Slashdot Mirror
Senate Votes To Turn Down Volume On TV Commercials
Hugh Pickens writes "Ever since television caught on in the 1950s, the FCC has been getting complaints about blaring commercials but concluded in 1984 there was no fair way to write regulations controlling the 'apparent loudness' of commercials. Now the AP reports that the Senate has unanimously passed a bill to require television stations and cable companies to keep commercials at the same volume as the programs they interrupt using industry guidelines on how to process, measure and transmit audio in a uniform way. Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY), a co-sponsor, says it's time to stop the use of loud commercials to startle viewers into paying attention. 'TV viewers should be able to watch their favorite programs without fear of losing their hearing when the show goes to a commercial.' The House has already passed similar legislation, so before the new measure becomes law, minor differences between the two versions have to be worked out when Congress returns to Washington after the November 2 election."
Cause it ties the playback loudness of the commercials to *what program material surrounds them*: the same spot could play louder during Footday Night Monball than during CSI, frex.
FCC wisely ducked this, last time.
What will the Senate do next, vote to reduce gravity, so overweight people can get around more easily?
It's a wildly popular bill with broad bi-partisan support, a true no-brainner. With that said, don't worry, the Democrats will still find some way to fuck it up.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
Worthwhil3. So I of ev3nts today,
IF the volume voltage rises louder than the program, Kill the assholes.
If the modulation does the same, Kill the assholes. Kill anyone who
thinks this has ANY value. Kill their children too, the apple does
not fall far from the tree!!!
It is technology, not happenstance. Kill anyone who thinks
commercial data needs to be more prominent than Content data.
It is not a hard thing to do, It should be held up as an assualt
on the 'people's' rights. We allow this and we should control this.
Very simple. NIGGERS !!!!!
Did I say NIGGERS? Sure I did, you that believe we the people should allow this
and you that are advertisers need to understand WE allow or dis-allow these
things. We should kill you people that thinh WE the people, should allow this.
We allow you to do business in this country, not the converse. The tail shall NOT
wag the dog! NIGGERS!!!
Please try to be a little less condescending and flippant when postulating that someone else may not have children. For all you know, he and his wife have tried several times to have children unsuccessfully, so to imply that he's inferior because he's childless could come across wrong.
Its just darn near impossible, kind of like dying from insomnia, yea ok it could happen but the chances are next to none
sorry if you think I am an asshole, hell I will be the first to admit it, but just like there is no cure for that, there is no cure for being an over exaggerating twit
>>>If it's between a candidate who I agree with on 100% of the issues but can't do anything about them, and a canidate who agrees with me on 50% of the issues but is effective at getting legislation passed, then I'm probably going to have to vote for the guy I only half agree with.
>>>
So how's that working out for you?
For me, if I had voted for the major candidate, it would have sucked. (We got over-regulation from Clinton, warmonger/spyer Bush, and national socialist Obama.)
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall