TV Stations Cancel 'Saving Private Ryan'

FNC ^ | 11-11-04 | Associated Press

[ConYoungBlack]

TV Stations Cancel 'Saving Private Ryan

NEW YORK — Several ABC (search) affiliates have announced that they won't take part in the network's Veterans Day (search) airing of "Saving Private Ryan," (search) saying the acclaimed film's violence and language could draw sanctions from the Federal Communications Commission (search).

Stations replacing the movie with other programming Thursday include Cox Television-owned stations in Atlanta and Charlotte, N.C., three Midwest stations owned by Citadel Communications.

"Under strict interpretation of the rules, we can't run that programming before 10 p.m.," said Ray Cole, president of Citadel, which owns WOI-TV in Des Moines, KCAU-TV in Sioux City and KLKN-TV in Lincoln, Neb.

The Oscar-winning film includes a violent depiction of the D-Day invasion and profanity.

[Normal4me]

I wouldn't watch it nor rent it for the same reasons I don't watch the be-headings of hostages in Iraq. I'm not anti-war, it's just not my thing.

Ironically, if Micheal Moore had produced it, most of us would be boycotting it altogether right?

[ServesURight]

Everybody in Hollywood are liberals. But so what? What are you going to do? Are you going to boycott everybody who has a difference of opinion with you? Spielberg has made some films that are certified classics. If he's not the greatest director in motion picture history then I don't know who is.

[12 Gauge Mossberg]

I just think FReepers need to focus on something other than the politics of the Hollywood set. Granted, there are some actors and actresses that I make a point to avoid, such as Alec Baldwin or Julia Roberts. But I can respect liberals such as Spielberg and Hanks who keep their politics to themselves instead of making bug-eyed hateful statements everyday about Bush.

[silent_jonny]

Your reasoning is flawed--Michael Moore would never make a movie like Saving Private Ryan. Too patriotic.

[joesnuffy]

The idea of ABC affiliated in any way with the concepts of decency or responsibility or honesty or truth or patriotism or anything Pro USA is laughable at best...when they are in fact the very antithesis such nobility

They still contend Rather is a journalist and not the cheap commie propagandist that he has shown himself to be over and over again...

And that they were not culpable in the lies they have spread non stop...

Walter Cronkite being their chief propaganda minister...

I would not watch ABC for any reason...or for that matter

CBSNBCMSNBCCNNPUBLICTV or listen, watch or read MSM in order to ascertain truth...

EVER

imo

[Doe Eyes]

ABC has suddenly found a moral compass in the last 24 hours for what is in its programmming offerings.

ABC is airing SPR, its the affiliates that aren't picking it up. They are worried about big fines from the FCC. As far as I know, the FCC has not stated a position on fining stations that air this movie.

[sharktrager]

There is substance behind the stunt.

The fact is, it shows the system is screwed up because, technically, there could have been a fine, and that is not how our legal system is supposed to work.

I, for one, don't want the government being allowed to control the context of language, because that is far too close to censoring ideas.

[silent_jonny]

I was agreeing with what you were saying.

And you're right about Tom Hanks, too. He supported Clinton's re-election in '96, but after the Lewinsky scandal broke, he publicly said (paraphrase), "I wish I never gave Clinton money." Since then, Hanks has been pretty mum about his politics. As much as he admirers the WWII generation, I think he also quietly supports our efforts in the War On Terror. As far as Hollywood liberals go, he's a class act.

[sharktrager]

So you feel that your politics should define what is aired, and that nobody who disagrees with you should be allowed to produce anything that will be on television?

[Dr. Frank fan]

The fact is, it shows the system is screwed up

Look. How is the system "screwed up"?

Tonight, hundreds of TV stations are going to show SPR. None of them will be fined. What's "screwed up"?

Some station in Iowa disingenuously crying wolf proves that there really is a wolf?

technically, there could have been a fine,

There is not going to be a fine. Nobody seriously believes there is going to be a fine. There is no good reason to believe that there will be a fine. And I reckon even Mr. Cole does not, deep down, actually believe there will be a fine.

He is crying wolf.

