LawTalkers  

Go Back   LawTalkers > General Discussion > Politics

» Site Navigation
 > FAQ
» Online Users: 704
0 members and 704 guests
No Members online
Most users ever online was 4,499, 10-26-2015 at 08:55 AM.
 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 02-03-2004, 05:02 PM   #11
sgtclub
Serenity Now
 
sgtclub's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Survivor Island
Posts: 7,007
Super Bowl Investigation

Quote:
Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
The FCC enforces restrictions on prurient content because the people, in their wisdom, have decided that some sorts of things ought not be aired, even if market forces say otherwise.
I realize that, but I think this is outdated, given cable TV. Is there really a difference between programs shown via over the air and cable/satellite? I don't see the pay/free distinction.

Quote:
Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop Suppose, though, that things were otherwise. As a matter of law, anything goes. But CBS tells people that it's not going to show naked breasts on its programming. So people who are opposed to that sort of thing tune in, and let their kids watch. And then they see more than they want to. Tort law doesn't really help you at that point. I suppose you think that viewers will retaliate against the advertisers, or the network, but, if it's an accident, why? Unclear that the market will produce optimum results in that situation.
I don't see what sort of compensible harm anybody has suffered by viewing a naked boob for 1/2 a second.
sgtclub is offline  
 


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.0.1

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:22 AM.