Study Ties Indecency to Consolidation of Media - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 09-08-2005, 12:00 PM   #1
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 07:14 AM
Study Ties Indecency to Consolidation of Media

from the LA Times:

Copyright 2005 Los Angeles Times
All Rights Reserved

Los Angeles Times

September 8, 2005 Thursday
Home Edition

SECTION: BUSINESS; Business Desk; Part C; Pg. 1

LENGTH: 621 words


HEADLINE: Study Ties Indecency to Consolidation of Media;
Report says that as big broadcasters buy more stations, shock-jock programming often replaces local content.

BYLINE: Sallie Hofmeister, Times Staff Writer

BODY:

The consolidation of the broadcast industry over the last decade may have increased indecent programming on the nation's airwaves, according to a new report by the Center for Creative Voices in Media and Fordham University.

According to the report, as leading broadcasters such as Clear Channel Communications and Viacom Inc.'s Infinity Broadcasting have bought more stations, they have frequently replaced local programming with shock jocks such as Howard Stern and Bubba the Love Sponge, who are prone to vulgarity.

Those programming decisions may have lured more young listeners, the ones that advertisers most covet, while also saving the companies money. But that may have led to an increase in indecency complaints, according to the report, which is to be released today.

From 2000 to 2003, the report found, the nation's four largest radio companies racked up 96% of the fines handed out by the Federal Communications Commission, while their stations accounted for only about half of the country's listening audience.

The study suggests that instead of relying on stiffer fines, regulators seeking to rein in indecency would be better off breaking up large broadcast groups.

"Rather than raising the fines, Washington should think about reinstating the ties that stations have to their local communities," said Jonathan Rintels, executive director of the Center for Creative Voices, a Washington-based group that represents Hollywood writers and producers, and a co-author of the study.

The study points out that some of the politicians who are now trying to crack down on indecency by raising fines on broadcasters are the same ones who voted in 1996 to relax ownership rules that contributed to concentration.

"One of the unintended consequences of their support of deregulation is an increase in indecency," Rintels said.

Congress is slated in the coming year to revise the 1996 Telecommunications Act that deregulated the media and spurred consolidation.

The correlation between media consolidation and indecency will also be an issue as the Federal Communications Commission begins its revisions of media ownership rules.

In reaching its conclusions, the report cited the case of a station in Port Charlotte, Fla., that was bought by Clear Channel in 1996. The station, never previously fined for indecency, incurred penalties of $110,000 in 2004 because of crude remarks made on the air by Bubba the Love Sponge.

The report quotes from segments of Bubba's show in which the voices of purported cartoon characters talked about drugs and graphic sexual acts.

In one expletive-laced skit, for example, Shaggy tells Scooby Doo that he could perform sexual favors to raise money to buy crack.

Bubba the Love Sponge has since been dropped by Clear Channel. Some might see that as proof that indecency fines accomplish their goal, but the report pointed out that an overreliance on such punishments could have a chilling effect on broadcasters that would be detrimental to consumers.

"A lot of political speech is being repressed because of the self-censoring by broadcasters," said Rintels, who noted that the threat of higher fines had led an Ohio station to bump Stern off the air last month after the FCC said it was investigating a consumer complaint.

Already, consent decrees signed in 2004 by three of the nation's four largest radio groups to resolve outstanding indecency complaints have led to self censorship, Rintels said.

Clear Channel Communications, the nation's largest radio station owner, has terminated Stern, who is moving to Sirius Satellite Radio to escape restrictions.

"While Howard Stern is often indecent, he is also political and to pull him off the air is to deprive listeners of that commentary," Rintels said.

LOAD-DATE: September 8, 2005





tell me, where is the moral outrage at big business?
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 09-08-2005, 12:05 PM   #2
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 04:14 AM
This is a stretch for a cause and effect relationship (not that one is needed in politics).

The local jock is replaced by the syndicated NY jock. All that means is more people hear the crap from the NY jock.

The problem isn't syndication, it is the people spewing the crap in the first place.
__________________

__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 09-08-2005, 12:06 PM   #3
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 07:14 AM
The problem is that we're defining "indecency" by our most prudish members of society. "Indecent programming" exists, because the public wants it.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 09-08-2005, 12:22 PM   #4
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 04:14 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon
The problem is that we're defining "indecency" by our most prudish members of society. "Indecent programming" exists, because the public wants it.

Melon
That's great circular reasoning. People only find something "indecent" if they are "prudish".

