Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years.

Thanks,

CNET Support

General discussion

Super Bowl Stunt May Force Change In Broadcast Standards

Feb 7, 2004 1:23AM PST

Could'nt find a spot in the Boobie discussions to hang it on. 239 posts?? wow, must be some sort of record.

Anyway, thought the Janet Jackson Fans might be interested in this article. Those Jacksons sure know how to get publicity.

http://www.thebostonchannel.com/news/2828076/detail.html

Discussion is locked

- Collapse -
Re: Watch all the filth you want -- I don't watch 'Filth!'
Feb 8, 2004 10:44PM PST

And therein lies the problem, Evie. Your modest proposal would inevitably mean that this "special package" would have a higher price. You're the one who wants limits on what's shown, so you should be the one who has to make the effort to limit your options!

-- Dave K, Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!

- Collapse -
Re:Re: Watch all the filth you want -- I don't watch 'Filth!'
Feb 8, 2004 11:06PM PST

You already pay a premium for HBO don't you? The kind of objectionable material I am talking about is that which is shown on MTV, not A&E and Bravo. Why should anyone have to pay a premium for a little decency.

Gotcha with that "filth" huh? Maybe you'll temper your indiscriminant use of the words prude and bluenose to denigrate any and every attempt, however minor, to shield children from the oversexualizing of our society.

Evie Happy

- Collapse -
You want choice Dave, so you
Feb 9, 2004 3:57AM PST

pay for it. Why should everyone else subsidize your choice? I'ld almost think you object to a higher price. I thought Dems and others on the left counted it a point of honor to give their money away. Use Bush's tax cut to pay for it.

- Collapse -
ROFL! Tax cut TV. Good one. (nt)
Feb 9, 2004 5:05AM PST

.

- Collapse -
Trash, Trash, Trash.
Feb 9, 2004 4:31AM PST

There, I upgraded it. Feel better?


You're the one who wants limits on what's shown, so you should be the one who has to make the effort to limit your options!


You're the one that desperately wants to satisfy your prurient viewing habits, so you should be the one who has to pay a bit extra to expand your options.

- Collapse -
On the other hand.
Feb 8, 2004 11:16PM PST

Parents could try controlling what their children watch and not wait for intrusive government regulation to do it for them.

Dan

- Collapse -
(NT) But should they expect the government to not help them any?
Feb 8, 2004 11:18PM PST

.

- Collapse -
Any more, you mean. nt
Feb 8, 2004 11:26PM PST

.

- Collapse -
(no text) and no point obviously to discuss it.
Feb 8, 2004 11:31PM PST

.

- Collapse -
How typical. I KNEW you'ld respond that way Dave.
Feb 8, 2004 8:09AM PST

What did you expect after setting cable up as the poster child?

- Collapse -
What do you mean? -nt
Feb 8, 2004 11:27PM PST

.

- Collapse -
Dave went into his usual rant...
Feb 9, 2004 4:04AM PST

'How typical -- you feel the right not just to decide what comes into your house, but into mine as well. That's not the American way -- to use the same rhetoric y'all do, why don't you go to Iran, where the government enforces religiously based decency standards on everyone?'

'How typical...decide what comes to my house...go to Iran' right down to the good old boy 'y'all'.

- Collapse -
Um...
Feb 8, 2004 8:03PM PST

We DO regulate the airwaves already Dave. So your objection to some regulation of what has now become the modern day equivalent of "broadcast" is what?

You can still have your HBO. But I guess you'll have to find some other way to get your jollies than Sex and the City as this is their final hurrah.

Evie Happy

- Collapse -
My first reaction is,where's that old bottle of Ipecac?
Feb 7, 2004 9:11AM PST

or maybe I'll rent a Michael Moore movie and produce the same end result?

- Collapse -
Re:My first reaction is,where's that old bottle of Ipecac?
Feb 7, 2004 9:44AM PST

You lost me there Pal. What in hell is Ipecac? and who is Michael Moore? I drink Jack Daniels myself and watch the 3 Stooges.

- Collapse -
On the off-chance you're serious :)
Feb 7, 2004 11:48AM PST

Hearing about this "stunt" has gotten me to the point where it's going to cause 'projectile vomiting'.

I don't think it's still available but Syrup of Ipecac is a poison control measure,a good swig will empty your stomach of it's contents also.

If one wishes to induce vomiting,the most vile way to do so(more than those previously mentioned)would be to watch a film by left wing nut Michael Moore,his "Bowling for Columbine" comes to mind.

To the best of my knowledge,The Three Stooges have never caused anyone to vomit.I suspect that an excessive intake of Jack Daniels might accomplish it though. Wink

- Collapse -
Re: On the off-chance you're serious :)
Feb 7, 2004 1:29PM PST

Hi, Tony.

Of course, Michael Moore's films have made more money at the box office than any other documentary filmmaker's -- but never mind that! (OTOH, his diatribe at the Oscars was another example of inappropriate behavior for the situation).

-- Dave K, Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!

- Collapse -
Making money, Dave...
Feb 7, 2004 2:30PM PST

And Larry Flint made a fortune from Hustler Magazine and his other enterprises. So your but he made a lot of money means what, Dave?

- Collapse -
Re: Making money, Dave...
Feb 8, 2004 4:48AM PST

Hi, J.

Flyhnt's a pornogtapher, so the comparison doesn't really apply. My point is that his opinion of Moore is apparently not universal (I like some but not all of Moore's work myself -- but he's definitely to the left of me!)

-- Dave K, Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!

- Collapse -
How much is that? Inquiring minds want to know. (NT)
Feb 8, 2004 8:24AM PST

.

- Collapse -
Re:On the off-chance you're serious :)
Feb 8, 2004 12:01AM PST

Thanks for clearing up that Ipecac situation. I knew you had a point somewhere there. I was kidding about Jack Daniels. Have'nt drank in 20 years now. But, I think I might take a nip or two just in case my brain is drying out here.

Hope you don't become Bulimic over this "stunt" situation.

Have a Good One,
George

- Collapse -
Nah, the lpecac will be more pleasant both now and in retrospect. (NT)
Feb 7, 2004 9:53AM PST

.

- Collapse -
Rent what you want while you're still free to do so -nt
Feb 8, 2004 11:29PM PST

.

- Collapse -
Re:Super Bowl Stunt May Force Change In Broadcast Standards
Feb 9, 2004 11:28AM PST

Not necessarily new standards, let's just enforce the ones we have!!