Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Why is OK to hear Bad Language On TV in the USA.. If YOU PAY Extra?
Old 05-03-2019, 03:12 PM   #1
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Historic Florida
Posts: 3,537
Why is OK to hear Bad Language On TV in the USA.. If YOU PAY Extra?

I remember watching an Australian TV show airing at prime time, around 9pm or so in Aus. and hearing the usual cuss words that a lot us use in everyday chat, and some that we do not use so commonly along with mild sexual content. None were bleeped or censored/blurred out like they are in the USA. I also remember in the UK in the evening the same thing, No Beeps or blurs, although I cannot remember that actual timing, it may be after 10pm or something.

With all the parental controls available these days on TV, why is the US still so Prudish..... Unless you pay Extra! Seems at the least quite hypocritical. Thinking that kids are not exposed to any of this at school or wherever is being very naÔve.

HBO, Netflix, etc. have no such issues with what some consider colourful language as it is not beeped out. BUT of course one has to pay a premium for those channels and services. This seems more like a money making scheme rather than keeping what some consider bad language and mild sexual content off TV, so that the young, impressionable, religious, grannies or whoever do not have to listen to or see them... again unless they pay extra, then it is OK. The same goes for a little more graphic sexual content (Not porn, but a little more than standard mild nudity, that is OK in movies and on pay channels) and for that matter racial slurring.

Yes, I agree keeping such shows that do contain such activities to later at night, but I really do not understand why it is OK if you pay Extra, you can watch them any time.

Personally I am not offended by any of these things, but understand that some over sensitive types maybe, and do agree that they should have their air time restrictions.

Am I the only one that thinks this is simply a money making ploy by whoever? I cannot think of any other reason, maybe there is.

Would it not be better to have a warning before a show to indicate it has sensitive subjects covered. This would allow regular channels to compete for the ratings with the pay channels.
__________________

__________________
"Arguing with an Engineer is like rolling in the mud with a pig. Just remember that the pig likes it."
ShokWaveRider is online now   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Why is OK to hear Bad Language on TV in the USA.. If YOU PAY Extra?
Old 05-03-2019, 03:16 PM   #2
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Historic Florida
Posts: 3,537
Why is OK to hear Bad Language on TV in the USA.. If YOU PAY Extra?

For some reason the "on" is in the wrong place in this title, can the mods please change it. It should be:

Why is OK to hear Bad Language on TV in the USA.. If YOU PAY Extra?
__________________

__________________
"Arguing with an Engineer is like rolling in the mud with a pig. Just remember that the pig likes it."
ShokWaveRider is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2019, 03:21 PM   #3
Moderator
Walt34's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Eastern WV Panhandle
Posts: 19,885
Title change made.
__________________
I heard the call to do nothing. So I answered it.
Walt34 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2019, 03:26 PM   #4
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Big_Hitter's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: In the fairway
Posts: 5,112
I hear cuss words all the time on regular TV
__________________
Swing hard, look up
Big_Hitter is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2019, 03:29 PM   #5
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 817
The difference is that broadcast TV is on public airwaves and anyone can access it for free. The others are private media (cable, streaming services, etc). I think public vs private is the key difference, not free vs pay.
Which Roger is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2019, 03:34 PM   #6
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: St. Charles
Posts: 1,481
OK, someone had to post it:

__________________
If your not living on the edge, you're taking up too much space.
Never slow down, never grow old!
CardsFan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2019, 03:42 PM   #7
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Historic Florida
Posts: 3,537
Quote:
Originally Posted by Which Roger View Post
The difference is that broadcast TV is on public airwaves and anyone can access it for free. The others are private media (cable, streaming services, etc). I think public vs private is the key difference, not free vs pay.
It is not really free in the USA as most folk pay for Cable or Satellite. Even so, the free vs pay is my point. Not ok if it is "Free" OK if you Pay!
__________________
"Arguing with an Engineer is like rolling in the mud with a pig. Just remember that the pig likes it."
ShokWaveRider is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2019, 03:49 PM   #8
Moderator
ziggy29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: North Oregon Coast
Posts: 16,149
It depends on whether or not you are subject to FCC regulations. Broadcast networks that are using the public airwaves (the spectrum allocated to over-the-air TV) have restrictions that other networks that *only* distribute by cable, satellite and streaming do not have.
__________________
"Hey, for every ten dollars, that's another hour that I have to be in the work place. That's an hour of my life. And my life is a very finite thing. I have only 'x' number of hours left before I'm dead. So how do I want to use these hours of my life? Do I want to use them just spending it on more crap and more stuff, or do I want to start getting a handle on it and using my life more intelligently?" -- Joe Dominguez (1938 - 1997)
ziggy29 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2019, 03:50 PM   #9
Administrator
MichaelB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: lumpen slums of cyberspace
Posts: 29,858
Thereís no conspiracy and this isnít about money. Part of the restriction is due to FCC regulation. See here https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides...ane-broadcasts These regulations apply to broadcast and cable alike.

Part of the difference is due to self-imposed standards that were implemented when broadcast / OTA was the primary source of viewing, long before cable enjoyed the viewership. It evolved this way, and cable programming slowly introduced images and words that did not meet the high broadcast standards. The TV industry enjoys the separate standards.

The broadcast channels still adhere to these standards. They will popularize and nurture stupidity (The Simpsons) but not show a naked body. Go figure.
MichaelB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2019, 04:14 PM   #10
Moderator
Aerides's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 3,596
^ It's all about the FCC span and lack thereof.

Same with Satellite vs. OTA radio.
Aerides is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2019, 04:29 PM   #11
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Historic Florida
Posts: 3,537
It still seems somewhat hypocritical to me. Oh Well, I do not even like the Simpsons. I used to like Family Guy but it got silly.

We are still very prudish on the whole I think as a nation, especially the religious folk. That is OK as to each his/her own. But other nations are also religious, but not to the point where a topless lady offends them. I think in the US people are more opinionated, meaning, I do not like it so you cannot/should not see it either. As opposed to each his/her own. There are many other controversies that fall into this category, but we cannot go into those here. Others controlling what others see or do (That is not criminal and does not hurt others). So much for being free. What was the saying of Uncle Sam "Your Country OWNS Needs You"?
__________________
"Arguing with an Engineer is like rolling in the mud with a pig. Just remember that the pig likes it."
ShokWaveRider is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2019, 04:32 PM   #12
Administrator
MichaelB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: lumpen slums of cyberspace
Posts: 29,858
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShokWaveRider View Post
It still seems somewhat hypocritical to me. Oh Well, I do not even like the Simpsons. I used to like Family Guy but it got silly.

We are still very prudish on the whole I think as a nation, especially the religious folk. That is OK as to each his/her own. But other nations are also religious, but not to the point where a topless lady offends them. I think in the US people are more opinionated, meaning, I do not like it so you cannot/should not see it either. As opposed to each his/her own. There are many other controversies that fall into this category, but we cannot go into those here. Others controlling what others see or do (That is not criminal and does not hurt others). So much for being free. What was the saying of Uncle Sam "Your Country OWNS Needs You"?
Is this thread still about the FCC or is it a generic rant?
MichaelB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2019, 04:46 PM   #13
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 15,294
What do you mean about 'mild' sexual content... from what I understand Game of Thrones is not mild at all..


BTW, it is also not the same... there are shows that I watch that you can tell they said the F word but it was not in the audio... but if you stream it... there it is... and this is paid, I think USA or something similar...
Texas Proud is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2019, 05:24 PM   #14
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Historic Florida
Posts: 3,537
Quote:
Originally Posted by Texas Proud View Post
What do you mean about 'mild' sexual content... from what I understand Game of Thrones is not mild at all..
GOT is on Pay TV.
__________________
"Arguing with an Engineer is like rolling in the mud with a pig. Just remember that the pig likes it."
ShokWaveRider is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2019, 05:25 PM   #15
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Historic Florida
Posts: 3,537
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelB View Post
Is this thread still about the FCC or is it a generic rant?
No, It was never about the FCC. Where in the OP was that mentioned?

