Thursday, March 30th, 2006,
by Fred (,
censorship, government, Missouri, video games
,
Undeterred by the numerous court cases finding such bans unconstitutional, Missouri Democrats are pressing forward with a bill making it illegal to sell certain video games to minors
The gory excerpts, taken from the most violent of video games [Postal II], were offered as Exhibit A this week in favor of a bill banning the sale of such content to minors. The bill would make it a misdemeanor to sell games rated M for “mature,” or AO for “adults only” to anyone under age 17. It also would impose fines as high as $5,000 to retailers who fail to post information about game ratings.While shocked members of the committee echoed the need to protect children, critics warned of certain legal assault against such efforts. And they needed only to point to St. Louis County and Illinois, where similar bans have been toppled in court.
The last refuge of the censor is always “protect the children.” Parents, however, already have all the tools they need to protect their children. All video games are rated, indicating the appropriate ages for such games. Here are the ratings in question in Missouri:
MATURE
Titles rated M (Mature) have content that may be suitable for persons ages 17 and older. Titles in this category may contain intense violence, blood and gore, sexual content, and/or strong language.
ADULTS ONLY
Titles rated AO (Adults Only) have content that should only be played by persons 18 years and older. Titles in this category may include prolonged scenes of intense violence and/or graphic sexual content and nudity.
If you are a parent and don’t want your kids exposed to these games, don’t let them play games rated M or AO. Don’t know the rating of a game? Use the ESRB’s handy search feature, which will tell you that Postal 2 is rated M for “Blood and Gore, Intense Violence, Mature Humor, Mature Sexual Themes, Strong Language and Use of Drugs”. Or search by rating - there are nearly three times more games rated Teen (13+) than rated M or AO.
It’s just more Sesame Street Nation - lazy parents and the easily offended would rather have a society where nothing is inappropriate for a child than put the responsibility of raising children where it belongs, on the parents.
More discussion, including lots of parents asking the government to do their jobs for them, at the Post’s Talk of the Day.
Share This
Monday, March 27th, 2006,
by Fred (,
AFA, censorship, TV
,
The latest target for the AFA ComplaintBot is Fox and NASCAR
Fox allows ’s’ word. Take a stand for our children!File a complaint against Fox network stations for broadcasting the “s” word during a NASCAR race when millions of families were watching with their children.
I’m so sick of these yahoos. Hearing one utterance of the word “shit” is not going to scar your child for life. If they’re old enough to have any business watching NASCAR, they’ve already heard it. More news for the American “Family” Association: according to the US Census, only 32% of American households include children under age 18. Why, then, must we live in Sesame Street Nation, where the only programming that can see air is that appropriate for a three year old?
If you are really offended by this sort of thing, rather than visiting the ComplaintBot to complain about a program you didn’t actually see and wouldn’t even know you were supposed to be offended by but for the convenient AFA Action Alert, try this magic device:
Fight Sesame Street Nation at TV Watch.
Share This
Wednesday, March 22nd, 2006,
by Fred (,
censorship, Comedy Central, cults, scientology, South Park, Tom Cruise
,
There appears to be some evidence that Tom Cruise pressured Comedy Central into pulling the scheduled airing of the episode of South Park mocking Scientology. According to Hollywood, Interrupted
Sources from inside Paramount and South Park Studios report that parent company Viacom pulled last night’s scheduled repeat of the high-rated “Trapped in the Closet” episode after the humorless Scientologist movie star Tom Cruise threatened to cancel all publicity for Mission Impossible:3 if Comedy Central aired the episode that satirizes Scientology and mocks his sexuality again.
Not only is this the first time that the South Park creators have been officially censored in their ten hit seasons with Comedy Central, Viacom officials also reportedly ordered Matt Stone and Trey Parker not to discuss the reason why their episode was cancelled.
The South Park boys are said to be angry, but will probably get revenge with the manner in which they deal with Scientologist Isaac Hayes’ departure from the show.
So far, 1948 people have signed an online petition stating that
We, the loyal viewers of television’s South Park, do hereby protest against the removal of the episode “Trapped in the Closet.” We demand that Comedy Central put this episode back on the air and show it as soon as possible: we want everyone, including Tom Cruise, to know that censorship is wrong.
To that effect, we also will refuse to see any movies featuring Tom Cruise, most especially Mission Impossible 3, until this episode is once again shown.
Boycotting Mission Impossible 3 seems more like self-defense than a statement of political principle, but any attempt to stand up to murderous cults is to be commended.
[via lots of people, including Boing Boing]
Share This
Thursday, March 16th, 2006,
by Fred (,
CBS, censorship, FCC, PTC, TV, Without a Trace
,
The PTC and their lackeys at the FCC are at it again.
A government crackdown on indecent programming resulted in a proposed fine of $3.6 million against dozens of CBS stations and affiliates on Wednesday - a record penalty from the Federal Communications Commission.The FCC said an episode of the CBS crime drama “Without a Trace” that aired in December 2004 was indecent. It cited the graphic depiction of “teenage boys and girls participating in a sexual orgy.”
99% of all indecency complaints come from the ComplainBot at the Parents Television Council. The PTC’s Action Alert page even tells you what to be offended by, and fills in the details of your complaint for you so you can complain about programming you haven’t watched.
The history of this particular episode of Without A Trace is illustrative. After it aired the first time, the PTC minions used the bot to complain about it en masse as directed. The FCC dismissed the copy-and-paste complaints in return for a $3.5 million payment. CBS then had the gall to re-air the episode, even though the PTC had clearly identified it as Something You Shouldn’t Be Allowed To Watch. So the minions used the bot to complain again, and the FCC lackeys gave in this time.
Here’s a news flash for the “private market” censors at the PTC. When you use the power of government to get rid of what you don’t like, it is censorship, making this ridiculous argument even more ridiculous:
The First Amendment begins: Congress shall make no law… and is supposed to limit the powers of the federal government only. The Parents Television Council is not a federal entity or a legislative body. It has neither the power to forbid programming nor the desire for the government to ban legal programming. Instead, the PTC operates by providing members and advertisers with information about the content of programs. Where prime time programming contains significant amounts of material unsuitable for children in a timeslot and venue where children presumably have access to that material, the PTC asks advertisers to reconsider their sponsorship of the program.
In the PTC’s view, of course, using the off button or changing the channel isn’t enough:
Merely changing the channel is essentially to accept what is on that channel, and admit powerlessness to change what is on one’s own television. To be forced to change the channel is to accept the loss of additional stations to unhealthy content and to expect similar material to one day appear on the next channel.
Got that? The mere existence of an episode of Without a Trace dealing with teenage sexual activity, a show which is rated TV-PG or TV-14 and which airs at 10 pm ET, is so threatening to the heads-under-rocks censors at the PTC that they encourage a crackdown by government.
These people need to get a life. Judging from their list of best TV programming, one assumes that said life would not include television.
Update: More from Jeff Jarvis
Share This
Tuesday, February 14th, 2006,
by Fred (,
cartoons, censorship, Free Speech, Islam, Larry Flynt
,
Cory Doctorow, SF author and blogger, has published the most sensical discussion of Google Book Search I’ve yet seen:
But these objections reflect a nonsensical vision of how copyright law and computer security work. The reality is that the biggest threat to book-writers and publishers is that their works are simply invisible to people who get all their information from the Internet. Google Book Search makes our books visible to those people. In so doing, Google will save our asses from oblivion. Instead of sending legal threats to Google, I think that writers and publishers should be sending them fruit-baskets and thank-you notes.
Google Book Search is an index, which only copies works in the course of indexing them. If you are an author or publisher and object to inclusion of your work(s) in the index, Google will freely accommodate your stupidity.
Share This
