Censorship

[ScottyTwoHotty]

Sitting here today, I was listening to the radio. Man can censorship butcher a song. Eminem's song (edited) has a verse that says, "Looking for a couple chickens with Double D's".....
What the fuck? Thats a big breasted chicken.
Traveling in other countries, I have seen a vast difference in censorship. Canada is to the point of being sick and pathetic.
We live in a day and age where we have V-Chips, and can password protect channels you don't want children to watch.
I'd like to see the proof that shows that children who watch violent movies, become crazed killers. I have seen stories where parents have blamed music artists for their kids killing themselves. What the hell!!!!!! Think maybe the kid was already warped and just happened to relate to a song the artist recorded?
I don't think Canada is ready for an instant change in censorship laws. Canadians have been sheltered from the rest of the world, and real life.
Many countries have a more laid back outlook on human sexuallity. A more laid back and realistic view on whats real and whats not when it comes to television and movies. When is the last time you heard of a kid who watched Vin Diesel jump a car off of a bridge, and then go jump a car off of a bridge themselves.?.?.?
The other night I had the home shopping network on, I had a sudden urge to buy every damn juicer on the market, and start a cult! We will buy fresh veggies, juice em' and force people on the street to drink them.

 

[lenharper]

While I don't agree with censorship it must be pointed out that there are numerous examples of kids who have met tragic ends emulating things they have seen on TV. During the heyday of the WWF numerous kids severely injured themselves attempting to duplicate stunts they had seen on TV. There was also a famous case in the Eastern US where kids got the idea to light a homeless person on fire becuase they had seen it on a TV show.

I am not saying that censorship is the answer but there needs to be an acknowledgement that "entertainment" does have consequences. To say that there are no negative consequences is to bury one's head in the sand.

 

[JustAGuy]

Here's some downright weird censorship. I noticed the other day that that ubiquitous "Nagafuki surprise" Bud Light tv ad has the line "it comes with Bud Light" in the Canadian version whereas in the American commercial, the line is "everyone gets Bud Light". I'm sure this has to do with some obscure Canadian blue law that doesn't want people making the connection that drinking beer might be fun. Thus the commercial couldn't play here in its American form because of the stated promise that "everyone" at the table is going to get a bottle of beer (and that could possibly wind up with people having fun). Instead the Canadian audience is given the impression that the person ordering the Nagafuki surprise gets a beer but not everyone else at the table. Even though you can clearly see the waitresses placing multiple Bud Light bottles on the table.

The most depressing aspect is the knowledge that someone (more probably lots of someones) actually gets PAID for doing this job of finding and altering messages that might potentially allow we weak-minded Canadians to draw the conclusion that there could possibly be a fun component to alcohol consumption.

 

[rollerboy]

Okay, so after reading this post, I was going to say something like how worse censorship is in the states. However, the more I think of the states and the level of violence, I think maybe censorship could be a solution, though awful, I know. Do you remember that one song by the NIN nails guy, Trent what-ever his name is and David Bowe, "I'm afraid of Americans"? There is something seriously strange about a country where it leads the world in office workers going postal, kids carrying weapons to school and just the plain old suicide.

According to the WHO, as of 2001, the suicide rate in Canada was 11.9 per 100K, compared to 10.7 for the US. Peaceful Sweden's suicide rate was 13.4, and Russia's far higher at 38.7.

http://www.who.int/mental_health/prevention/suicide/country_reports/en/index.html

 

[Sexy BBW]

Censorship sucks

 

[sdw]

While I don't agree with censorship it must be pointed out that there are numerous examples of kids who have met tragic ends emulating things they have seen on TV. During the heyday of the WWF numerous kids severely injured themselves attempting to duplicate stunts they had seen on TV. There was also a famous case in the Eastern US where kids got the idea to light a homeless person on fire becuase they had seen it on a TV show.

I am not saying that censorship is the answer but there needs to be an acknowledgement that "entertainment" does have consequences. To say that there are no negative consequences is to bury one's head in the sand.

The problem is more that kids aren't parented, are not told no, don't get away from the TV and find that slidding into home plate can hurt.

When they do get to their teenage years, they have no sense of boundaries and no experiance that some things hurt when they do them.

Consequently, they attempt things that they don't have the physical ability or the moral grounding to do.

If a child burns themself cooking, they know it hurts to be burnt. If they are fed nothing but takeout, do nothing more complicated than nuke instant meals, they have no experiance to base a decision to burn another person.

 

[rollerboy]

I'm half joking about censorship being a possible solution for the U.S., of course, as mass media is usually the first scapegoat.

Mass media probably has a lot to do with how people behave and think.

At the very least, for dumbing down the public, the networks do not merit essentially free use of broadcast spectrum.

 

[Thais]

The problem is more that kids aren't parented, are not told no, don't get away from the TV and find that slidding into home plate can hurt.

When they do get to their teenage years, they have no sense of boundaries and no experiance that some things hurt when they do them.

Consequently, they attempt things that they don't have the physical ability or the moral grounding to do.

If a child burns themself cooking, they know it hurts to be burnt. If they are fed nothing but takeout, do nothing more complicated than nuke instant meals, they have no experiance to base a decision to burn another person.

Exactly. The big problem I have with censorship is that it tends to be a vastly insufficient and ineffective measure that nonetheless satisfies moral high ground of some people. We need to provide children with attention, care, education in many areas of life, opportunities for intellectual development and stimulation, and practical experience of both duties and responsibilities. All of this is hard and requires significant commitment of time and energy on the part of parents and social institutions. It’s much easier to sit them down in front of TV or videogames, and then try to censor that entertainment as an excuse for doing something.

Another issue with censorship is that it’s apparent. A book or movie or any creative piece tends to be a complete work with its own integrity. Censorship is different from editing in that it destroys that integrity by cutting out an element or two without changing the supporting structure. Hence you can always tell that something is missing, it provokes curiosity and desire to find out what really was there. It’s better to show and explain than hide and hope nobody pays attention.

 

[Thais]

Originally Posted by rollerboy
Mass media probably has a lot to do with how people behave and think.

But difficult to quantify and qualify. The variables are too many.

Difficult but not impossible. There is significant amount of public interest and research done to address this problem. I am not sufficiently knowledgeable to provide exact links to interesting papers and discussions right now, but if you search for these terms online, you'll find a variety of materials.

Besides, we never have perfect information about anything. Most things in life are difficult to quantify and qualify; nonetheless attempts at it are done every day and in every industry. We try to predict the behaviour of markets, people, weather patterns, how body reacts to chemicals or vaccines, how human presence affects the environment and much much more. The success of such models may be varied, but what else do we have?

 

[slow__hand]

What's the big deal?

Sure there is censorship.....what's new about that? There is also propaganda....rife in the good old USA....Thank your lucky stars you live here and not under CNN rule.....BUT....you have brains and forums, and unlimited media and the internet....you can obtain news and views from around the world if you care to read.....objective and not so....but different perspectives. Talk to the kids and each other. Make your opinions known. The only people censored here are those too lazy to look around, read and listen....those that read, as their daily update....8 page newspapers handed to them for free on Robson Street.

Sorry, old argument with no basis in fact IMO. OK..OK my rant...any takers on a more objective, enlightened viewpoint?

SH

 

[slow__hand]

What are you talking about? Circumlocution at it's best.

 

[ScottyTwoHotty]

What are you talking about? Circumlocution at it's best.

You fucker. LOL Now you made me go to http://www.dictionary.com to look up Circumlocution
Circumlocution

circumlocution was Word of the Day on October 27, 1999.
Source: Dictionary.com Word of the Day
Circumlocution
n 1: a style that involves indirect ways of expressing things [syn: periphrasis, ambage] 2: an indirect way of expressing something [syn: indirect expression]

 

[slow__hand]

Scotty..I admire you