From my point of view, just general observation and wondering what others thought. The fact a few folk brought up FCC is quite coincidental. Factual reasoning maybe, but coincidence never the less. To me it seems odd one can pay for something is OK and rules are waived, in this case at least.
__________________
"Arguing with an Engineer is like rolling in the mud with a pig. Just remember that the pig likes it."
ShokWaveRider is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2019, 05:26 PM   #16
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
joeea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 3,276
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShokWaveRider View Post
With all the parental controls available these days on TV, why is the US still so Prudish
Broadcast versus non-broadcast services.

Quote:
This seems more like a money making scheme rather than keeping what some consider bad language and mild sexual content off TV, so that the young, impressionable, religious, grannies or whoever do not have to listen to or see them... again unless they pay extra, then it is OK. The same goes for a little more graphic sexual content (Not porn, but a little more than standard mild nudity, that is OK in movies and on pay channels) and for that matter racial slurring.
This is confusing.

You want to force your crap on people who don't want it, so that you can save some money? How much would you actually expect to save?

Quote:
Would it not be better to have a warning before a show to indicate it has sensitive subjects covered. This would allow regular channels to compete for the ratings with the pay channels.
That already exists.
__________________
Old enough to know better.
joeea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2019, 05:31 PM   #17
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
joeea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 3,276
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShokWaveRider View Post
We are still very prudish on the whole I think as a nation, especially the religious folk. That is OK as to each his/her own. But other nations are also religious, but not to the point where a topless lady offends them. I think in the US people are more opinionated, meaning, I do not like it so you cannot/should not see it either. As opposed to each his/her own.
How would "to each his own" work for a public good like broadcast television anyway?

You get to see topless ladies on every channel and those who don't want to see it get to listen to radio?
__________________
Old enough to know better.
joeea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2019, 05:32 PM   #18
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
joeea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 3,276
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShokWaveRider View Post
To me it seems odd one can pay for something is OK and rules are waived, in this case at least.
It wouldn't be odd if you understood which rules you were talking about, where they apply and where they don't.
__________________
Old enough to know better.
joeea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2019, 05:55 PM   #19
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Historic Florida
Posts: 3,537
Some of you are missing the point, try to think outside the box. I still think if the FCC controls one aspect, it should either apply to all or none, that would make sense. Broadcasting is broadcasting. Whether OTA or not. Times do change, (Although sometimes people do not) so should the rules. All I am saying is if something applies to one, it should apply to all. Probably when the FCC was founded there was no cable or Satellite. It has nothing to do with the actual content, just the same for all. I am OK with censorship across the board, that makes sense.

In this case, cable and Satellite have an unfair advantage over the regular FCC controlled channels. From a ratings perspective.

The point remains the same regardless of the FCC. It is OK if you Pay Extra for premium channels. Even if it is because they are not governed by the FCC rules.
__________________
"Arguing with an Engineer is like rolling in the mud with a pig. Just remember that the pig likes it."
ShokWaveRider is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2019, 06:05 PM   #20
Moderator
Aerides's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 3,596
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShokWaveRider View Post
I still think if the FCC controls one aspect, it should either apply to all or none, that would make sense. Broadcasting is broadcasting. Whether OTA or not.
OTA is based on a publicly built network, therefore under the FCC domain. Cable/Satellite, is a privately build network. If you'd like the FCC (and other regulatory agencies) to increase the scope of their purview to include more private industries, well that's a whole different argument and one that I'd not expect to see you win in this country.

As far as "advantage" - sorry no, you win with quality. Saying F and S and showing a boob doesn't mean you make more money. Cable has a completely different business model than OTA.
__________________

Aerides is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Usa #1, usa #1, usa #1, usa #1, dex Health and Early Retirement 14 02-07-2011 02:46 PM
American Retired in UK Needing To Replace a USA ETF portfolio with USA Stocks/Bonds cvc8445 FIRE and Money 17 06-18-2010 12:41 PM
Usa......usa.....usa........ Dawg52 Other topics 6 07-04-2007 09:54 PM
USA, USA, USA... mickeyd Other topics 6 12-18-2006 02:53 PM

» Quick Links

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:08 PM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.