Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

The Law of Unintended Consequences at work again.
1 posted on 07/26/2006 11:54:03 PM PDT by WestVirginiaRebel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-24 next last
To: WestVirginiaRebel

Of course this is from Al-Reuters with the obligatory Bush mention....I'm sure bleeping some freaking words would ruin, just ruin the entire program.


2 posted on 07/27/2006 12:01:00 AM PDT by Uriah_lost (http://www.wingercomics.com/d/20051205.html)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Abram; albertp; AlexandriaDuke; Allosaurs_r_us; Americanwolf; Americanwolfsbrother; Annie03; ...
you know what i like. the fact that we have more freedom and a smaller less intrusive government under bush with a repub senate and congress then we did under clinton with a dem controlled congress and senate. yep it does my heart good to see it

Libertarian ping.To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here

3 posted on 07/27/2006 12:02:54 AM PDT by freepatriot32 (Holding you head high & voting Libertarian is better then holding your nose and voting republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Gabz

possible nanny state ping


5 posted on 07/27/2006 12:04:12 AM PDT by freepatriot32 (Holding you head high & voting Libertarian is better then holding your nose and voting republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: WestVirginiaRebel
They should just show it on cable or another pay to play service.

The pols are just gonna legislate them mean old dirty words away.

11 posted on 07/27/2006 12:28:40 AM PDT by NoCurrentFreeperByThatName
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: WestVirginiaRebel

I bet they get around this.


12 posted on 07/27/2006 12:33:19 AM PDT by Anti-Bubba182
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: WestVirginiaRebel

One of my most vivid childhood memories is that of being told by Mom, "sticks and stones may break your bones, but words will never hurt you!" She made it a point to teach my sister and me that letting someone else's words be a source of offense was giving them a power over you that they could get only if you gave it to them. Her approach was that all through life we would encounter people who would try to upset us with their language and the only sure way to avoid that trap was to understand that it's the listener that decides what effect someone else's speech will have on their feelings.


15 posted on 07/27/2006 12:47:05 AM PDT by jwparkerjr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: WestVirginiaRebel
Agree or disagree, the rules about colorful language have been in effect for, what, fifty years? Ken Burns knew this, left it in anyway, and now the real question is how many PBS stations will not be showing this series due to fear about fines.

Personally, I'd flip the bird to Burns, delay it by an hour, edit out the words and play the series, and let Burn's lawyers make a very interesting court case out of it. But that's just me. Colorful language doesn't harm me, it certainly wouldn't shock anyone in my household, but the honest truth is that so much of Burn's work recently has absolutely bored me that I'll probably just record it and fast forward through a lot of it.

Which is unfortunate.
26 posted on 07/27/2006 2:18:24 AM PDT by kingu (Yeah, I'll vote in 2006, just as soon as a party comes along who listens.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: WestVirginiaRebel

Okay. There have been rules since...forever...about language on broadcast television, right? When have networks ever been allowed to use curse words liberally on the air? Never, right? There have been allowances in context (Saving Private Ryan, etc.)

Personally, I am glad that there are limits on this.

If networks were given free reign to broadcast any language or content they wanted to, network television would be unwatchable (oh, wait...they already are unwatchable...) in a short period of time. They would make all content as salacious as possible in order to boost ratings.

I'm sorry. The networks are like children, and must be treated as such. They cannot be trusted to police themselves, "nanny state" labels by people notwithstanding.


32 posted on 07/27/2006 3:59:27 AM PDT by rlmorel (Islamofacism: It is all fun and games until someone puts an eye out. Or chops off a head.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: WestVirginiaRebel
If the explecitives make it to air, they could lead to crippling fines for the offencing stations as a result of a new law signed last month by President George W. Bush.

Something is wrong here. These typos and the fact that the link isn't working are unsettling. I have reason to question the veracity of the story. This is supposed to be the product of "professional" journalists who don't make these types of mistakes, NOT the pajamahadeen.
36 posted on 07/27/2006 4:12:08 AM PDT by DustyMoment (FloriDUH - proud inventors of pregnant/hanging chads and judicide!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: WestVirginiaRebel

Gosh, all the way to the 2nd paragraph before blaming Bush. Sigh.

The overall language is so bad that my wife pointed out that they frequently bleep out words on her favorite channel...The Cooking Channel (Food Network)!


37 posted on 07/27/2006 4:27:00 AM PDT by libertylover (If it's good and decent, you can be sure the Democrat Party leaders are against it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: WestVirginiaRebel

What idiot parent actually thinks Little Johnnie and Janie hasn't been exposed to and regularly uses the 'f' bomb?


38 posted on 07/27/2006 4:28:02 AM PDT by lawdude (To Colmes - It ain't rocket surgery!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: WestVirginiaRebel
Ask the FCC to screen it and find out if they need to change the dialog, would it be acceptable if shown after 9:00 with a warning about foul language?

I think this is just an attempt by PBS to bring up how (They feel) the guidelines are blurry and the FCC's actions have been inconsistent.

Remember Schlindler's list?

40 posted on 07/27/2006 4:45:14 AM PDT by #1CTYankee (That's right, I have no proof. So what of it??)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: WestVirginiaRebel
Wrong, there is not one bit of foul language that can not be replaced with decent language.

In many courtrooms, every lawyer that comes before that court knows that unnecessary profanity will not be tolerated. It is their responsibility to make their clients understand that.

Burns, as a professional film maker should know as well, if he chooses to ignore the law and include filth in his documentary, than let it lie on the cutting room floor, he has no one to blame but himself.

Burns knows the rules or at the very least he should. Go break the rules of your work place, see how long you are allowed to get away with it. Why should Burns be allowed to spit on the rules of common decency?

42 posted on 07/27/2006 4:47:58 AM PDT by thiscouldbemoreconfusing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: WestVirginiaRebel
"The Law of Unintended Consequences at work again.

As if this congress gave a damn about unintended consequences unless the consequences can provide more political fluff.

I am about as disgusted with congress as I have ever been. Has congress done anything meaningful this year at all? Has congress accomplished anything this year except debate fluff political issues for November?

47 posted on 07/27/2006 5:18:52 AM PDT by DaGman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: WestVirginiaRebel

Just bleep it out. My father was surrounded for six days by Chinese during the Korean War and he can still describe it without using profanity; ditto Jeremiah Denton speaking about his time in North Vietnam; ditto Joe Foss, CMO winner. If these guys can't do it without using the profanity, strike it up to class (or lack of it), bleep out the swearing and I doubt it will detract from the message.


49 posted on 07/27/2006 5:23:59 AM PDT by Jimnorwellwarren
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: WestVirginiaRebel

I'm more concerned about whatever spin Burns is going to put on this.


52 posted on 07/27/2006 5:30:04 AM PDT by Tijeras_Slim (Crazier than a rattlesnake at a Thai wedding)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: WestVirginiaRebel

Typical american... Reminds me of the 9/11 documentary where presenter Robert De Niro apologised for the foul language used by the fireman in one of the twin towers... Redicioulus!


57 posted on 07/27/2006 5:36:52 AM PDT by Kurt_Hectic (Trust only what you see, not what you hear)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: WestVirginiaRebel

I don't give a sh!t what they say as it couldn't come close to what was broadcast at the Slick Willie impeachment trial.

But seriously, what is the worst they could say? The "F" word? They say that all the time on tv after midnight on cable. And they pretty much drop the F bomb every other minute on HBO/Cinemax.

No, this is all an effort to blame Bush, the RIGHT, and most importantly, the evil Christian Right.


59 posted on 07/27/2006 5:40:41 AM PDT by subterfuge (Call me a Jingoist, I don't care...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: WestVirginiaRebel

I'm not worried about their language, but if any of those old guys have a wardrobe malfunction they should be punished to the full extent of the law.


60 posted on 07/27/2006 5:46:37 AM PDT by Manic_Episode (Some mornings, it's just not worth chewing through the leather straps...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: WestVirginiaRebel

Is the show going to include stories about newly liberated French women showing their appreciation to our GI's?


62 posted on 07/27/2006 5:48:15 AM PDT by EricT. (SpecOps needs to paint the NYT building with a targeting laser.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-24 next last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson