![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
uh, isn't that bombing cambodia in order to kill vietnamese?
From Reuters:
Ok, so because on air television is so bad, we're going to further regulate cable.
Not counting the fact that 1) parents DO have the ability to restrict which channels can be watched, 2) parents DO already decide whether or not to have pay channels, and 3) parents can password protect pay-per-view as well. Finally, cable companies are mostly local (and satallite systems have local-aware capabilities) so they can already black-out content deemed inappropriate for the community obscenity standards (indecency is another issue, and is PROTECTED SPEECH YOU JACKASSES so KNOCK IT OFF). They use the same technology to enforce sports-related blackouts.
Its already all in there...and in addition, most digital set-top boxes are already V-Chip aware, so even if your TV doesn't have the V-Chip, the cable box can handle it for you.
Cable customers already know and have control over what they are and aren't getting, and the ultimate solution (ditch the cable) is always an option. On air broadcasts are the things out of people's control and solely in the hands of the networks and affiliates.
Besides, isn't McCain supposed to be solving our Intelligence crisis yet? Or is he part of the problem to begin with?
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Outraged by how salacious programs on radio and network television have become in recent months, lawmakers vowed on Wednesday to look at indecent shows on cable and satellite channels.
Senate Commerce Committee Chairman John McCain urged cable and satellite companies to offer parents the ability to pick and choose what channels they get so they can protect their children from violence, sex and profanity, an idea that resonated with other lawmakers and regulators.
Ok, so because on air television is so bad, we're going to further regulate cable.
Not counting the fact that 1) parents DO have the ability to restrict which channels can be watched, 2) parents DO already decide whether or not to have pay channels, and 3) parents can password protect pay-per-view as well. Finally, cable companies are mostly local (and satallite systems have local-aware capabilities) so they can already black-out content deemed inappropriate for the community obscenity standards (indecency is another issue, and is PROTECTED SPEECH YOU JACKASSES so KNOCK IT OFF). They use the same technology to enforce sports-related blackouts.
Its already all in there...and in addition, most digital set-top boxes are already V-Chip aware, so even if your TV doesn't have the V-Chip, the cable box can handle it for you.
Cable customers already know and have control over what they are and aren't getting, and the ultimate solution (ditch the cable) is always an option. On air broadcasts are the things out of people's control and solely in the hands of the networks and affiliates.
Besides, isn't McCain supposed to be solving our Intelligence crisis yet? Or is he part of the problem to begin with?
Duh, I keep forgetting the Carollinian Logic
no subject
*rolls eyes*
next they will be telling us how to be "appropiate parents" oh wait....we have that already too. Social Services.
Thus, the Newt Gingrinch fear...
the result being, of course, that anybody still married to their first wives will have to divorce them immediately, because about 60-70% of the Family Values crowd of the 90s, including Reagon, Dole, and Newt, were all on their 2nd marriage.
this is the "sanctity" of marriage?
Re: Thus, the Newt Gingrinch fear...
I'm sorry, but the sanctity of marriage is a practical joke, in my humble opinion. You get it played on you by smug married's and then you play it on some naive non-married's so that they become the victim and they (being the newly created
undeadsmug married's) in turn play it one someone else...no subject
I know that in some areas, broadcast television is nearly non-existant. I have cousins who get exactly one broadcast station with decent reception. Certainly, going without TV and the info/entertainment it provides is an option. Or they can use a dish system, or (I'm not sure it's available there) cable.
You mention that there are a number of controls available for cable/dish systems. But how universal are they? Are they a feature that Comcast offers in this area, but maybe other companies/areas don't? We are in one of the most tech-advanced regions in the country, and not everybody has access to the features we "enjoy," and smaller non-Comcast companies may be less inclined to implement them without Congressional mandate. But like I said, I haven't researched this.
Personally, I'd like to think that parents should be sufficiently watchful of their kids, sufficiently responsible, sufficiently parent-like, to not need Congress to help them raise their kids. If the kids are watching porn, it's the parents' fault, not Congress'.
Re:
We already use it to screen out the pay per view channels and the sports channels for the most part (we do have a filter just for sports that we never watch. At least, I never watch).
I can't say anything for the smaller cable stations... And since I was without cable for 27 years of my life (my goodness, someone who wasn't raised on cable, go fig), I can't say what kinds of controls are on older systems. But any of the newer systems will have them, gratis.
no subject
Not that it's an issue right now... mostly... as there isn't a lot on during the day that I'd keep my kids away from that they're interested in. (And earlier on I bought them a "Wee-mote" that is limited to 5 channels and the one to switch to the VCR... which was handy when they didn't know their favorite channels .. 3 PBS, Nick, and Animal Planet (which has been replaced by Disney now))
Then again, it'd be even better if it could be programmed to allow access only to certain channels, and to a subset of those only during certain hours of the day (I really don't care for the "after school" trash on Nick... and Disney's only a smidgen better).
Requiring the cable companies to make something available to parents at no additional cost might not be something that was totally wrong... or that would trigger the V-chip more reliably (I've been told that there are quite a few shows out there that slide under the V-chip radar for certain age groups that probably shouldn't).
And no, I don't have anything of the sort on... other than a quick by-pass of channels like QVC... more for our benefit than theirs :-)
Re:
It's part of the menu system, and costs nothing to implement.
I don't know how it might work on everyone's system, but it's just fine for us. When we eventually have kids, we'll probably take one of the filters and call it "kids", and only have the channels we don't mind the kids watching on it (and I'm not about to screen out the health and discovery channels... If they see it as part of a health documentary or a discovery documentary, well, it's at least educational, even if it is "do it like they do it on the discovery channel").
Oh, but it will screen out Skinemax. ;) Then again, by then we may have gotten rid of premium channels altogether. :) (crossing fingers)
Re:
And we just bought the thing last summer... so it's not an old tv.
Then again... we're looking into DirectTV or something similar... Comcast has priced itself *so* far up that even with the discount that comes with having the cable modem it'd be cheaper for us to switch (even if keeping the connection for the computers).
Re:
Re:
Re:
WEll, unless we're in the middle of a show. Nothing like being in the middle of Law and Order, they're about to figure out who the killer is likely to be, and the satellite signal cuts out. *smirk* Usually comes back within ten minutes. Doesn't do us much good if it's nine minutes before the hour when the signal cuts out. *chuckle*
I had bigger problems with Comcast when we lived in the apartment. Constantly cut out and gave us really sucky signal. And when the signal cut out altogether, usually took us at least six hours to get it back, instead of a few minutes. They finally gave us six months worth of free cable because we threatened to switch to Dish Network, we'd had so many problems from it.
no subject
no subject
Kids go to what their not supposed to. Period. If it's taboo, it must be better than what I'm allowed to watch. Mom and Dad watch it, so how bad could it be? I didn't have life barred from me as a kid. It was explained when it happened, so I knew the context, why it was right or wrong, and we got on with life. Big deal.
Oh, wait a minute. I think I've just asnwered my own point: if we spend time being PARENTS, kids usually don't turn out to be morally screwed up, but that does require us to actually spend time being PARENTS. And there's the rub, isn't it? No many folks today spend time being parents anymore. Park the kid in front of the TV and he won't be in my hair for a while.
What? Little Jimmy saw a boob on tv? That's not what I want him watching. So rather than be a PARENT, and explain things to him, I'll just get someone else to do the job for me. Then if the kids turn out to be monsters, it isn't my fault. It the stuff they put on tv. Its the video games, it's the music he listens to, it's the magazines he reads. I shouldn't have to be a PARENT, that stuff just shouldn't be there for him to see. Sure, adults who know better will still want to see it, but we have to idiot proof the whole damned world because I'm too busy to be bothered to be a PARENT.
Maybe I'm disillusioned, but it seems to me that the cure to 98% of societal ills begins at home. 'Course, I could be misinformed.