Slashdot Mirror
Lone Activist Group Submits 99.8% of FCC Complaints
andywebz writes "Mediaweek is reporting that complaints to the FCC are rising. Powell spoke before congress, detailing that the complaints are up from 14,000 in 2002, to nearly 240,000 in 2003. There were only 350 complaints during 2000 and 2001. Powell failed to mention however that 99.8% of those complaints came from PTC (Parents Television Council). The article does mention he may have been unaware of this fact. Jonathan Rintels (president of the Center for Creative Voices in Media) commented, 'It means that really a tiny minority with a very focused political agenda is trying to censor American television and radio.'"
PTC lost a LOT of their political clout after WWE kicked their ass in court a couple years ago. Other targets should repond the same way.
I, for one, welcome our new PTC overlords.
What the PTC has figured out is that indecent TV and radio was being allowed simply because the FCC only takes action when it gets a complaint from somebody in the public. No complaint, nobody was harmed so no foul.
The FCC is still in control over what is indecent, so the PTC's power is merely that of spotter. If they complain about something that isn't over the line nothing will happen. Of course, a big problem with the current system is that the FCC doesn't have a written down definition of what they consider to be indecent so broadcasters are flying blind when it comes to deciding what to air before they actually do it. What they've gotten away with in the past is no help because they've been allow to get away with far too much.
The megacompanies need to realize that they should use their cable outlets for the borderline content they have, because the over-the-air channels are regulated.
I know that Stern pushed for his listeners to complain about Oprah Winfrey (?). Oprah got away with saying things about vaginas and sexual practices that Stern was fined for
"brxref
Why do you think interest groups are engaging in these kinds of actions?
Because other "interest groups" have recently proven that politicians will usually bow to your wishes if you bitch loud enough.
especially when you consider in Canada they broadcast (i.e. no cable needed) the sopranos (at 11pm). Heck even CityTv broadcasts softcore porn after 12.
If you don't want some vocal group imposing its religious values on you, I suppose you'll have to be just as vocal. Of course, prohibition was quite profitable for a lot of Americans...
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
You are misinterpreting how the FCC polices indecency. It doesn't watch channels. It responds to complaints that provide transcripts of the alledgedly offensive broadcasts. The PTC and other American Moralists have been streaming complaints against Howard Stern for over a decade. That's why he's been getting fined.
The Oprah Winfrey example clearly illustrates the hypocrisy in how the FCC arbitrarily chooses to levy fines. If you're a friend to the mainstream, you're safe. If you're outside the status quo, watch out.
Here's a link to the transcripts. Judge for yourself if the FCC is being fair.
$5 / month hosted VPS on linux = awesome!
Political minority groups on the right and left have massive amounts of influence and stage things like this ALL the time. This is the equivalent of PETA for TV... a small group of people focused on a cause so they create a lot of ruckus. (Difference between these guys and PETA... these guys are abusing a system that is set up for legitimate complaints while PETA merely tells everyone they're going to hell.) Really, while this is a non-story, its a non-story because disturbing practices happen like this ALL the time. A small minority inflicting their will upon the majority. Though I tend to agree with this small minority (I think parents should parent their children first and foremost, but I do agree that public television ought to be regulated) I disagree with this kind of "Shock and Awe" attacking.
See, back when I was working on an internet helpdesk, if people kept ringing over and over and over with the same complaints and problems, we were instructed to stop helping them. These three people waste everyone else's money, so why not apply the same policy? Here and in the US.
And in regard to ninjas, - this guy knows about them. Remember the arse kicking circle. Ninja beats pirate beats robot beats clown beats ninja. Every seen a ninja fighting a clown? Now you know why
Looks can be deceiving. Or CAN they?
They have a funny sense of what's acceptable. When I moved there to live, I turned the TV on the first morning. Sunday at 10am on regular TV there was Predator uncut. I guess violence is okay, but anything involving sex is offensive! As I recall at the time (I emmigrated from the UK a decade ago), that movie would have only been on after the 9pm watershed due to it's content. Here in Canada we get a lot of more risqué content on regular TV, often produced in Canada or the UK, and I find it much more preferable to dumb violence, images of people trying to be over-powering and the constant pointless and dull stream of gun culture.
STOP THE PRESSES!! We're on our way, promise. We are SpeakSpeak (and so are you!). SpeakSpeak.org will be functional by early January. From SpeakSpeak's site, you will be able to generate a personalized letter to FCC board members, advertisers, and your own personal political representatives thanking them for protecting free speech and for standing up to religious fringe groups. Like I said, the site will be fully up by January, barring disasters. By the end of this week, you will be able to sign up for 100%-ironclad-never-sold-or-shared email updates at speakspeak.org. Hey, maybe I'll even get that done tonight....
If the FCC is getting hundreds of thousands of complaints, then there's no way for them to actually investigate these complains. So probably all they can do is count them.
What this means is that any organization that can muster large numbers of complaints about random programs they don't like can cause the system to collapse completely. There'd be no effective way for the FCC to use the complaint system as an alert mechanism.
The only problem with this is that the slashdot crowd aren't nearly as good at organizing as the PTC. So the question is whether we can write python scripts with output that is not detectably different than the PTC's form letters?
And you'd be right up there with the likes of Mr. ABC, who wants to bar mountain bikes from every park and open space in the world. A prolific writer of pseudo-intellectual skewed information and outright fiction, he's actually effective, because he cares enough to show up for every meeting, contact every policy maker and flood USENET newsgroups with disinformation in his crusade, while mountain bikers are generally oblivious until the find a big NO BIKES sign in their favorite park.
Squeaky wheels get the grease, which is why it's important to be ever vigilant against those crusaders out to change your way of life to make themselves feel better.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
... more statistics.
... or 480 ... are non-PTC.
99.8% are PTC? That means 0.2% of the 240,000
Two years earlier, the number was 350. Did the PTC exist? Is so, what percentage? If not, it means the non-PTC increase is 37%.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Agreed. I will be writing to the FCC.
FCC Contact Page
Escape Pod Films: Sketch Comedy and Web Series
Child to Mom: Mom how do you create a child? ... You know Mom and Dad... ehh first Mom lies in the bed ehh... and then Dad lies in the Bed...ehh.. And then Dad...
Mom: Ehh.. *silence*
Child: You mean like fucking ?
Mom: Ehh.. *very emarrasing silence*
Advertiser-voice: Rema 1000; the simple is somethimes the best. (their slogan)
I would like to see Wal-Mart do something like that on public TV.
Is it wrong but every single show from that their list that I have enjoyed or at least considered watching is rated with a red light, and almost every single piece of lowest-common-denominator derivative garbage I checked is yellow light or better?
On the bright side, I am thinking of writing to them to thank them for providing a good method for evaluating new TV shows. Just search for the ones with the most red lights.
Anyway, I must be off now to use cuss words and thinking unwholesome thoughts about sexual issues, all whilst advocating non-peaceful solutions for complex problems.
I truly hope that some of the responses posted here to this story were being sarcastic or joking. Not all of us that read Slashdot are liberally biased like most of the news media. I guess Slashdot never claimed to be an objective reporter of the facts, but perhaps some of those 240,000 complaints came from people who clicked on the link to complain to the FCC from the PTC website?
Also, I think the issue is not that the PTC or other conservative groups want to censor television for everyone, the biggest issue is when some types of objectionable material air. The reason that CBS was cracked down on so hard during the SuperBowl is because the incident occurred around 9 pm which is still considered "prime-time" TV and is not "late-night" (10pm or later). If that incident would have occurred after 10pm, they might not have been fined at all.
I know this will probably get me flamed, but if the majority of people in the nation voted for a conservative Senate, House, and President, does it not perhaps signify A) That the majority of the nation actually *wants* conservative policies or B) That a large number of people are too lazy to vote and then like to complain when they see the results of their inaction.
Just my two cents. And yes, I am a conservative, and yes I DO think that there is far too much foul language and sex on TV during hours when children are watching. If people want to air uncensored nudity or sex on TV - do it on a pay channel that is an optional addition to your Cable so that parents can choose not to purchase it for their household. Otherwise, there is no excuse for this kind of stuff during times when children are watching.
"To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield." - Tennyson
Children don't need protection from something they don't want to see anyways... and keeping stuff from teenagers is impossible anyways.
"" How about taking the safety labels off everything, and let the stupidity-problem solve itself? """
Well, I'm tuning back to see when they drop their #1 show, Joan of Arcadia. You see, the other week, one of the characters who plays God (who occasionally also appears in the form of a *gasp* woman on the show, as well) had the temerity to say that He (i.e., God) had so many religions because people had so many way's of relating to Him, acknowledging Hinduism as an example. I'm sure that goes over well with the thumpers that put that show as numero uno on their list! Like I said, I'm anxious to see what they have to say when they next revise the list, because I'm pretty sure neither polythism nor spiritual eclecticism is high on their list of core values.
That is all.
As long as we're confusing the issue with facts, it should be noted that Senator Lieberman was (and for all I know, still is) on the advisory board for the PTC. Both parties have their own big brother wannabes.
"The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than that of whether a submarine can swim" -EWD
"I actually donated money to the PTC."
Hmm, what's that phrase. Oh, a fool and his money are soon parted....
"I am all for showing sex and violence on TV but not when it is deviously smuggled inside shows billed "family entertainment"."
So, could you give some examples of these shows? Or is it that some shows that you THOUGHT were "family entertainment" had sex and violence in them. Frankly, I find very little sex (not sexual content) and violence in ANY US television, which brings me to point two-maybe your definitions of family entertainment are different than most people....
"The sad fact is that there are hardly any alternatives because almost EVERY show is doing it. There are not many intellectually stimulating shows to watch - unless you want to watch PBS all the time."
Deal with it. If every show is doing it, then by the FTC's definition of indecent, it probably isn't, because of "community standards". If most people want it in the community, how can it be indecent?
Regarding the "intellectually stimulating shows"- there never have been many of them. There never will be. Get over it. TV, for better or worse, is for entertainment, not deep thought. Be glad there is ANY "good" shows. The fact that there are so few illustrates how profitable that niche is....
Hillary's right, it does "take a village", but not "to raise a kid". It takes a village to pay for a kid. Parents, think about that the next time you're lobbying for new additions to the local school, or for speed bumps every 10 feet because you're afraid your kid will get run over, etc. We child-free folks pay just as much as you do for those items (ie, in most states property taxes are used to pay for public schooling, and the amount of property tax you pay relies only on the value of your property and not the number of children you have attending a public school), and we don't use the provided services nearly as much as the childed. Consider the catch-22 of moving to a new community because it has a "better" school. Chances are, in many cases that's because the community and school are small, with a low number of students per teacher so that teachers can spend more time per student. You see that and drag in your three progeny. Others do the same and before you know it the school with an average class size of 16 has now skyrocketed to an average size of 35-40, hemmoraging teachers left and right because of the added stress, increasing property taxes to pay for school additions and increased community infrastructure (more/wider roads so all of your huge SUVs can drive junior to school in the morning), etc. Of course, then you start complaining about how bad the school is, or how the community is no longer the quaint place you thought you were moving into, or that you're getting reamed by property taxes. Here's a little video worth watching. (warning: this will likely offend parents, and it's definitely an example of an extreme belief, but the concept is still sound and the video is funny, IMHO)
As for "family values", can anyone define "family values" for me? I'm not considered a family (single, no kids), so why should I embrace "family values"? Who says what a family is, anyway? Is a childless married couple a family? What about a single father with custody of his kid(s)? What about a same-sex domestic partnership (with or without children)? Are those families? If not, why should they "act in ways that value families?" There's nothing in it for them.
(Note: I read your post to be in jest, making fun of Hillary, anti-gun nuts, etc. I just decided to rant.)
Dear PTC activists, We are of the bread of human being that through history promoted science, technology and new ways of communication. Things like The Internet, television, radio and many others exist because of the hard work of many free spirits before us that we admire and from whom we are always trying to take the flame.
In another hand you are of the kind who claimed that the earth was flat and that continue to claim that evolution is non-existent. Your puritan and conservative way of thinking comes from those who have done everything to slow down the research and accomplishment of the first group. If humanity has listened you from the beginning, we will probably still be chasing animals with rocks and sticks and living in caves.
Please stop censuring those technologies that you did not contribute to create, in fact why don't you simply stop using them at all and go communicate though bushes on fire or something else you believe in?
Sincerely yours.
Yahh, hiii haaaaa! -Major Kong, from Dr. Strangelove
I nonetheless find it ironic that those who want most to shut down free speech scream the loudest when nobody wants to listen to them.
I sent this letter to the parentstv.org email address. Maybe send them similar letters?
Hello,
I'm not sure who I might be addressing at editor@parentstv.org, so I apologize for the lack of personalization.
I am somewhat curious about your organization and why it exists. I realize you probably get all sorts of crank emails, spam, etc... So I expect this email to most likely get ignored.
I don't like most of what's shown on TV today... I rarely watch TV as a matter of fact. However, I find that trying to prevent other people from doing so is a) futile and b) wrong. I am wondering why your organization thinks it's ok to dictate what other people do in the privacy of thier own homes?
I understand you are working under a "save the children" banner, and that's fine. But is it not more logical for a parent to parent, as opposed to expecting the government or TV and radio stations to do it for them? Why does your organization feel that it's acceptable to deny programming to people who may find it funny/interesting/worth watching? Why do you feel that your "rights" override other's "rights" to watch what they please?
As I said, I have no real agenda; I don't watch the TV shows you label as "Bad" nor do I watch the ones you label as "Good." If either or both of them are cancled or taken off the air, I don't really care one whit. What I do care about is your organizations internal justification for censoring programming because parents can't be bothered to actually monitor what their children watch. I have a very real problem with organizations like yours dictating to others what's "right" and what isn't.
It's time to stop blaming TV, Radio, Newspaper and other media for the poor condition some children find themselves in, and it's time to start looking at the parents. I know it's hard to accept responsibilty for the majority of parents that are part of your organization, but the very real facts of the matter are that any parent that joins your organization is a poor parent and is obviously incapable of taking care of a child in an appropriate manner. They rely on the TV to babysite or educate then children, when that is a job for the parents themselves, not to be shunned off on the anonymous TV screen.
As I said, of course I do not expect this letter to be given any serious thought by the people of your organization. It's often hard, if not impossible to convince a zealot that they are misguided and doing harm rather than good. It's a very sad state of affairs and a very sad day for the nation when people with misguided political agendas are able to influence freedom of speech and democracy. Shame on your ogranization for further erroding our right to free speech and freedom of expression. Your ogranization is part of the problem, not a part of the solution.
Thank you for your time,
XXXXXX
Nice, how you're imposing your moral values on your children. When I was a teenage boy with raging hormones, I very much wanted sexually-explicit shows. Very much like drugs, if I couldn't get them from TV, I would get them from somewhere else. And I saw some pretty explicit stuff at a fairly young age (around 15, 16). Can't say it's caused me any physchological damage. Though I guess I can't prove it as AC.
The problem with the Puritan rooted US society is that sex and violence are lumped in one category. Why? They're not the same thing at all. So what Janet Jackson's boobs were on TV? Guess what, a lot of you were sucking on one right after you were born!
There's nothing wrong with seeing sex on TV as long as it's not mixed with violence.
I agree with you on the parenting part, for one no one should comment on parenting unless they're parents themselves.
But on your statement regarding the slashdot crowd is being "religiously godless and radically liberal" and that slashdot should be more balanced. I feel I must speak out against that. Slashdot, being a forum and site for technology related subjects (hence, for the nerds), it will inherently be biased towards one side. And of course the said modding will be radical, since the only people that bothers to mod are those with radical opinions. Secondly, you could also argue the same regarding many other online groups, including the PTA. Which consists of members who, pardon my language, are a bunch of "ultra conservertists and hard-core fundamentalists" (maybe a bit extreme, but just to make a point.
In US, you can easily buy enough major firearms to wipe out your neighbourhood but a few little fireworks are banned.
I looked at a couple of this years and previous years shows. This is strictly a group of shows approved by your local church.
I see little to do with "morality" and lots to to with propagating the faith. News flash people don't have to go to church to have morals.
The "best" show are littered with the "godly shows":
Seventh Heaven, touched by an angel. And shows so mind numbingly bland that your intestines would throttle your brain as a defence mechanism if you actually watched them and actually had a brain. Shows like Sue Thomos FBI.
The "Worst" list has many shows I actually enjoyed. Like Buffy, Angel, That 70's Show, Spin City, CSI, Cold Case, and NYPD Blue.
I din't actually see anything on the "Best" list that I could actually tolerate watching.
Here's my 2 cents.
I'm Christian, but I'm against having a Theocracy.
Trying to form a Theocracy in the name of God is a blasphemy against him. If God wants a Theocracy, he won't have given us the freedom to choose. Any attempt to for a theocracy is an attempt to judge at others, an act frowned upon in bible. A true Christian Fundamentalist won't attempt to subvert democracy, won't attempt to forcefully convert others, won't judge others for their actions, and won't retaliate when being attacked.
Yes, I would like everyone to believe in Jesus. But in the end, it's your choice and your decision, and it is in my belief and obligation to respect your choice/decision.
In US, you can easily buy enough major firearms to wipe out your neighbourhood but a few little fireworks are banned.
You're a credit to your religion.
I'm not a religious individual, but at least you're not one of the pushy types.
Note: If you agree with the site in question, you will be offended. Fire off your emails blindly.
Maddox Banned?!
Posted AC to avoid kharmoring.
Didn't Jesus himself say something like "give unto the Lord what is his and give unto Caesar what is his?" If that or something similar is true then wouldn't that imply that both olden things like tithes and newer ones like theocracies, gov't by theo?, would not be giving what is actually the Lord's but taking what is "Caesar's."
Why don't you guys have friends or journals?
Cowboy Neal's remarks are typical of the powers that be at SlashDot. Despite the quoted claims, this isn't a censorship issue. Broadcast television gets free use of a valuable and scarce resource, the RF spectrum, that's publicly owned and worth many billions. It does that because it has agreed from day one that what it broadcasts must serve the public interest not the interests of the networks or a select group of artists.
For a parallel that fits what Rintels wants, imagine a society where only a few giant corporations are allowed to use our Interstate highways, while the rest of us can only travel on their buses where, when, and how they want. That's what TV networks want to do. It's "free speech" for a vanishingly small and extraordinarly wealthy few.
Imagine further that those networks have decided that more money is to be made by using the land alongside "their" highways to dump trash that gets blown into our neighborhoods. That's the network's current glorification of violence and sex. It blows into every neighborhood in the land.
The result of the programming is the same as with the advertising--our sons are more likely to get mugged and our daughters to be rapped. Never forget that if programming doesn't influence behavior, then neither does advertising and the networks are guility of fraud on a massive scale.
That's why "we the people" have every right to decide what is in the public interest and can or cannot be broadcast. If the TV networks don't like that, they have every right get out of broadcasting and publish their programming like the rest of us do--on DVD and video tapes where there is no issues involving a scarce public resource and thus no role for the FCC.
All this is so obvious, it makes you wonder why there's a fuss.
--Mike Perry, Inkling blog , Seattle
Funny how it's always the religions who are trying to restrict other people's freedoms...
They don't like something, so YOU shouldn't be allowed to do it.
Nice
N.
"Nothing strengthens authority so much as silence." - Charles de Gaulle
When I say that Carter was out of his depth, I'm referring to his inability to recognize that many of the people he had to deal with were operating from genuinely evil motives. He's basically a decent man himself, and was far too willing to think the best of people who had a lot of blood on their hands.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
TV does suck - but it is also great. I will admit, I do watch some crap. But I try to learn from it. There is a show out now called "Nanny 911". An English nanny (not hot) comes and stays with a family for a week. The family has horribly behaved kids, and it is usually the parents fault. She lays down some guidelines, they eventually learn, and la la la happy ending. Pure trash, right? Well, yes. But I am about to be a dad for the first time. I enjoy watching this show to see just how bad it could possibly get. :-) My wife and I watch this, and we talk about parenting stuff. Could we do this without TV? Of course, and we do. But I try to learn stuff from everything in life, including TV. I watch a lot of the Discovery Channel, Animal Planet, The Learning Channel, and The Food Network. I have learned sooooo much from FoodTV. Even those channels run crap shows, but just because I watch TV doesn't mean I watch all TV. I turn it off - a lot.
But to the point of this article, let them run whatever they want, within some guidelines if need be. Censorship is NOT solving anything.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
Obviously no one checks the statistics on global education and where America's children stand. I am not quite sure why our children are significantly less intelligent for the amount of resources we have. Quality programming and video games probably have nothing to do with it. Blame the parents. Partially, sure. What happens when all you kid bearing geeks (oh, what, that's few and far between) are out and about and have to be subjected to some other child's uneducated and rude comments. Oh, like the Television, we have the option of not going outside. Yeah, and we have the option to lock our doors and close down all communication with the outside world. Self righteous, hypocritical and nosy are attributes every poster on this site has as well.