[Proud Conservative2]

I hope these new found morals stick with them. I will be vigilant in watching their programming in the future and fast to point out any indescretions to authorities!

[silent_jonny]

I visited my ABC affiliate's website--WTVD 11 in North Carolina--and they're gonna show it!

From the site:

"The ABC Television Network presents Steven Spielberg's Oscar-winning film "Saving Private Ryan" as a tribute to veterans beginning at 8 p.m. tonight on ABC 11. The broadcast will include an introductory message from Vietnam Veteran and former POW, Senator John McCain. "Saving Private Ryan" contains graphic violence and intense adult language, including a realistically violent depiction of the D-Day invasion and extensive profanity. "Saving Private Rying" carries a TV-MA,L,V parental guideline, is intended for mature audiences, and viewer discretion is strongly advised."

[Dr. Frank fan]

Look, let me make another analogy. Think of cases like Rigoberta Menchu, Tawana Brawley, or some other known fraud or hoax. It happens time and time again that the left grasps onto some story which, they argue, shows how bad things are.

Then if the hoax is exposed for what it is, the story exposed as an out-and-out lie, the left shrugs and says, "Well, ok, maybe it's not literally true, but at least it shows some Larger Truth about the way things are..." I know you've heard this a thousand times over.

Well, you are essentially making the same argument: That even those it's not literally true that TV stations have an actual risk of getting fined for showing SPR, it's ok for this guy to pretend and lie about feeling "scared" so as to expose the "Larger Truth" that the FCC is being too moralistic/arbitrary/whatever.

Sorry, I just don't buy into Hoaxes For Larger Truths.

[sharktrager]

He is not crying wolf. He is pointing out that the system does not actually have any rules. If some government official finds a word offensive in a certain content, there is a fine. If he doesn't, there isn't.

Are you aware that radio shows nationwide can no longer air best of shows because, although the laws are the same, they would now get fined for the content? These are shows that have aired more than once with no fine. But, since their last airings, the broadcasters have quietly removed them from rotation because fines have since been issued for the same content.

The federal government justified the stricter rules for the airways, while letting the newspapers slide, because there were few radio stations and many papers in the average city. It was felt the limited choices for radio justified tighter controls because there were fewer options.

Now the situation is reversed, but the rules remain the same.

You really need to look at this situation because what the FCC finds offensive under a future administration may not be so much to your liking. Unpopular speech must be defended because, at some point, you too are going to want to say something that is unpopular, and you will want that right.

[zoobee]

Nice points. I think that since they made a big deal out of it, more people will watch...or rent it. I'll even try to sit through it.....

[sharktrager]

Not a hoax.

Fact is, stations HAVE been fined for repeating things in the same content that had been allowed for years.

If it takes station managers making this stand to get some people to wake up I am all for it. I do not want to sit idly by and watch as others dictate what I can and can't see, say and hear.

[Dr. Frank fan]

He is not crying wolf. He is pointing out that the system does not actually have any rules. If some government official finds a word offensive in a certain content, there is a fine. If he doesn't, there isn't.

Is there any sane reason to believe that the FCC will level a fine for showing this particular film given that it's already been shown??? If not, he's crying wolf to show a "Larger Truth". That "Larger Truth" may, in fact, actually be true, as you are saying. But that's no reason for me to nod my head and pretend that this isn't just a stunt.

You really need to look at this situation because what the FCC finds offensive under a future administration may not be so much to your liking.

Don't get me wrong - I'm not even saying that current FCC rulings are to my liking. I just find it very hard to believe that anyone could possibly believe that showing SPR would entail any nontrivial risk of fine. Hey, maybe I'm wrong... we'll see tonight, right? It's going to be shown on many many affiliates and we'll see what the FCC does.

[Dr. Frank fan]

If it takes station managers making this stand to get some people to wake up I am all for it.

If it takes Rigoberta Menchu falsifying her biography to achieve social justice then I am all for it...

Sorry, no... not me. *shrug* I have no great love for what the FCC has been doing (my opinion is not that strong either way) but I just have a distaste for posturing political stunts, which is what - I am fairly certain - this is. Best,

[Let's Roll]

This is just their latest attempt to mock the FCC.