boob incident and haven't been sorrowful that I missed it. I have actually seen bare boobs previously - without pasties!

KenEis said:

I'm no prude and understand that younger generations have different
entertainment values but this, more then prompting a bunch of inain
politicians to talk about sensorship just maybe cost the network
and the NFL some real dollars. The show was an embarrassment.

Click to expand...

I agree.

There's a big difference between CBS doing the censoring and the government having a person there doing the censoring.

If a gallery chooses not to display your photos because they feel they can't sell them, that's not censorship. If the government tells the gallery not to display your photos because they don't like them, that's censorship. I would also add that if the government says that it won't fund an exhibition, that's not censorship, since you still have the option of displaying them, just not at government expense.

Anthony

ulysis said:

But I do agree with you on the "what if someone criticizes Bush".
This is something that can be used for good but also sensorship
(cutting out what the network deems inappropriate politically).
There has to be standards to what they can omit in the 5 min delay
broadcast and what they can't.

Click to expand...

Uncle B.....If you consider banning what happened to JJ on broadcast TV to be a loss of freedom, what would you say to allowing a half time program of graphic sexual intercourse, self stimulation, beastiality or similar acts. Where would YOU draw the line......or would you prefer no restrictions at all? Do you think allowing 16yr. old children to legally buy alcohol and tobacco is a good thing? What freedoms do Europeans have that you don't. Please don't generalize....be specific. I may be breaking the law and doing things I'm not really free to do. Uncle B you haven't lived long enough to know what raising your children is all about. Come back in about 20 yrs. and we'll see how you feel then. There is no way that CBS, NBC or ABC is ever going to curtail their biased broadcasting.

I lived in Germany for 8yrs in the early 50's and 70's. I love it....it's a beautiful country. One thing they have which I wish we had is practically unrestricted access to the forests.

Uncle B said:

America IS great. I said that in my original post and I will say it
again. I never denied that.

Click to expand...

Somehow "mith" didn't seem right to me

I don't know much about raising children in Today's day and age, but since I am only 23 years old, I know more about growing up and being a teenager in the present times.

You ask where I would draw the line. It's very simple. I simply don't think that nudity is something that should be censored out. I lived in Europe most of my life and I am used to seing nudity on public TV. Kids see it, grandparents see it, and it doesn't do any harm.

In the US on the other hand, movies are edited and many scenes are cut out. Sometimes the part where nudity is shown are relevent to the plot and it isn't there just for the heck of it. It's really annoying when I watch a movie on TV that I've seen before and I notice that parts of it are gone.

On the other hand, American TV shows things that are more inapropriate than nudity. Shows like "elimidate" and other similar ones show very graffic

scenes. They show everything except for nudity. Is that where America decided to draw the line?

In your mind, which of these two things are more innapropriate and can do more harm to a child's mind for example? Is it seeing Janet Jackson's breasts, or the rest of the Halftime show, which was full of sexual gestures?

To me it seems that America is a little confused on this subject. They drew the line at nudity, but their showing things that are much worse.

In the future, when I have kids, I would much rather they see a naked woman in a shampoo or soap commercial than one of Christina Aguilera's music videos. What's the difference between them? The difference is that one is showed in the US a couple times a day, and if the other one aired, there would be a national crisis.

As far as being able to buy alcohol and cigarettes when your 16..... I can't say wheather it's right or wrong, because I don't think there is a right answer to this question. I can only tell you about my own experience. After experimenting with alcohol and cigarettes when I was 16, 17 and 18, it seems I have grown out of it by now. Now when I have a job, I drive a car, I am ready to start a family, I don't have a need to get drunk and party.

Now is that better than having 21 shots of liquer on your 21st birthday when you've never had alcohol before? I think it is.

It is about a standard of decency for broadcast television (and only broadcast TV). Whether or not I personally find a breast to be indecent, I do definitely support the concept that there should be a defined standard of decency for broadcast media and it should be followed.

This standard of decency for a very specific media type does not amount to censorship. There are still plenty of places to get your fix on bare breasts without getting them on broadcast TV. I am so tired of people crying "cencorship!" or "violation of free speech!" all the time when they don't know what they are talking about. Freedom of speech is too precious a right to be thrown around so casually. Would these cencorship criers advocate having hard core sex on TV?? After all, it is cencorship not to allow it, according to your logic, right?

