General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhat part of TV-MA do "concerned parents" not understand?
With all of the mature, violent, sexual content filling up each episode of FXs Sons of Anarchy, youd think the Parents Television Council would have a direct line to series creator Kurt Sutters office, where each of their complaints could be addressed accordingly. (With lots of ignoring and deleting, presumably.) The PTC is breathing heavily and seductively down Sutters neck for last Tuesdays episode, which kicked off with an opening montage of nearly all of the main characters engaging in sexual acts. Their advice to FX: go join all those titties and asses on HBO.
The PTC called the opening sequence the most sexually explicit content the [organization] has ever documented on basic cable, according to THR. To be fair, theyre pretty spot on with it being one of the most sexually forward things cable has ever shown. Not only did we see Jax having good sex, but we saw Gemma and Nero having bad sex, Marilyn Manson sorta raping Juice, Wendy getting down with a vibrator, and Tig doing
whatever he was doing
with transgender character Venus Van Dam. All before the opening credits. But was it more damaging than the endless amounts of violence on this and many other series across the TV dial? Doubtful.
And so if FX wants to show audiences such skin-tastic material, the PTC feels their audience should have to pay for it as a separate part of their cable package. Heres how PTC president Tim Winter puts it in a press release.
For years, FX has been pursuing a path to be as explicit as HBO yet still be included in the forced-bundle of advertiser-supported networks that every cable or satellite subscriber must purchase through their monthly bill. If FX wants to be like HBO and air this kind of explicit content, then they should become a premium network.
Of course, in the face of rational arguments that FX airs the series during the latest primetime hour along with ample warnings and TV-MA ratings, Winter then moves the argument to one involving customers only paying for the content that they want a la carte. He compares it to paying for other movies in a theater instead of solely the one hes going to see, and says that the Sons of Anarchy footage is something of a watershed moment for cable programming.
In order to watch cable news, ESPN, Disney or the History Channel, every family in America must now also pay for pornography on FX.
http://www.cinemablend.com/television/Why-Sons-Anarchy-Being-Hassled-By-Concerned-Parents-Again-68455.html
MADem
(135,425 posts)Sounds like a hot-breathed POUTRAGE exercise. They want something to stir up the masses and get them all pissed off.
Thing is, they'll probably drive poutraged "concerned parents" to the show--they had better put the whole thing "ON DEMAND" so those concerned parents can catch up on the plotlines!!!!
I've never watched the program, but I always say the answer to speech is more speech. And if they don't want to watch it, they should roll over on one well fed cheek, stretch out that arm and grab that remote and push that button!
I find some of these religious channels where they beg for money constantly pornographic. No one gives a shit about MY objections, and I know enough to keep moving when I come across them....
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)malfunction for Fundies...
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)So if you have cable or satellite, don't you have the ability to universally block all shows with certain content?
d_r
(6,907 posts)ProudToBeBlueInRhody
(16,399 posts)csziggy
(34,136 posts)So I don't have to pay for Faux Noise or the religious channels or all those sports channels I never, ever watch? If they can do that, I would be very happy.
If not, they need to learn how to use the parental controls - they can set them so they never have to see any TV-MA programming at all. It's not that hard - I used it to block Faux Noise so no one can tune to that propaganda channel ever in my house.
RandySF
(58,894 posts)I block all the way down to TV-14 and PG-13 so I can control what the kid sees while he's still very young.
TreasonousBastard
(43,049 posts)watching "Sons of Anarchy" again.
I was getting bored with it for a while.
RandySF
(58,894 posts)csziggy
(34,136 posts)Sorry - I couldn't resist.
Warpy
(111,270 posts)they wouldn't accept it. They want ammunition to take to Babble School so they condemn anybody who isn't them.
Initech
(100,080 posts)Don't go ruining it for the rest of us.
LynneSin
(95,337 posts)I mean that's the only thing I can figure out because when I find bad stuff on TV I use that nifty invention called the remote and I change channels or better yet I turn the damn thing off.
And last time I checked Parents should be parenting their kids, not letting the TV be the baby sitters. If parents are too fucking lazy to monitor what their kids are watching and use the parental controls available to block channels that have non-kid friendly stuff on it like FX, then top blaming the rest of the world for your own damn laziness. These people support the same party who do not want the government to interfere with their guns but want the government to dictate what is on TV. Which is it - do we want MORE government regulations or do we want LESS government regulations because we can't fricking pick and choose here.
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)by publicly going after popular shows...
When I worked at a newspaper, the PTC, Focus on the Family, and the like used to blow up our fax machine every morning with a press release stating their opposition to this TV show or that commercial or this music video...(This was back when "Will and Grace" was really big, and we heard their complaints constantly)
Orrex
(63,215 posts)The PTC formally objects to the phrase "backdoor ways."
Response to RandySF (Original post)
Warren DeMontague This message was self-deleted by its author.
rudolph the red
(666 posts)and are just going for the shock/gross-out factor. It used to be a good show, but it really has become a horrible mess the last couple seasons. As for the complaints; It's a cable channel, it airs late at night, and there are more than adequate warnings for the parents of young children.
* and from the OP, "Marilyn Manson sorta raping Juice", there really wasn't any "sorta" about it.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)I don't need to see Marilyn Manson naked.
Behind the Aegis
(53,959 posts)...is why people get so fucking worked up over sexuality, but rampant, horrific violence merits a "meh"! When we were younger, my mother would let us watch rated "R" movies if the "R" was for sex (as long as it wasn't rape), but if it was "R" because of excessive violence, we weren't allowed to see it. In her opinion, sex and sexuality is natural, violence is not. Though, of course, violence is natural, she felt it sent a positive reinforcement that violence was some how acceptable.
Arkansas Granny
(31,518 posts)While I didn't allow R rated movies, I didn't get too upset if they happened to catch a sexy scene. Violence, however, was a deal breaker. There was a 10 year gap between my oldest and youngest child so all TV shows had to be suitable for the youngest. Of course, what was shown on TV back then (70's and 80's) was pretty mild by today's standards.
alp227
(32,027 posts)Archae
(46,333 posts)The Parents Television Council (PTC) is a United States-based censorship advocacy group founded by conservative Catholic activist L. Brent Bozell III in 1995.
World Wrestling Federation campaign and lawsuit[edit]
In 1999, the PTC launched a campaign against the World Wrestling Federation (WWF), now World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE), complaining that their SmackDown! program contained levels of sexuality and violence unbecoming prime time programming.[54] In the campaign, Bozell said that four children had been killed by peers emulating professional wrestling moves learned from the program.[55][56][57] With these allegations, Bozell and various PTC members began meeting with representatives of the advertising departments of various companies that advertised on SmackDown! to persuade them to withdraw sponsorship. The PTC also suggested that between 30 and 40 advertisers had pulled their commercials from WWF programming, an assertion that was not true.[57][58]
On November 9, 2000, the WWF filed a lawsuit against the PTC in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, claiming that the PTC's statements were false and constituted defamation.[59][60] The WWF also filed a copyright infringement lawsuit against the PTC for using clips from WWF programs in their promotional videos.[58] The PTC filed for dismissal of the suit, but on May 24, 2001, U.S. district court Judge Denny Chin denied the PTC's motion on the basis that the WWF's lawsuit had merit.[58] The PTC and the WWF settled out of court and, as part of the settlement agreement, the PTC paid the WWF $3.5 million USD and Bozell issued a public apology,[61] stating that it was wrong to blame the World Wrestling Federation or any of its programs for the deaths of children and that the original statements had been based on what was later found to be false information designed by people close to the Lionel Tate case to blame the death of Tiffany Eunick on the WWF.[62]
During the conflict the WWF created the Right to Censor (RTC) stable, a group of wrestlers that parodied the PTC by portraying them as self-righteous moral crusaders.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parents_Television_Council
alarimer
(16,245 posts)This group doesn't seem to realize that their efforts may result in MORE people watching the show, not fewer.
dilby
(2,273 posts)is because they show bare asses of men and sometimes a woman it plays after 10 PM when all the kids are supposed to be in bed anyways. I would prefer to be able to watch it a couple hours earlier so I did not have to stay up till 11 on a work night, but I know it's for the kids so I will suffer.