Oppose Censorship

lithium · 20 Mar 2004, 01:46 PM

Originally Posted by MVS

I can live without Howard Stern on the radio.

There are a lot of people I can live without on the radio. But I can't live with any of them forced off the radio. There's a difference.

**Frogacuda** · 21 Mar 2004, 12:29 AM

Originally Posted by Nic0

We should also get rid of the aclu.

My taxes don't pay for the ACLU, and ACLU doesn't make laws. I support the ACLU by choice.

I'm all for private groups that make boycotts and such to get companies to voluntarily censor themselves. That's different than having the government force it upon us.

**James** · 21 Mar 2004, 03:44 AM

MVS- you are too stupid too live in this coutry. Please move away.

James

**Captain Vegetable** · 21 Mar 2004, 04:47 AM

Wow. You guys are blowing this way out of proportion.

Howard's rights haven't been infringed upon, at all. Wise up.

**youandwhosearmy** · 21 Mar 2004, 09:33 AM

Originally Posted by Mike

Damn, it, no, that's what the people with this ultra-conservative agenda WANT! They want you to leave because then you're not there to resist! We can make a difference by voting against them!

Once they get done with "public" airwaves they're going to go there. They've been mulling the regulation of Satellite, actually. The reasoning is that you get channels like HBO and Skinamax in a package so you can't NOT get the channel with the "offensive" material.

You know that they're thinking of investigating books read to children?

This is what we conspiracy theorists and constitutional upholders call, "screaming at the wind."

The only positive the FCC fines on Howard Stern (who is delving into Art Bell waters with the reports he's posting on his website nowadays) can have is simply to wake up the people from the comforter of indifference they've been huddled under for the past twenty years.

The problem in fighthing the FCC is that this is very much a political agenda being acted out on Howard Stern, and the fact is, if this adminsitration remains in power, this is going to happen no matter who you write a letter to or not.

The indecency witch hunt has begun, and the raping of of those who disagree with government policy is simply going to get worse. Really Mike I admire your proactiveness but the best you can do is hope that Howard has a large enough pissed off listener base to make a difference in the upcoming elections and save himself.

P.S. Nice of you to join the club, your a little late to the party though.

Originally Posted by Frogacuda

My taxes don't pay for the ACLU, and ACLU doesn't make laws. I support the ACLU by choice.

I'm all for private groups that make boycotts and such to get companies to voluntarily censor themselves. That's different than having the government force it upon us.

Your right it is, because the majority population and those that appreciate the satire and the content of those shows are deprived something they like because some uptight mother in colorado happened to be flipping the dials in her car on her way to work and heard something she disliked.

This country needs to learn what, "censor yourself" means.

Originally Posted by Captain Vegetable

Wow. You guys are blowing this way out of proportion.

Howard's rights haven't been infringed upon, at all. Wise up.

No they haven't.

Its a strong arm tactic by an organization that constitutionally does not have the authority to do what its doing, and the idea of passing a bill that fines the broadcaster (not just the company the individual, and if they can find a caller who did something indecent the company is authorized to turn his information over to be fined as well) himself a maximum fine of 500,000 dollars per violation
for what the FCC declares is indecent, which is utter bullshit because the FCC's indeceny polices read like one of those non-linear Hardy Boys novels.

There is no clear definition of whats indecent under their guidlines and the point of the Oprah thing is that she broadcast something which under the standards they set for the Howard Stern fine, would justify one as well. But they won't cause if they do thats another massive fanbase that might just swing democratic.

Basically this law lets the FCC pick and choose who gets to be on the air or not. And because they decide whats indecent on a daily basis to suit there needs, and now you can watch as open-minded talk shows are unconstitutionally thrown off the air one by one for violating those undefined terms.

This is not an overreaction. This is a wake up call.

Time for you to wise up buddy.

**Shine** · 21 Mar 2004, 02:02 PM

We do not fear censorship for we have no wish to offend with improprieties or obscenities, but we do demand, as a right, the liberty to show the dark side of wrong, that we may illuminate the bright side of virtue—the same liberty that is conceded to the art of the written word, that art to which we owe the Bible and the works of Shakespeare.

~D.W. (David Wark) Griffith~

I can imagine no greater disservice to the country than to establish a system of censorship that would deny to the people of a free republic like our own their indisputable right to criticise their own public officials. While exercising the great powers of the office I hold, I would regret in a crisis like the one through which we are now passing to lose the benefit of patriotic and intelligent criticism.

~President WOODROW WILSON, letter to Arthur Brisbane~

**voltz** · 21 Mar 2004, 03:23 PM

The FCC has already proven they have interest in protecting their members and supporters in congress, this has totally nothing to do with the rules of indecency which they claim to have been violated.