Moderate our views on commercialized "free speech" in public arenas?

[lostnfound]

First, let me say that George Carlin's famous http://www.erenkrantz.com/Humor/SevenDirtyWords.shtml">soliloquy about the 7 dirty words you can't say on TV has always made me laugh.

I am not in favor of censoring the Internet in any manner whatsoever.

Years ago, I was far more disgusted by the fact that the most passionate scenes were censored from the movie http://www.suntimes.com/ebert/ebert_reviews/1999/01/thecook.html">The Cook The Thief His Wife & Her Lover -- while the chopping up & murder scenes were not -- than I ever could have been disgusted by what was a really interesting movie.

And my favorite world city is Amsterdam, for all of its broad range.

But the issue of "family values" vs free speech ought to be put in a different context than either the left or the right puts it in. The ranks of the right wing has been beefed up by frightened parents with knee-jerk nostalgia for a purer past.

Most parents try to protect their child during their 'formative years' from some perceived evil or another. I avoid exposing my 3 year old to television violence and commercialism. My secretary avoids exposing her 3 year old grandchild to television sex. Naturally, my values are more valid than hers. ;)

Now you can say 'turn off the TV!' and be right..but it is advice right up there with 'exercise more!' It works some of the time for most of us and all of the time for some of us.

And a few might say 'they are going to get exposed to it all eventually anyway, just let them watch it all'..but one might want that tree to grow a little before pruning, lest it turn into a bonsai.

So let's broaden the context:
As a community, do we want to create some "safe zones" in the public arena, which are "safe" from not only explicit sex but also violence and commercialism?

When rightwingers complain about words like 'fuck' and excessive nudity on TV, we can roll our eyes and tell them we don't understand 'WTF' they are complaining about, "don't they believe in free speech"?...which only reinforces their fear that liberals want to cause the society to deteriorate further down the slippery slopes to perdition, and leads them to flee into the arms of the conservative beast that entraps them with their own fears.

In reality, sex and violence on TV are NOT about free speech, they are about commercialism. Like Woodstock said on another thread, re the Superbowl halftime, "This isn't about a breast to me - it's about sleaze. The human body is beautiful. What they were doing at halftime was trading sex for money. That's not beautiful.

We must recognize the commercial context of TV. And we need to repeatedly remind conservative family values types like the http://www.parentstv.org/PTC/publications/reports/top10bestandworst/Main.asp">Parents Television Council that sex on TV isn't the result of "liberals" getting what they want; it's the result of commercial interests appealing to the least common denominator. Further, there would be more time and more channels available for quality children's programming if as a society we could fund it differently, so that 1/3 of the airtime wasn't taken up with advertising.

When rightwingers complain about words like 'fuck' and excessive nudity on TV, we liberals should
1) recognize and validate their desire to create 'safe zones' to make society more 'family-friendly'-- i.e., "I have my own concerns about too much violence and too much materialism"
2) reframe the discussion into the defects of commercialized culture, of which pervasive sex & violence & excessive advertising is a side-effect. "Corporations will always strive to push the limits."
3) point out that the FCC had made a start at community standards at one time but that now the FCC has been silenced and subverted by corporations, in many ways.
4) remind them that it's the same 5 media companies presenting all of these channels, and there would be more hope of groups developing creative child-safe channels if these media companies didn't have a lock on the media
5) remind them that "PBS-kids" is under attack and threatened with budget cuts by the same people that want to 'drown government in a bathtub', and sweet programs like Mister Rogers are trending towards Power Rangers and other stuff that can sell, because there are few noncommercial funding sources.
6) remind them that there's http://www.turnoffyourtv.com/programsratings/ratingsAds.html">21 minutes of advertising in every hour of broadcast TV, which is saturating our children's brains with materialism, consumerism, and very shallow perspectives about life. What's the solution? The public -- consumers -- are already paying for it all, indirectly; and we are paying to watch 39 minutes of programs PLUS 21 minutes of advertising.

[uhhuh]

1. Well said

And absolutely true.

[tinanator]

2. Republican versus Democratic Family Hour values

It seems the pattern has emerged where television nudity and sexual raciness under Republican oversight has always been more loosely controlled or possibly simply encouraged, and under Democratic supervision all things sexual or violent have been repressed. For example the drastic editing of Warner Bros. cartoons in the 80's and early 90's were so stupified that they removed the "poofs" from the Road Runner/Wile E. Coyote cartoons. At the same time Fox Network was pushing the boundaries of what used to be known as the Family Hour with (very funny) programs like Married With Children or outright trash programs like Cops (that was Fox, right?) showing seamier social aspects in a rather militaristic/propagandistic light of self loathing and disrespect for privacy. There is really only one party to blame for putting oral sex into the nightly news content of our country and elementary classrooms, in another example of privacy violating political oppression. It is reprehensible that the family hour viewing traditions have been destroyed by conservative profiteers, and just as reprehensible that Democratic attempts at paternalistic content controls went so far as to butcher classic cartoons to the point of no comedic return. A tough question, and a good thing I dont have kids to worry about these days.

[dutchdemocrat]

3. Netherlands

And my favorite world city is Amsterdam, for all of its broad range.

Tits are allowed. Sex is normal. People smoke pot... if they want. People don't live on the streets generally. The elderly are taken care of and live well. Gays have rights. Prostitutes have a union, as do the military.

Taxes are high. Who cares.

*smile*

:7

[rman]

4. Netherlands wellfare state being dismantled

The dismatling of the wellfare state in the Netherlands is an official mission statement by the ruling right-wing 'Cristian Democrats' party.
It's not by far as bad as it is in the US, yet. But we're well on our way.

[dutchdemocrat]

5. Next election

Harry Potter will dissappear.

They don't have time to whittle away at it that much, not with the bureaucratic backlog and speed of due process in the Netherlands.

[Bandit]

7. Yes and how many "Terrorist" hate Amsterdam for it's freedoms?

Only the GOP terrorists.

[bloom]

6. good post

IF people really wanted to protect their children - don't have them watch the Super Bowl and it's accompanying commercials at all.

It's funny that people want their kids to be part of the culture (including the commercial part) and want them to be separate (and protected from it) at the same time.

Take away the commercial part of the culture and what is left? Not a whole lot.



My kids are college age now and I don't worry about it - but I well remember walking that road. My kids did mostly watch public TV when they watched any - I would hate to think what raising kids would like without having that choice. (I'm glad we didn't have Cable/Satellite back then.)