File Under: Are You F-in' Kidding Me?

Post here about TV shows, movies and other types of media

Moderators: Admin Team, Moderators

User avatar
TeMerc
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 15995
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2005 5:16 pm
Area Of Expertise: Security
experience: I know the functions, OS settings, registry tweaks and more
PC time: What else is there in life?
Location: PHX, AZ
Contact:

File Under: Are You F-in' Kidding Me?

Postby TeMerc » Sun Feb 24, 2008 6:42 pm

FCC on indecency tear, fines Fox for pixelated naughty bits
By Matthew Lasar | Published: February 24, 2008

The Federal Communications Commission continued its indecency rampage on Friday, rejecting all appeals and fining 14 Fox affiliate TV stations for broadcasting an episode of Married By America that featured a strip show. "We find that the material, in context, was presented in a pandering and titillating manner," the FCC ruled in its Forfeiture Order. "Indeed, the whole point of the strippers' performances appears to be to titillate the brides- and grooms-to-be, and, by extension, the audience."

But the agency's final decision on Married refused to give Fox a break for doing precisely what the FCC punished ABC TV just days earlier for not doing in a 2003 broadcast of NYPD Blue: pixelating "sexual" body parts. ABC says that they have paid its fine, but will take the FCC to court over the decision.

The April 2003 episode in question featured the participants partying at a strip club. The strippers dance over the engaged couples, who massage, kiss, and even lick whip cream off the performers' bodies. Meanwhile, they make comments like "there's nothing wrong with kissing a stripper before you're married. Kissing a stripper after you're married, that’s when the trouble begins."

nwz Ars Technica
Image

User avatar
TeMerc
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 15995
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2005 5:16 pm
Area Of Expertise: Security
experience: I know the functions, OS settings, registry tweaks and more
PC time: What else is there in life?
Location: PHX, AZ
Contact:

Re: File Under: Are You F-in' Kidding Me?

Postby TeMerc » Sun Feb 24, 2008 6:51 pm

The people that make these kinds of decisions care the livin' daylights out of me. These people must be the most retentive people the FCC could find.

Heaven forbid someone see something that might tempt them into some heathenous act. On top of that :o <GASP> they showed it before 10PM!!

Don't they know that some child could have seen it and turned into Ted Bundy or the Boston Strangler?

And to top it all off, they have been pondering this BS since 2003!!

America is so wrapped up in preventing kids from seeing or hearing anything offensive or sexual our kids will row up being shocked into a coma once they grow up and are able to view these things for themselves.
Image

User avatar
TeMerc
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 15995
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2005 5:16 pm
Area Of Expertise: Security
experience: I know the functions, OS settings, registry tweaks and more
PC time: What else is there in life?
Location: PHX, AZ
Contact:

Re: File Under: Are You F-in' Kidding Me?

Postby TeMerc » Tue Mar 25, 2008 11:37 am

Fox to FCC: your analysts' sexual fantasies not our problem
By Matthew Lasar | Published: March 25, 2008

Fox Television has informed the Federal Communications Commission that it will not pay the agency's proposed $91,000 fine for a pixelated strip show on Married in America, broadcast in 2003. "FOX believes that the FCC's decision in this case was arbitrary and capricious, inconsistent with precedent, and patently unconstitutional," the network declared in a press release.

But the media company's detailed, 49-page Petition for Reconsideration, submitted to the agency at the same time, goes far beyond the terse press release. It all but wonders if the FCC's indecency analysts are projecting their own sexual fantasies into the programming that they evaluate. And the Petition sets the stage for yet another legal confrontation as the Supreme Court prepares to hear the FCC's appeal on its "fleeting expletive" rulings, struck down by a lower court in New York City.

FCC spends too much time imagining what's under the pixelation
In its petition, Fox challenges the FCC's description of the program, insisting that many of the agency's key complaints are inaccurate. At one point the FCC's analysis of the show claims that one performer places himself close to a woman in a miniskirt, "apparently to lick off the whipped cream" from her body. But nobody actually licked whip cream off anyone's body in the program, Fox protests. The agency's summary charges that at another moment two performers wear tops "but their buttocks are pixelated, presumably to obscure portions of their buttocks as well as the g-strings that cover their genitals.” But, as Fox attorneys note, the episode "never showed the women without clothes or without pixelation, so there is no way for the Commission to know what undergarments they were wearing."

nwz More @ Ars Techinca
Image

User avatar
gimpguy2000
Posts: 202
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2008 2:53 am
experience: I know the functions, OS settings, registry tweaks and more
PC time: What else is there in life?
Contact:

Re: File Under: Are You F-in' Kidding Me?

Postby gimpguy2000 » Tue Mar 25, 2008 8:14 pm

titillating manner
Quote from Beavis and Buthead... uhhhh huhh, they said, titillating, hah, hah, titillating heh...heh, heh..

This world truly scares me sometimes. You have idiots like that who decide what people should see, you have some people who are so uptight, everything offends them, "in my opinion, they are the worst kind" and the reason for idiotic decisions such as above among many stupid laws. You know, the kind that have kids but refuse the fact they actually had sex in order to do this?? ^>
Image


Return to “Movies, TV Other Media”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest