To be honest, I don't think you NEED a tv for your news. I get most of my info off of the internet which is by no means free from perversion. It isn't about that though. Is it going to kill me to avoid stern's station in search of quality programming? If enough people avoid it, the station will lose ratings and stern will be dumped.
I think the ultimate question is being somewhat side stepped in this discussion (or at least my ultimate question). TO answer you: I don't think that sexual content should be on at all times of the day, but I do think it should be ALLOWED at all times. If people are putting trash on at 9 in the morning and no one watches, it becomes a nonissue. It is like any industry- kill the demand and the supply will change.. I simply don't want the government acting as a watchdog in this or in any industry. People can take care of these problems without big brother.
I get most of my info off of the internet which is by no means free from perversion. It isn't about that though. Is it going to kill me to avoid stern's station in search of quality programming? If enough people avoid it, the station will lose ratings and stern will be dumped. If 50% of the available listening public DON'T listen, is Stern off the air? Or is he kept on the air by a minority?
I can avoid Howard Stern, I can avoid Internet porn, mostly. The problem, like tv, is that it becomes all pervasive and difficult to avoid. Then I have to start withdrawing from the public square. People are doing that, so all the decisions are being made by people who LIKE crap, and more becomes available.
I think reasonable people can make rules for themselves. That is what government is. I think it is legitimate for people to say, "Porn is available, but not right next to the cash register."