Posted on 05/01/2006 3:07:48 PM PDT by Mr. Silverback
Note: This commentary was delivered by Prison Fellowship President Mark Earley.
In McLean, Virginia, a young mother named Silvia began channel-surfing, looking for something that would amuse her 4-year-old daughter. Up on the screen popped something called “Girl Next Door.” It was a photo shoot for a Playboy centerfold, and it showed women in sexual poses, completely nude, except for portions that were blurred.
“It was very clear what was going on,” Silvia relates. She grabbed the remote—but it was too late. Her little girl was already asking questions.
The program was not a cable or satellite offering. In fact, Silvia did not even subscribe to those services because she knew it was hard to control their content. However, even over-the-air broadcasts have hit a new all-time low.
It’s just as bad on the radio. Another mother, this one in Seattle, was in her kitchen with her 5-year-old son, searching for her favorite music station. But instead of classical music, guess what: She heard a DJ using a vulgar term to describe the female anatomy. As Robin put it, “My son learned a new word that he wasn’t ready to learn, and I wasn’t ready to explain.”
These moms are not alone in their disgust. Overwhelmingly, Americans loathe having their children exposed to profanity and sexual vulgarity every time they turn on the TV or radio. The networks don’t seem to care. In fact, they recently filed suit against the FCC over its decision to fine networks that ignored community standards of decency. In their view, nobody has a right to tell them what to do. Even during “family hour,” they insist on airing programs containing the “F” word. If parents don’t like it, too bad.
This in-your-face attitude is indicative of how far our society has traveled along the path of radical individualism—especially when it comes to anything related to sex. Anything else can be restrained—smoking in public, driving without a seatbelt—all on the grounds that it’s good for society. But restrain sexual expression? No way—especially if it makes money.
And this is not without consequences. Just yesterday, I was advised by the head of a juvenile court services unit in a large suburban county that sex cases among juveniles are beginning to dominate their court dockets.
All of this is in contrast to the Judeo-Christian view that dominated our culture for most of its history. The view says innocent children should be protected from things that might harm them—especially ugly distortions of human sexuality. If adults wanted to consume filth, they had to go to grubby little theaters and bookstores to do it—places that kept children safely out.
What can we do today to clean up the airwaves? We can ask our lawmakers to support the Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act. This bill would increase fines and hold networks accountable if they break the rules.
The House overwhelmingly passed this bill a year ago. But it’s gone nowhere in the Senate. Yesterday, members of pro-family groups bombarded their senators with calls. They reminded them about the networks’ lawsuit against the FCC. And they asked them to get behind the Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act—ASAP.
If you didn’t call yesterday, I hope you’ll call today, and get your friends to call, too. We’re working hard on Capitol Hill for this cause.
In reality, the networks are not declaring war on the FCC; they’re declaring war on our kids. Are we going to put up with it—or are we going to fight back?
If anyone wants on or off my Chuck Colson/BreakPoint Ping List, please notify me here or by freepmail.
BreakPoint/Chuck Colson Ping!
If anyone wants on or off my Chuck Colson/BreakPoint Ping List, please notify me here or by freepmail.
Society used to be the safety net. No more.
Yes, we can change the channel ... or get rid of the TV. But that doesn't make it safe for our little girls to walk around the block.
There are consequences to a cultural indulgence in sexual libertinism ... and every day on the news we see the chickens coming home to roost.
There is always the 'power' button or sending the kids to their room to do homework.
It is not the 'if you don't just like it change the channel' it is preventing the intrusion of government becoming the nannies of society.
If sex(sic) didn't sell, it wouldn't be on the air. You want to change what is on TV, change the demand.
This is an E! program, which is cable.
Good point, and in most markets, E! isn't even basic cable, it is tier or a digital package. No one should be surprised what is on E!. Instead of more laws, use to learn the V chip and other parental controls.
Sure ... I'm a real tyrant ... ask my nine children.
Do you believe the American people should have no collective say in what is presented on the public airwaves ... other than having the option to change the channels?
Really??? You mean all I gotta do is change the channel and all that smut, soft porn, and suggestive crap somehow magically goes away?
/sarc off.
