Comments about ‘Nudity, profanity and broadcast TV: The future hangs in the balance right now’

Return to article »

Published: Sunday, April 14 2013 7:45 p.m. MDT

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Cache county, USA

It's simple.
If it gets worse, we will cancel the Dish.

Someone Pinch Me

They say the Devil is in the details, I believe the Devil really is and owns broadcast media in all its forms.

Kaysville, UT

Government and the FCC have not pushed for more decency. They push for more liberal programming in all cases. Decency involves all types of programming that is pervasive. The PG-13 programming is very general and even liberal on the definitions they have used for 30 years to put in all types of what I would call R rated type material.

Money does buy a lot of favors and pushes the agenda of Congress and the President. As we know, the Supreme Court through their Senatorial processes and nomination by the President come into the Court with their own bias that can appear to be persuaded in certain circumstances. The shift of people and parties to a certain agenda is influenced by their next vote, either in Court or Senate and even at the ballot box.

Advertisers and sponsors also influence the producer, networks and directors to put in their own agenda items at the expense of what the book actually put in the script.

Salt Lake City, UT

Anybody catch Game of Thrones or Mad Men last night?

The best TV is found on cable/satellite, where the FCCs "decency" rules are already ignored.

Anti Government
Alpine, UT

All part of the plan with regards to sexualizing the youth of America.

The filth continues to pour out of hollywood and the bar is continually lowered.

Salt Lake valley, UT

I've never watched a lot of TV, and my wife and I have been pretty selective about the programs we did watch. However, for economic reasons, I've cut the cord to cable TV and am watching air-air TV. There are quite a few TV stations in the SL area, and we have pretty good choices of programs. I enjoy getting HD air-air TV since we didn't pay for HD cable TV.

Utes Fan
Salt Lake City, UT

@Bob A. Bohey

"This appears to be an issue that the folks who normally champion for less government intrusion into Americans lives are all for it in... It's kind of like saying I'm all for less government except when I'm for more government."

And the folks who normally champion for more government intrusion into American lives now want less government intrusion because of their insensitivity to morals and decency, the negative effects on children, etc. It is hard to take those who want more garbage etc. on TV seriously when their own standards are changed to fit their own agenda. If you want your smut nobody is stopping you - you have plenty of options. For those who want the option of decency without being flooded with garbage, we want that option too.

It's kind of like saying, "I want more government except when I want less government". Yes, that logic seems to work against both sides.

So instead let's make the moral standards the argument, shall we? In all fairness, you can have your garbage, just let me have a choice to be entertained without garbage.

St Louis, MO

G L W8: "yes, there are hundreds, even thousands, of options available these days and most of them bad."

This took me right back to my dad railing about the horrible state of modern music (the 80's, at the time) and how it was all "modulated noise." So I asked, him, on multiple occasions, if he could name more than a couple of bands or songs he specifically objected to. Of course, he couldn't. He had his straw man and his generalizations and that was all he needed.

You comment is more of the same. "Most of them" are "bad"? First of all, I'll bet you lunch that you can't tell me thing one about the content of 90%+ of the programs you'll find by pulling up a Dish menu. Then there's the matter of what "bad" means. Far too many people in these discussions confuse taste with morality. Your dislike of a particular program doesn't mean it's harmful to society. It just means you dislike it.

Salt Lake City, UT


"1- More TV programs will join the rush to be "edgy" and in the end will not be that much different from one another."

No, they won't. The article says that they are not changing the standard for deliberate or repetitive use of these things. Scripted shows will not have it at all.

What this would change is something incidental that the network couldn't really control. Like that Janet Jackson halftime show. Or a swear word being caught on a microphone of a reporter by a fan or athlete at a sporting event.

Salt Lake City, UT

"it would like to ease up on enforcing existing decency standards for broadcast television and radio by only punishing the “deliberate and repetitive use” of profanity and nudity."

This means that no scripted shows will change because it'd be deliberate instances.

Ernest T. Bass
Bountiful, UT

Every channel just needs to show Little House on the Prarie, Lawrence Welk and The Waltons reruns. Nothing else. And byu football games.

Tooele, UT

It's the principle of the thing. The real issue isn't concerning the media and whether or not profanity should be displayed to toddlers (although I do believe that's wrong). It's experimenting with the public and finding out how much they can get away with. This is a baby step toward even more drastic actions. And it sounds to me like the 50,000+ comments they have already received aren't being given much consideration, no matter what they say.

American Fork, UT

My wife and I have gone 5 years now without having our TV hooked up, I can't say we miss it one bit. We still watch movies, and one day we may even get Netflix, but it's quite liberating to not have TV in our home.

Farmington, UT

@ hutterite

Why is it that the seemy, the vulgar, the adult and the profane always want their rights but there is no right for the innocent, such as children and grandchildre, as well as youth (and adults for that matter), such that they can avoid all the gargabe in society? Why does freedom always mean kinky, obscene and lewd?

The persons that want to swim in the sewage certainly have that available to them; why does everyone else to avoid it have to "turn it off?" I am seriously asking. Let the perverter viewers be the one who have to "turn it on" at their own expense, but fiscally and morally.

I saw a movie review that said "PG-13, Profanity, Nudity, Sexual Content, Violemce and Abusive Behavior." Why would anyone ever want to waste their money on such questionable and filthy viewing? And yet the movie critics say "mild language" when they really ought to say "raw language." Time for fantasyland (Hollywood) to grow some morals but don't look for that to ever happen......ever!

Spanish Fork, UT

25 years ago I lived in Europe - my kids grew up there. One day I was watching a children's tv program with them. One of the commercials announced that that evening there would be a show about "a day in the life of a prostitute." It shows full frontal nudity - and, mind you, this was during a children's program. Advertisements for show gel - a naked woman in the shower - are a common occurrence. If people don't think that this won't happen here, they are awfully naive.

Cedar Hills, UT

no question it is only a matter of time - short amount of time - before NBC, ABC, CBS have R rated programming complete with the 'F' bomb and sexual scenes sparing nothing. I suspect you are going to have to have some sort of filter to watch the superbowl with your family going forward ...but I'm certain the left will attempt to block any filtering of content as well. I haven't watched NBC, CBS or ABC for years just because the programming is trashy but I suspect it is about to get alot worse. It feels like America is turning into "Pottersville" and no cooincidence with Barack Obama being president.

St Louis, MO

Oh, dear, the sky is falling, filth filth filth, devil devil devil. If you lot could find a way to monetize hand-wringing, you'd be rolling in it.

I'll say it again: if you can't find anything to watch that suits your standards, you simply aren't trying very hard. If you have transceneded the desire to watch TV anyway, why are you mingling with we, the rabble?

Cedar Hills, UT

I am not in favor of the proposed changes, but it should be pointed out that the AFA statement was very misleading. It makes it sound like the FCC is proposing a changing of the standards to allow constant nudity and obscene language 24 hours a day, which is not the case. However, if the enforcement policy is allowed to change, I'm sure it won't be long before the AFA's sensationalized version actually does become true.

Jackson, TN

We need the TV standards of the 50s on EVERY CHANNEL including HBO, Showtime, etc!

Get the filth out of our homes!

Mount Pleasant, UT

What is wrong with the FCC? There is so much smut, profanity, nudity and everything else degrading on our TV that it is getting to the point we watch only a few select channels. It is not good for children to watch more programs anymore...it pollutes their innocent minds and that is not good....there is nothing good from violence, profanity and leud dress. The moral balance in our country is pathetic and sad. Someone needs to stand up to the FCC and let them know we don't want them to ease anymore restrictions...we've had enough.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments