The Censors are annoying me! - 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 03-30-2004, 08:03 PM   #1
Refugee
 
Justified's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: living with MVD
Posts: 1,629
Local Time: 03:31 AM
The Censors are annoying me!

so apparently you are not allowed to say "Jesus" on TV. Janet Jackson was censored last night for saying "Jesus" when responding to Dave Letterman's questions about the Super Bowl "wardrobe malfunction". Seriously these censors are getting out of control.
__________________

__________________
Justified is offline  
Old 03-30-2004, 09:22 PM   #2
War Child
 
najeena's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: an island paradise
Posts: 995
Local Time: 07:31 AM
Jesus, you mean you can't say Jesus on TV anymore?
__________________

__________________
najeena is offline  
Old 03-30-2004, 09:37 PM   #3
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 07:31 AM
That's insane. I couldn't believe it when I read that in the paper today. This is really getting out of hand.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 03-30-2004, 11:37 PM   #4
The Fly
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 56
Local Time: 07:31 AM
Can't say the word Jesus, but on a soap opera the male actors can call the female character a "bitch." The FCC is really starting to piss me off!
__________________
Inis is offline  
Old 03-30-2004, 11:43 PM   #5
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,694
Local Time: 01:31 AM
Does anyone have any information on this? I saw the interview and I noticed the edit, but I didn't think she said that.
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 03-31-2004, 01:10 AM   #6
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: 01:31 AM
You're kidding.

I agree...this censorship stuff is just flat out insane.

Angela
__________________
Moonlit_Angel is offline  
Old 03-31-2004, 03:56 AM   #7
New Yorker
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Los Angeles, CA USA
Posts: 2,551
Local Time: 12:31 AM
Well you can thank right-wing evangelical Christian political groups for the lovely censorship we're enjoying these days.

Right at the core of the campaign against "indecency" are several groups affiliated with the Christian Right, e.g., Focus on the Family and the Family Research Council, just two of the organizations that appear to work hand in hand and/or are one in the same.

The following is from the Focus on the Family site:

---------------------------------
Action Alert

Tell the FCC To Stay Tough on Indecency

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has begun to take seriously the concerns of viewers offended by indecent content and language on radio and television.

The agency's Enforcement Bureau has begun to hand out fines to particularly egregious offenders like Howard Stern -- in part prompted by public backlash over Janet Jackson's raunchy Super Bowl halftime performance earlier this year. In fact, the FCC went so far as to reverse a ruling it issued last year that rock star Bono's use of the f-word in prime time was not indecent under U.S. law.

We urge you to contact all five of the FCC's commissioners (by clicking on the "Take Action" button above) and urge them to continue to be aggressive in punishing TV networks and individuals who run afoul of laws governing broadcast indecency. Encourage them not to stop at issuing fines, even hefty fines, but to consider revoking the licenses of particularly egregious offenders.


powered by Capitol Advantage ©2004


http://www.family.org/cforum/fnif/news/a0031098.cfm
--------------------------------------------------


If anyone has any question about the right wing fanatic views of the Family Research Council, just read some of the articles on their site, which, incidentally, has a link to Townhall.com at the bottom of its home page.

I've seen two stories in the newspaper in the last couple of weeks putting forth the notion that the current campaign against "indecency" is a bi-partisan or rather a non-partisan effort, but, sorry, I don't buy it. You can bet Dr. James Dobson and his clones and political allies have a great deal to do with this nonsense. Yes, a number of congressional democrats are voting for the "anti-indecency" legislation, but I'll wager this has more to do with their spinelessness than anything else.

And BonoVoxSupastar, here's the information you're looking for.....

NEW YORK (AP) -- Unlike the last time she appeared on CBS, Janet Jackson was bleeped by censors Monday while talking to David Letterman -- for saying "Jesus."

The exclamation, made in apparent exasperation as Letterman asked the singer about her famed Super Bowl "wardrobe malfunction," was edited out for broadcast, a show spokesman said.

Jackson told Letterman that her breast-baring, when a piece of clothing was yanked off by duet partner Justin Timberlake during the halftime show, "was totally an accident. It wasn't a stunt."

Another piece of clothing was to have been in place to conceal the breast from view, said Jackson, who conceded the maneuver wasn't rehearsed.

On the "Late Show," she wore a red dress that exposed cleavage and her navel, which was affixed with jewelry. Despite being booked on the first of a round of national television appearances to promote her new album, "Damita Jo," Jackson repeatedly told Letterman she didn't want to talk about the incident.

"You're going to make me relive this?" she asked. "I want to put all that behind me. I truly do."

She told the audience she was "sure you're sick of hearing about this."

"I'm not so sure they are sick of hearing about it," Letterman replied.

Pressing for further details, Letterman said it looked to Super Bowl viewers that the breast-baring was intentional.

"Oh, Jesus," Jackson said, according to an unedited tape of their conversation.

She said it was "very embarrassing to me, to have so many people see this little breast."

"Well ...," Letterman said, indicating Jackson was doing some verbal downsizing.

The singer said she learned from the incident that she had reserves of strength like her mother.

Jackson and Timberlake's duet sparked a round of recriminations and complaints about broadcast standards. Jackson later canceled an appearance on the Grammy Awards. Timberlake appeared but apologized for the Super Bowl incident.

Jackson told "Access Hollywood," in an interview to be broadcast Tuesday, that she was "straight up asked not to go" on the Grammy Awards show. CBS has said Jackson would have been welcome if she apologized like Timberlake but she declined.

Asked whether she was still friends with Timberlake, Jackson said, "at some point, he and I need to talk."

(Copyright 2004 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)

http://www.kron.com/Global/story.asp?S=1746702
__________________
pub crawler is offline  
Old 03-31-2004, 06:14 AM   #8
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 05:31 PM
Oh its good to know that these fine organizations are willing to make a strong stand against indecency, they will fight tirelessly to keep audiences isolated from reality and maintain stong christian values in the houshold and in politics.

I can see on their website that Family.org is also willing to fight against those evils in society such as;

Homosexuality (taken from their own recomended reading "Homosexuality is a lifestyle of imprisonment. In public schools, kids are being taught that it's normal." Now its really good to know that homosexuality is a lifestyle of imprisonment, now if only I could find out how family.org deal with homosexuals I would have an answer of why its a lifestyle of imprisonment).

and what do you know they have FACTS for

FACT: HOMOSEXUAL MALE RELATIONSHIPS ARE RARELY MONOGAMOUS AND THOSE INVOLVED ARE MORE AT RISK FOR LIFE-THREATENING ILLNESSES
Studies indicate that the average male homosexual has hundreds of sex partners in his lifetime. The median number of partners for homosexuals is four times higher than for heterosexuals.15 A study on the sexual profiles of 2,583 older homosexuals, published in the Journal of Sex Research, found that only 2.7 percent claimed to have had sex with one partner only.16 Research has also found that few homosexual relationships last longer than two years, with many men reporting hundreds of lifetime partners.”17

Check out these findings:

* 24 percent of gay men had over 100 partners
* 43 percent of gay men had over 500 partners
* 28 percent of gay men had over 1000 partners18

Solid, irrefutable evidence proves that there are lethal consequences to engaging in the defining features of male homosexuality—that is, promiscuity. Active homosexuals are vulnerable to dozens of sexually transmitted diseases. According to one report, the risk of anal cancer rises by an astounding 4,000 percent for those engaging in homosexual intercourse and doubles again for those who are HIV positive.

Its great to know that gays will die in an awful manner and no doubt rot in hell because of their sins.

Evolution; Are we humans the result of meaningless processes that did not have us in mind? Or were we created on purpose—by design?

The answer to these questions is key to many public issues debated in our society, including abortion, marriage, sexuality, bioethics, human rights and so on. Yet in most public schools, only one view may be taught: naturalistic evolution—which boils down to the claim that all living things, including humans, are a product of undirected, natural processes.

Intelligent design challenges that claim, as well as its monopoly in the public schools.

Wow commited to fighting those evil atheist evolutionists who want to convert the kiddies to secular humanism and turn them away from the undeniable truth and salvation found in the bible. They even manage to explain the fossil record in an easy to comprehend manner that proves that mainstream science for the past 150 years has been entirely wrong.

the scientific literature shows that the rock record, far from supporting neo-Darwinism, has always been something neo-Darwinists have had to explain away. What the evidence shows is not gradual change, but sudden appearance and stability: Most fossils species appear all at once, fully formed, and exhibit no directional change throughout their stay in the rocks.

And to think that while I was volunteering at paleontological digs I was seeing strata layed down over millenia. My eyes must have been decieving me whenever I looked at fossils within the rock because they were layed down and were not just jumbled all over. Gee it is great to have such a fountain of knowledge to tell me what to think, I think that I will have to just close my eyes whenever I see anything I dont agree with but can't change.

Yes standing up there like any good Christian Soldier, they are persecuted for their beliefs as well, in fact if anybody around here were to speek ill of their organization it would all be part of the anti-christian plot that is designed to persecute these opressed religious types. They outline it all right here on their social issues page;

Christians are persecuted more today than they than at any time prior to the 20th century......stemming from two sources: communism and politicized Islam.

So there it is, these are the fine, knowledgable and unbiased men and women who can tell the regulatorsl what we should be able to watch. People who are willing to stand up for ignorance, homophobia and bibliotheism. WE MUST STOP IT!, lift the standard of TV (get rid of reality shows etc.) and show what place violence, swearing and nudity have in good TV (Such as The Sopranos, I know its a cable show but its just a good example) then these types will have no leg to stand on and (hopefully) just dissapear (its not going to happen, uh their as bad as Al Qaeda, strike them down they just pop up again).

Maybe its just me but I still have a strong suspicion that these wankers are behind the cancellation of good shows like Futurama and Angel, Throw arms up in air and scream KIRK VOICE "CHRISTIAAN RIIIIIIIGHT /KIRK VOICE.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 03-31-2004, 06:49 AM   #9
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 05:31 PM
* 24 percent of gay men had over 100 partners
* 43 percent of gay men had over 500 partners
* 28 percent of gay men had over 1000 partners

Allright let me just express this:

P(x>100) = .24
P(x>500) = .43
P(x>1000) = .28

There is no range, they dont state between 100 and 499 or 500-999 so I must assume that they intend these statistics to be just greater than the given number.

Now who can tell me why these statistics don't add up?
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 03-31-2004, 08:17 AM   #10
Jesus Online
 
Angela Harlem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: a glass castle
Posts: 30,163
Local Time: 06:31 PM
thats not a statistic, or a fact.

its just bullshit.
__________________
<a href=http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v196/angelaharlem/thPaul_Roos28.jpg target=_blank>http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...aul_Roos28.jpg</a>
Angela Harlem is offline  
Old 03-31-2004, 09:03 AM   #11
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 02:31 AM
Focus on the Family is probably the most homophobic religious organization in the country. They are complete nuts. I should inform FOTF that none of the gay men (notice, of course, their obsession with gay men; as always, lesbianism is a forgotten after-thought) I know personally have more than 5-10 partners (most of them are <5, though). Keep in mind, though, that, statistically, the average heterosexual has nine partners before marrying, and, even at that, half of all marriages end in divorce. Of course, if we started stereotyping heterosexuals as that same "party" contingent that homosexuals get stereotyped with, I'm sure then maybe you can apply 100+ sexual partners to heterosexuals, as well.

Maybe FOTF needs to spend a bit more time in their own pasture? I really don't know what to say to these assholes, but when they're allowed to testify in courts against same-sex marriage, I start to think that our courts are really fucked up. Their arguments have zero scientific basis, and are completely founded on religious prejudice.

And people wonder why I have started to become so embittered towards Christianity? I really do start to wish it never existed!

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 03-31-2004, 09:08 AM   #12
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 02:31 AM
As for the FCC, if Americans don't like it, the best thing they can do is vote out Bush in the next election. By tradition, even though the FCC commissioners have terms, with every change in president, all the commissioners resign, as to allow the President to appoint new ones.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 03-31-2004, 10:53 AM   #13
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,984
Local Time: 02:31 AM
What in God's name do any of those "statistics" have to do w/ this topic? reminds me of one reason I no longer enjoy this forum

Anyway, a blurb I heard on the news said that you are allowed to say Jesus in a religious context, but not as an exclamation the way she used it That's not a new rule from the FCC, it has previously existed.
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 03-31-2004, 11:20 AM   #14
New Yorker
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Los Angeles, CA USA
Posts: 2,551
Local Time: 12:31 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by MrsSpringsteen
What in God's name do any of those "statistics" have to do w/ this topic? reminds me of one reason I no longer enjoy this forum
The quotes from Focus on the Family serve to demonstrate the insanity of the worldview held by the groups who are pushing the FCC to ban "indecency" on the airwaves.

Quote:
Anyway, a blurb I heard on the news said that you are allowed to say Jesus in a religious context, but not as an exclamation the way she used it That's not a new rule from the FCC, it has previously existed.
The rule may have previously existed but I doubt it would have been enforced prior to all the recent hubbub over "indecency." Remember, we're now living in a world where Howard Stern is being edited live by his station management for fear of FCC fines. And here's the interesting thing: the FCC has no problem if Stern broadcasts stuff that promotes racist stereotypes (as he is wont to do); they're punishing him for using foul language. I'd love to see Focus on the Family and the FCC show outrage over Stern's racist "comedy bits," but I doubt it'll ever happen.
__________________
pub crawler is offline  
Old 03-31-2004, 11:30 AM   #15
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 02:31 AM
It is ironic, though, that broadcasters aren't allowed to be indecent, but religious organizations can be as repugnantly bigoted as they want. After all, they are the organizations that fight anti-discrimination laws the most, and, thus, are exempt from them. How ironic, eh?

The networks should declare themselves a religion.

Melon
__________________

__________________
melon 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 02:31 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