You should apologize to Ben franklin for using that quaote, a quote that was obviously meant to discuss unreasonable search and seizure and such, to justify getting to look at boobies.
Crap! Can't spell today. Let's try that again:
You should apologize to Ben Franklin for using that quote, a quote that was obviously meant to discuss unreasonable search and seizure and such, to justify getting to look at boobies.
Here is the problem, first, the complaint specifically discussed was a show on E! which is on the private cable airwaves(sic), not on the public airwaves. Secondly, the market drives what shows are on, which means that a larger collective have been voting with their pocketbooks for 'smut'. If you want to change what is on the airwaves, you change people's attitudes, you don't force it into legislation because you don't that type of speech.
If it didn't generate revenue for the stations or something else generated better revenue, then yes.
And no doubt the ultimate solution is for the American people to quit watching the stuff.
But I refuse to give the entertainment industry elites a pass on this. They are not just reflecting the culture ... they are driving it ... intentionally and irresponsibly.
The results have been tragic ... and even those of us who know where the "off" button is have to daily live with some of those results.
On one hand, I see your point. Parents should be the first line of defense and much of the problem comes not from the stuff being on in the first place, but from parents not knowing or caring what their kids watch.
On the other hand, I think that your argument would be just as valid if we were discussing a paper plant dumping tons of dioxin in an aquifer, and you posted photos of Brita filters. "Protect your kids with these, it's not our problem."
We all have to live in the culture this stuff creates.
This same debate pops up every few years (most notably around election time), and nothing will really change. Some of you who believe the FCC should be the nanny of American children (instead of regulating airwaves, which is its purpose) seem to forget that in the 1960s people made the same comments about Elvis Presley, the Beatles and the horrible demoralizing effects they had on our nation's youth.
I nearly screamed at the television when the new head of the FCC said, "Sure you could turn the TV off or change the channel, but why should we have to?"
Only a fringe minority of people (I'm looking at you Family Resource Center) actually make the complaints and a vast majority of Americans have no problem switching the channel if what they see on TV is too much for them to stomach.
As a film major, I find this type of censorship of all forms of media (whether it be film, television, print, music) abhorrent. For example, a beautiful film about a dark day in America came out this weekend, and someone based their decision on whether to go see it or not based on the number of profanities in the film. I'm sorry, but 40 people facing their doom are not going to say, "Gosh darn" when staring their own mortality in the face.
In the end, this is just another impotent attempt at censoring what we are free to view.
For those of you who claim this is a new argument, I direct you to this episode of Crossfire from 1986 featuring Frank Zappa (an avowed conservative) enduring a withering attack on his character by now Constitution Party honcho John Lofton. Lofton's arguments are the same empty pleas for sanity that people like Bozell spout today.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZM9I3r11QPY
It's a wonderful episode. Zappa methodically destroys every one of Lofton's arguments with no help at all, as Lofton frantically searches through a yellow notepad to find new venemous things to say about Frank. By the end, he is rendered completely helpless. In a last ditch effort, he smugly cries, "How much do you make spreading this filth, Mr. Zappa?" Frank looks towards the back of the studio and utters, "....millions." as if he never realized it before.
Personally, I believe television and the general media are much less salacious now than they were in the 1970s. Had it not been for The Godfather, the number one box office grossing film in 1972 would have been DEEP THROAT.
I also strongly object to the FCC considering bringing pay cable under their same jurisdiction. I pay for my premium channels, and therefore should be to view as much swearing, nudity and violence as I want. Mainstream Republicans and Democrats alike would simply not stand for this type of intrusion into our rights. How do you think my father (a Republican since 1962) would react if HBO was forced to pull The Sopranos because one stuffy housewive in North Carolina found the content objectionable?
Please. Let's have some maturity and common sense, because I feel for some of you it is sorely lacking.
Exactly right. In fact, it doesn't even make it safe for them to interact with other kids their age in wholesome settings . . . because the other kids cannot be expected to be particularly wholesome themselves. We have no TV reception in our home (though we do have a set for the VCR). Nonetheless, my 7-year-old picks up the latest in TV culture from peers at her suburban Catholic school.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.