And by the way, bare breasts have been shown on national broadcast TV in the US ocassionally over the past 10 years on shows such as NYPD Blue in the context of totally nude sex scenes, and see-through shirts on actresses are routinely shown on academy awards shows. Nobody raised a stink then so why now? This line has been crossed.

Mark Caplin said:

All this hooha over a human breast being exposed at a football game?
Law suits and broadcasters changing content...

I imagine this will affect photographic content and change posting
rules for sites (like this) . Is the USA really this conservative?

--
http://www.pbase.com/mkelpie

Click to expand...

There is a standard that's set for broadcast TV and in American people's minds. The standard is no nudity! You can have people simulating hard core sex, as long as they are somewhat dressed. But a 3 second shot of a naked breast is a national tragedy. Now that is messed up!

PinHole said:

And by the way, bare breasts have been shown on national broadcast
TV in the US ocassionally over the past 10 years on shows such as
NYPD Blue in the context of totally nude sex scenes, and
see-through shirts on actresses are routinely shown on academy
awards shows. Nobody raised a stink then so why now? This line
has been crossed.

Click to expand...

I guess I don't understand why it would be okay to see that breast in the see through shirt as you say. Aren't you still seeing it? Isn't that what people found so wrong, the fact that they saw 3 seconds of boob.

Experience is what you get when you didn't get what you were looking for

kumod said:

PinHole wrote:
Isn't that what people found so wrong, the fact that they saw 3
seconds of boob.

Click to expand...

Speaking only for myself - not "people" - no.

What I found wrong was the tastelessness of the entire show and the idea that a male ripping the shirt off of a female is presented as an appropriate halftime show for the Superbowl.

P Sexton said:

kumod said:

PinHole wrote:
Isn't that what people found so wrong, the fact that they saw 3
seconds of boob.

Click to expand...

Speaking only for myself - not "people" - no.
What I found wrong was the tastelessness of the entire show and the
idea that a male ripping the shirt off of a female is presented as
an appropriate halftime show for the Superbowl.

Click to expand...

--

There are a wide variety of things on television that one could deem inappropriate that haven't raised the stir that this did. I also think that there are far greater things that we need to be spending the time and effort on with other then a singer that decided to get a ton of publicity.

Not that they are the same thing, but no so long ago an apperance by Elvis was deemed unappropriate for television.

Experience is what you get when you didn't get what you were looking for

HonestMan said:

As for my son, that other remark I made was pure irony. I don't
have a son, as I am only 23 years old. However I was raised in
Europe, where teenagers have no problems buying alcohol and tobacco
when they are 16 or even younger. Naked breasts are shows in
advertisements on bus stops. And no, I'm not a drug addict.
Actually, I'm far from it.

Click to expand...

Maybe France?

I was raised in Ukraine, but I've never seen street banners with naked boobs. In the Vogue magazine yes, but never on the streets. Considering that Ukrane, Russia and other post-Soviet countries have enough sexual freedom. BTW, I've been to Ukraine this autemn, and they were showing strip dancing contest on the public chalnnel. Truth to tell it was late night.

BTW, in my native country (I live in New York now) you can easily buy alcohol at almost any age. I remember that I first got drunk when I was like 12 yo But I'm not alcoholic now!

I spent most of my life in Poland. The most famous nudity there are advertisements of "FA", which is a line of showe gels and soaps. The commercials always picture a woman taking a shower, on a beach, or in a tropical forest. They appear on TV at any time during the day, as well as in print.

Igor R. said:

Maybe France?
I was raised in Ukraine, but I've never seen street banners with
naked boobs. In the Vogue magazine yes, but never on the streets.
Considering that Ukrane, Russia and other post-Soviet countries
have enough sexual freedom. BTW, I've been to Ukraine this autemn,
and they were showing strip dancing contest on the public chalnnel.
Truth to tell it was late night.
BTW, in my native country (I live in New York now) you can easily
buy alcohol at almost any age. I remember that I first got drunk
when I was like 12 yo But I'm not alcoholic now!

Click to expand...

Uncle B wrote:
. Sounds like comunistic cencorship to me....

HonestMan said:

I'll give you another example of how freedom in America works. Last
week, on Sunday, was my fiance's birthday, and I went out in the
morning to get her some flowers, balloons and a bottle of
champaign. It was about 10:30 AM. To my surprise, when I walked up
to the cash register with the champaign, I was told that State Law
does not allow me to buy alcohol on Sunday before noon. How nice....

Click to expand...

In Switzerland we couldn't buy a dress for my wife on our one day in Zurich. It was "Ascencion Day". (?sp) Not till just noon, LOL, but the whole day, that's the law.

In Munich, they didn't sell pastries during lunchtime because of a local rule about not competing with resaurants. So craziness is not only in the US, LOL!

However, in the USA, you can by a lot of stuff 24 hours a day at the supermarket! Both, IMHO, are bad, but for different reasons.

HonestMan said:

And just recently, there was a special news segment in which they
had hidden cameras go into a body piercing place and they caught on
camera, how no one asked for teenager's age when they wanted to get
a body piercing. They made a big deal out of how a 13 year old can
get something pierced because she isn't asked to show ID.
That news segment made me very angry. I think it's time for people
to wake up!!! Why don't they look at things like this from a
different point of view. How did you raise your kids if they want
to get body piercings at the age of 13!!!!!!!!!??????? Maybe that's
what you should be looking at. But no one says anything about that.
The body piercing place doesn't check ID's so it's their fault that
13 year old kids get their nipples pierced. I think it's only the
parents fault!!!!

Click to expand...

My 3 boys were trained in values and respecting themselves. Boys with earing had to remove them before entering the house! Yes it was extreme but I wanted to draw a line, a strong line on what I feel, in my values is important. Parents have that opportunity, right and responsibility!

Breasts need to be de-sexualized so woman can nurse in public without being called, "slut"!

Of course, the public has right toi vent when they don't like things, that's freedom of speech.

However, it doesn't mean that their displeasure is based on some absolute morality.

Breasts are now commercialized objects!

Asher

Anthony32599 said:

I have to laugh about you saying that Europe has more freedom.
I'll remember that the next time I think that a child can't wear a
cross to school or a head scarf. Yeah, those guys in Europe are
really free.

Click to expand...

Please do not get it wrong! Muslim terrorism in US, Israel, Russia creates anti-Arab thoughts in the whole world. French people are not that tolerant as Americans. Jaques Cheraque (prerident of France) created there law to protect Arabs from people's hate. Surely all this muslim dress reminds about who they are, and how they different from others. He (Jaques) secrefised christian and jewish religious attributes only because of respect for muslims.

what about German war, again Germans are not that tolerent, in the 30-th national xenophobia was extreme, BTW they still doesn't appreciate africans and jews.

But despite everithing said above, Europe is more pleasant place for photograper, movie deirector... for people of art. I prefer to choose what to see on TV, how much to drink.

BTW, you're talking about alcohol, in US, but you're forgetting about drugs! A dose of weed, LSD, cocaine is just a phone call away, and you can easily get the desired phone number in the Punlic school, from your neighbour. Atleast this is how it is here in New York.

kumod said:

I have to agree with you Uncle B, I saw it and had to ask did I see
what I thought I saw. Big scandal everyone up in arms over
it.....Funny how that was the most searched for photo with search
engines in history. People saying I'M SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO Mad about
this but gotta see it.

Click to expand...

I think Britney Spears naked photo for Playboy Britain were the most searched photos

kumod said:

P Sexton said:

kumod said:

PinHole wrote:
Isn't that what people found so wrong, the fact that they saw 3
seconds of boob.

Click to expand...

Speaking only for myself - not "people" - no.
What I found wrong was the tastelessness of the entire show and the
idea that a male ripping the shirt off of a female is presented as
an appropriate halftime show for the Superbowl.

Click to expand...

--

There are a wide variety of things on television that one could
deem inappropriate that haven't raised the stir that this did.

Click to expand...

I agree, but, if you will notice, I specifically responded to your question for myself, only. Therefore I don't understand your statement to be relevant.

kumod said:

I
also think that there are far greater things that we need to be
spending the time and effort on with other then a singer that
decided to get a ton of publicity.

Click to expand...

I agree with this also, but, then, why are you and I spending time jabbering about it?

kumod said:

Not that they are the same thing, but no so long ago an apperance
by Elvis was deemed unappropriate for television.

Experience is what you get when you didn't get what you were
looking for

Click to expand...

HonestMan said:

I spent most of my life in Poland. The most famous nudity there are
advertisements of "FA", which is a line of showe gels and soaps.
The commercials always picture a woman taking a shower, on a beach,
or in a tropical forest. They appear on TV at any time during the
day, as well as in print.

Click to expand...

Uh, yeah, I remember FA advertisement! I'vee seen it too, it was beautiful. And yes this lady showed a nippple!

P Sexton said:

kumod said:

P Sexton said:

kumod said:

PinHole wrote:
Isn't that what people found so wrong, the fact that they saw 3
seconds of boob.

Click to expand...

Speaking only for myself - not "people" - no.
What I found wrong was the tastelessness of the entire show and the
idea that a male ripping the shirt off of a female is presented as
an appropriate halftime show for the Superbowl.

Click to expand...

--

There are a wide variety of things on television that one could
deem inappropriate that haven't raised the stir that this did.

Click to expand...

I agree, but, if you will notice, I specifically responded to your
question for myself, only. Therefore I don't understand your
statement to be relevant.

P Sexton said:

I
also think that there are far greater things that we need to be
spending the time and effort on with other then a singer that
decided to get a ton of publicity.

Click to expand...

I agree with this also, but, then, why are you and I spending time
jabbering about it?

P Sexton said:

Not that they are the same thing, but no so long ago an apperance
by Elvis was deemed unappropriate for television.

Experience is what you get when you didn't get what you were
looking for

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

--

LOL, well I guess I am talking about it cause I can't dance and the fields to wet to plow.

Experience is what you get when you didn't get what you were looking for

Did you see in the news that a woman in Texas was arrested and charged with selling a dildo? To a married couple over 18 years old.

I bet the whole of Europe is laughing at that one, although I do feel sorry for the poor woman, apparently she was a well known member of the community and went to church regularly, but I guess she made a pact with the devil when she started selling sex toys!! LOL

Chris

Mark Caplin said:

All this hooha over a human breast being exposed at a football game?
Law suits and broadcasters changing content...

I imagine this will affect photographic content and change posting
rules for sites (like this) . Is the USA really this conservative?

--
http://www.pbase.com/mkelpie

Click to expand...

Ok, after all these talks, I told myself : I should see it and make my mind about this big US scandal. So I launched my favorite P2P app, searched Janet Jackson and immediately received tons of answers, all related to this big incident.

Ok, let's watch that.

Firstly I should say that my english isn't strong enough to understand fast-paced songs like this one. So I just watched the show without understanding the lyrics. Maybe if I had understood them I would get a completely different opinion, maybe not.

Anyway, what I saw was a typical pop show, with way too much light going on and off, way too much enormous banners showing "JANET" and later "JUSTIN" etc.. In short way too much dramatization. The music was standard, low-quality, typical of what you hear on radio these days.

From time to time I saw what could be seen as sexual mimicry but so fast executed it looked a bit weird. Like the performers didn't fully assumed it.

Well, finally, at the very end of the show, the male singer ripped of part of Janet's costume and so exposed her right breast for, maybe, at most less than a second. To me it looked like un-prepared, badly done and added nothing to the show itself.

Anyway, my first reaction was : THAT'S ALL ?? THIS SCANDAL FOR THAT ?? THE WHOLE USA GOING MAD FOR THAT ?? Something's wrong...

To put things into perspective : a few days ago the very well known journalist presenting the main news show of the most-watched TV station here (TF1) exposed by accident for a short time (a few seconds) part of her bra on air. It was broacasted at 8:00 PM where most french people watch TV news.

I bet lots of people laughed. And that's it. Nobody shouted scandal. In fact it came absolutely un-noticed : no big titles on paper, no end-less discussion on weblogs, even no talks at all about it around the coffe machine at the office the next day.

Looking at the Janet incident's reaction, this journalist would probably be fired for such an offense in the USA...

--
Rémi

First of all (and not that it matters), this site is based in the UK, not the US.

The problem is not that specific incident. I like vulgarity as much as the next guy. South Park is one of my favorite shows. But when I sit down to watch South Park, I know what to expect. When I sit down to watch a football game, I don't want the halftime break extended twice as long as it usually is to allow preening "entertainers" the opportunity to grab their crotches and expose themselves on broadcast TV. Anyway, I switched channels when the first half ended and switch back for the second half. I missed it, but I don't think I missed anything. I hope the lesson that the league learned all this other nonsense just detracts from the football game.

Tell you what, you refrain from making any sweeping judgments about the sexual hangups of Americans and I'll refrain from making any sweeping judgments about the drinking habits of Australians.

Mark Caplin said:

All this hooha over a human breast being exposed at a football game?
Law suits and broadcasters changing content...

I imagine this will affect photographic content and change posting
rules for sites (like this) . Is the USA really this conservative?

--
http://www.pbase.com/mkelpie

Click to expand...