I understand the conundrum. It seems as though your cable provider needed a little more competition to encourage a broader range of choices as to the channel packages. Can a pay network mix adult only porn with regular fare without notifying their customers? Or should such explicit programming be confined to adults only channels?
Well, I think they certainly can, but if they do it seems to me that they run the risk of alienating customers. Of course, most cable providers have a virtual lock on their markets. To that extent one might be able to make a better case for regulation, but I would argue that what we need is more competition. In my mind it still comes down to personal choices.
A parent who "tolerates" the excesses offered by some of the corporations gives them a green light to air such programming to children. This is what the dominant liberal media does.
If corporations were pressured (by individuals, not government) to do the "right" thing, they would separate out the "good" from the "bad" (and let their potential audience know where they could find such materials). But the homosexual agenda is being fought the same way the opposition to conservative ideals is being fought, through a media propaganda campaign.
A channel like MTV can be offensive and explicit and programs to an underage audience yet it is offered in most cable packages. Even if you don't watch it and block it out, your cable subscription fee still goes in part to Viacom-MTV.
Some people are asking for customers to be allowed to "opt in" to channels (especially in a digital environment like satellite) rather than "opt out". In the absence of any broadcast standards from the corporations, it seems like a reasonable request.
The only reason to REQUIRE a customer to buy garbage that he will never watch is to inflate the bill and create an illusion of market exposure. I don't think that any customer should be required to buy porn (especially when different porn producers do it well or lousy).