The FCC responds to whatever complaints they receive.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 09-08-2005, 12:29 PM   #5
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 07:14 AM
It's not "circular reasoning." That's how it works. That's how all the laws are written. The fact is that if no one listened to Howard Stern, he would not be on the air.

Instead, we have extremely conservative people who wish that television was nothing but "The 700 Club" 24/7. Maybe I should file an indecency complaint on that show.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 09-08-2005, 12:37 PM   #6
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 04:14 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon
Maybe I should file an indecency complaint on that show.

Melon
That is how the law is written. You find something offensive on the air, you file a report. Nothing to stop you from filing your own complaint. I wouldn't call you prudish.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 09-08-2005, 02:30 PM   #7
War Child
 
MaxFisher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 776
Local Time: 12:14 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon
The problem is that we're defining "indecency" by our most prudish members of society.

Melon

In your opinion, how should "indecency" be defined?
__________________
MaxFisher is offline  
Old 09-08-2005, 04:58 PM   #8
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 06:14 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by MaxFisher



In your opinion, how should "indecency" be defined?
The problem is...is that you can't. You can't define "indecency" for the whole. Why is it we need to define "indecency" is such terms? Can we not change the channel?

There are such standards we hold as a society such as young children shouldn't hear such words or be exposed to nudity, etc. So why are we paying attention to the prudish few who want to go beyond these standards, but are ignoring those that write in and complain about narrow hateful religious beliefs being spewed on TV?
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 09-08-2005, 05:25 PM   #9
Blue Crack Addict
 
Moonlit_Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo...
Posts: 19,271
Local Time: 06:14 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar
The problem is...is that you can't. You can't define "indecency" for the whole. Why is it we need to define "indecency" is such terms? Can we not change the channel?

There are such standards we hold as a society such as young children shouldn't hear such words or be exposed to nudity, etc. So why are we paying attention to the prudish few who want to go beyond these standards, but are ignoring those that write in and complain about narrow hateful religious beliefs being spewed on TV?
. Thank you.

Angela
__________________
Moonlit_Angel is offline  
Old 09-08-2005, 05:30 PM   #10
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 04:14 AM
I guess when you have children, and leap for the remote after some objectionable image appears on a Saturday morning, you may re-think the issue.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 09-08-2005, 05:34 PM   #11
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 07:14 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader
I guess when you have children, and leap for the remote after some objectionable image appears on a Saturday morning, you may re-think the issue.


i think that's a valid point.

i simply don't care what's on my TV screen -- if i don't like it (it's usually violence that offends me ... or potty humor, for some reason) i change the channel. and i feel as if the R-rated television one can find on premium cable is easily the most artistically valid, challenging, boundary-pushing storytelling we have today, in all of television or film (see The Sopranos, 6 Feet Under, The Wire, Weeds, The Comeback, etc.)

however, these are not shows for children, and i imagine it can be difficult to shield them from this when they are young (or even not so young).

however, i'd rather my kids hear "cocksucker" a million-and-one times on Deadwood than hear any of the far more offensive bile that comes out of Pat Robertson's mouth.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 09-08-2005, 05:37 PM   #12
ONE
love, blood, life
 
FizzingWhizzbees's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: the choirgirl hotel
Posts: 12,614
Local Time: 12:14 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader
I guess when you have children, and leap for the remote after some objectionable image appears on a Saturday morning, you may re-think the issue.
What type of objectionable images are you referring to?
__________________
FizzingWhizzbees is offline  
Old 09-08-2005, 05:44 PM   #13
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 04:14 AM
Usually ads for prime time or late night programming. Fox is the worst, but all the major networks have joined the shock value promotion method.

The problem with images is that once you see them, you can't simply erase them from your memory.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 09-08-2005, 05:50 PM   #14
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 04:14 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
however, i'd rather my kids hear "cocksucker" a million-and-one times on Deadwood than hear any of the far more offensive bile that comes out of Pat Robertson's mouth.
We don't let them watch the 700 Club either (well, we've never thought of turning it on). I once saw a couple minutes of TBN. It was like a trainwreck - more scary images.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 09-08-2005, 05:58 PM   #15
ONE
love, blood, life
 
FizzingWhizzbees's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: the choirgirl hotel
Posts: 12,614
Local Time: 12:14 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader
Usually ads for prime time or late night programming. Fox is the worst, but all the major networks have joined the shock value promotion method.
But what specifically are the images you object to? I mean is it bad language? Violence? Sexual images? People dressed in a way you dislike?
__________________

__________________
FizzingWhizzbees is offline  
 

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



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:14 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com