WHY? Parents council protesting fx's Rescue Me
video...@yahoo.com
I don't understand; yes the content of that program is objectionable &
not for children so.........
Why not just block the FX channel off your set Mr. or Mrs PTC member?
It's as easy as that; no sweat; and then your children can't see it.
Why is it necessary for these people to go around & call advertisers &
say, "You should pull this show off the air." Who are THEY to tell me
what I can or can not watch?
Let THEM adjust their viewing.
Erase the channel off their set.
Don't go around and ruining shows that I happen to enjoy.
.
bkl...@yahoo.com
Because they are fascists. They believe that everyone should live by
the same value system as they do. They are also apparently too lazy to
be actively involved in their children's upbringing and believe society
should be remade so they can be unfettered by the inconvenience of
monitoring what their children watch. Viva le autoparenting!
Steven L.
> http://www.parentstv.org/PTC/campaigns/rescueme/main.asp
>
> I don't understand; yes the content of that program is objectionable &
> not for children so.........
>
> Why not just block the FX channel off your set Mr. or Mrs PTC member?
yes, that might work with FX, since the entire channel doesn't offer any
family-friendly programming anyway.
It's not a solution for programs that run on the major broadcast
channels. If you block out NBC just because there's one NBC program
unsuitable for children, and block out ABC because there's one ABC
program unsuitable for children, pretty soon you've blocked out most
big-budget shows.
The right answer is for the networks to adopt a code of conduct in which
they broadcast at least some family-friendly programming in prime time
every night.
> It's as easy as that; no sweat; and then your children can't see it.
> Why is it necessary for these people to go around & call advertisers &
> say, "You should pull this show off the air."
Boycotts have been used by all sorts of groups to pull shows off the
air. As I've pointed out before, gay and lesbian activists from GLAAD
boycotted the sponsors of Dr. Laura's conservative talk show to get it
pulled off the air. Whether that was the reason it was ultimately
cancelled is debatable. But there's no debate that this was the intent
of those gay and lesbian activists. You can check the GLAAD website for
details on the campaign they waged to get Dr. Laura off the airwaves.
And I *NEVER* recall liberals objecting to that.
--
Steven D. Litvintchouk
Email: sdli...@earthlinkNOSPAM.net
Remove the NOSPAM before replying to me.
Steven L.
> video...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> http://www.parentstv.org/PTC/campaigns/rescueme/main.asp
>>
>> I don't understand; yes the content of that program is objectionable &
>> not for children so.........
>>
>> Why not just block the FX channel off your set Mr. or Mrs PTC member?
>> It's as easy as that; no sweat; and then your children can't see it.
>> Why is it necessary for these people to go around & call advertisers &
>> say, "You should pull this show off the air." Who are THEY to tell me
>> what I can or can not watch?
>>
>> Let THEM adjust their viewing.
>> Erase the channel off their set.
>> Don't go around and ruining shows that I happen to enjoy.
>
>
> Because they are fascists. They believe that everyone should live by
> the same value system as they do.
If you heard about a boycott of the sponsors of Bill O'Reilly (Fox News)
by liberal activists, to get the sponsors to stop advertising on that
program, would you oppose it?
bkl...@yahoo.com
I do boycott him, my remote never rests on Fox News.
One big difference for me is, FX never professes to be anything but
entertainment for adults, they don't market their shows in a manner
than would attract young eyes.
O'Reilley professes to be "news" but has little regard for honesty or
fact. And he actively crusades for policies that would make make,
specifically, my life more difficult and policies that endanger, even
kill, Americans needlessly.
Once a parent turns off FX channel, there's no "danger" to their child
(if there ever was).
record hunter
*Is* anyone actually calling for a boycott of Bill O'Reilly? The PTC
should do what I do. Take FX off their remote the way I do Fox News
(and MTV, which I find as objectionable as Bill O'Reilly).
Userb3
$ye3....@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net:
> The right answer is for the networks to adopt a code of conduct in which
> they broadcast at least some family-friendly programming in prime time
> every night.
>
No, the right answer is for parents to control what their children watch,
and instill good values in their children so they'll be less likely to be
swayed if they should be exposed to something counter to the parents'
values.
FDR
"Steven L." <sdli...@earthlinkNOSPAM.net> wrote in message
news:I7atg.6734$ye3....@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> video...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> http://www.parentstv.org/PTC/campaigns/rescueme/main.asp
>>
>> I don't understand; yes the content of that program is objectionable &
>> not for children so.........
>>
>> Why not just block the FX channel off your set Mr. or Mrs PTC member?
>
> yes, that might work with FX, since the entire channel doesn't offer any
> family-friendly programming anyway.
>
> It's not a solution for programs that run on the major broadcast channels.
> If you block out NBC just because there's one NBC program unsuitable for
> children, and block out ABC because there's one ABC program unsuitable for
> children, pretty soon you've blocked out most big-budget shows.
>
> The right answer is for the networks to adopt a code of conduct in which
> they broadcast at least some family-friendly programming in prime time
> every night.
OR, they could just use the V-Chip that's already installed in the tv, or
the parental controls in the cable box. But nooooo. It's easier (laugh) to
send letters and make boycotts.
You don't have to ban a whole netwrok. Ban the program.
>
>
>> It's as easy as that; no sweat; and then your children can't see it.
>> Why is it necessary for these people to go around & call advertisers &
>> say, "You should pull this show off the air."
>
> Boycotts have been used by all sorts of groups to pull shows off the air.
> As I've pointed out before, gay and lesbian activists from GLAAD boycotted
> the sponsors of Dr. Laura's conservative talk show to get it pulled off
> the air. Whether that was the reason it was ultimately cancelled is
> debatable. But there's no debate that this was the intent of those gay
> and lesbian activists. You can check the GLAAD website for details on the
> campaign they waged to get Dr. Laura off the airwaves. And I *NEVER*
> recall liberals objecting to that.
As I recall, Laura was using the show to directly bash gays and lesbians,
and using it as a pulpit. Now are you saying that it's the same as a
fictional entertainment tv show like Rescue Me?
record hunter
record hunter
FDR wrote:
> "Steven L." <sdli...@earthlinkNOSPAM.net> wrote in message
> news:I7atg.6734$ye3....@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> > video...@yahoo.com wrote:
> >> http://www.parentstv.org/PTC/campaigns/rescueme/main.asp
> >>
> >> I don't understand; yes the content of that program is objectionable &
> >> not for children so.........
> >>
> >> Why not just block the FX channel off your set Mr. or Mrs PTC member?
> >
> > yes, that might work with FX, since the entire channel doesn't offer any
> > family-friendly programming anyway.
> >
> > It's not a solution for programs that run on the major broadcast channels.
> > If you block out NBC just because there's one NBC program unsuitable for
> > children, and block out ABC because there's one ABC program unsuitable for
> > children, pretty soon you've blocked out most big-budget shows.
> >
> > The right answer is for the networks to adopt a code of conduct in which
> > they broadcast at least some family-friendly programming in prime time
> > every night.
No. I don't want to be forced to watch "family-friendly" programming
during prime-time. I don't have children, and I'm sick of having to
kowtow to everyone who does. It's not my fault they made that choice.
RESCUE ME reflects the way certain people (i.e., these characters)
behave, including how they talk. I wish there were more such realistic
programming, not less.
> OR, they could just use the V-Chip that's already installed in the tv, or
> the parental controls in the cable box.
And which there's a commercial for before every ep of RESCUE ME, THE
SHIELD, NIP-TUCK, etc.
record hunter
Someone happened to have turned my kitchen radio to AM over the Fourth
of July, and the next time I turned it on, I got to hear this woman
bashing gays. As you'll have guessed by now, it was Dr. Laura, using
radio as her pulpit.
David Johnston
<sdli...@earthlinkNOSPAM.net> wrote:
>video...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> http://www.parentstv.org/PTC/campaigns/rescueme/main.asp
>>
>> I don't understand; yes the content of that program is objectionable &
>> not for children so.........
>>
>> Why not just block the FX channel off your set Mr. or Mrs PTC member?
>
>yes, that might work with FX, since the entire channel doesn't offer any
>family-friendly programming anyway.
>
>It's not a solution for programs that run on the major broadcast
>channels. If you block out NBC just because there's one NBC program
>unsuitable for children, and block out ABC because there's one ABC
>program unsuitable for children, pretty soon you've blocked out most
>big-budget shows.
>
>The right answer is for the networks to adopt a code of conduct in which
>they broadcast at least some family-friendly programming in prime time
>every night.
They have enough troubles competing with cable without jointly
agreeing to broadcast adult hostile programming.
Anim8rFSK
"bkl...@yahoo.com" <bkl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Steven L. wrote:
> > bkl...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > > video...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > >> http://www.parentstv.org/PTC/campaigns/rescueme/main.asp
> > >>
> > >> I don't understand; yes the content of that program is objectionable &
> > >> not for children so.........
> > >>
> > >> Why not just block the FX channel off your set Mr. or Mrs PTC member?
> > >> It's as easy as that; no sweat; and then your children can't see it.
> > >> Why is it necessary for these people to go around & call advertisers &
> > >> say, "You should pull this show off the air." Who are THEY to tell me
> > >> what I can or can not watch?
> > >>
> > >> Let THEM adjust their viewing.
> > >> Erase the channel off their set.
> > >> Don't go around and ruining shows that I happen to enjoy.
> > >
> > >
> > > Because they are fascists. They believe that everyone should live by
> > > the same value system as they do.
> >
> > If you heard about a boycott of the sponsors of Bill O'Reilly (Fox News)
> > by liberal activists, to get the sponsors to stop advertising on that
> > program, would you oppose it?
>
> I do boycott him, my remote never rests on Fox News.
Then how do you kow what O'Reilley profefsses?
>
> One big difference for me is, FX never professes to be anything but
> entertainment for adults, they don't market their shows in a manner
> than would attract young eyes.
>
> O'Reilley professes to be "news"
Oh? I thought he had a commentary show.
> but has little regard for honesty or
> fact.
And since you don't watch, you just heard this somewhere, right?
Anim8rFSK
"Steven L." <sdli...@earthlinkNOSPAM.net> wrote:
> video...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > http://www.parentstv.org/PTC/campaigns/rescueme/main.asp
> >
> > I don't understand; yes the content of that program is objectionable &
> > not for children so.........
> >
> > Why not just block the FX channel off your set Mr. or Mrs PTC member?
>
> yes, that might work with FX, since the entire channel doesn't offer any
> family-friendly programming anyway.
>
> It's not a solution for programs that run on the major broadcast
> channels. If you block out NBC just because there's one NBC program
> unsuitable for children, and block out ABC because there's one ABC
> program unsuitable for children, pretty soon you've blocked out most
> big-budget shows.
>
> The right answer is for the networks to adopt a code of conduct in which
> they broadcast at least some family-friendly programming in prime time
> every night.
>
>
> > It's as easy as that; no sweat; and then your children can't see it.
> > Why is it necessary for these people to go around & call advertisers &
> > say, "You should pull this show off the air."
>
> Boycotts have been used by all sorts of groups to pull shows off the
> air. As I've pointed out before, gay and lesbian activists from GLAAD
> boycotted the sponsors of Dr. Laura's conservative talk show to get it
> pulled off the air.
We had a local news anchor urge a boycott of Howard Stern's show when it
first came to town; she tried to get people to call in and complain
BEFORE IT STARTED.
bkl...@yahoo.com
His many lies and misrepresentations are debunked in other sources.
Anim8rFSK
"bkl...@yahoo.com" <bkl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Okay, so it's all hearsay? That's fine, just asking.
Mark Nobles
> We had a local news anchor urge a boycott of Howard Stern's show when it
> first came to town; she tried to get people to call in and complain
> BEFORE IT STARTED.
Same thing happened when NYPD Blue started and the network let out that
they were going to be cussing and showing bare butts. That boycott
worked so well that the show only lasted 12 years.
Then there was the boycott urged on Married: With Children by Terry
Rakolta that forced that show off the air after only 11 years.
And I seem to recall a PTC move to boycott Seventh Heaven before it
started, which was reversed into support when the boycotters actually
saw what they were getting. Now why would they even watch the show they
had already decided to boycott, anyway? So much for the infallible
advice they were getting.
bkl...@yahoo.com
Anim8rFSK wrote:
> > > Oh? I thought he had a commentary show.
> > >
> > > > but has little regard for honesty or
> > > > fact.
> > >
> > > And since you don't watch, you just heard this somewhere, right?
> >
> > His many lies and misrepresentations are debunked in other sources.
>
> Okay, so it's all hearsay? That's fine, just asking.
Feel free to enlighten me on the intellectual giant of integrity that
is Bill O'reilly.
I'm prepared to soak it all up like a loofah sponge!
Anim8rFSK
"bkl...@yahoo.com" <bkl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
I was just asking if you'd ever seen it. I don't watch his show either,
although I've seen bits and pieces if somebody has it on in the
background.
Anim8rFSK
Mark Nobles <cmn-n...@houston.rr.com> wrote:
> Anim8rFSK <ANIM...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> > We had a local news anchor urge a boycott of Howard Stern's show when it
> > first came to town; she tried to get people to call in and complain
> > BEFORE IT STARTED.
>
> Same thing happened when NYPD Blue started and the network let out that
> they were going to be cussing and showing bare butts. That boycott
> worked so well that the show only lasted 12 years.
>
> Then there was the boycott urged on Married: With Children by Terry
> Rakolta that forced that show off the air after only 11 years.
>
Argh, that horrible, demented woman. I saw her interviewed on something
not long ago; she's still all proud of herself.
Mark Nobles
The Fox Network should put a statue of her in front of their building.
Without her help, the network would probably have gone the way of the
WB.
Susan Bartholomew
watch, and it's on very late for kids (10:00). If it was on at 8:00 it'd
be different, but is 10:00 considered to be part of the family viewing
time? Isn't that more like 7:00-9:00?
It's too bad they think the show's too graphic, but it's an adult show
made for adults shown in an adult time slot. What are they expecting at
that hour and with that subject matter?
Mark Nobles
It has nothing to do with graphic language. Their problem is that it is
aimed at adults and they can't understand it. That's why they think
there should be nothing aired that can't be watched and understood by a
ten-year old.
bkl...@yahoo.com
I think I'd have more respect for them if they weren't couching the
whole hub-bub in the "what about the children" and just admit: "We're
the morality police, and we want to censor what adults watch."
Anim8rFSK
Mark Nobles <cmn-n...@houston.rr.com> wrote:
hee hee
BTR1701
<sueb...@earthlink.net> wrote:
Honestly? A prayer-time and gospel sing-a-long variety show. That's what
they want everyone to be watching all the time. No joke.
BTR1701
"Steven L." <sdli...@earthlinkNOSPAM.net> wrote:
> video...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > http://www.parentstv.org/PTC/campaigns/rescueme/main.asp
> >
> > I don't understand; yes the content of that program is objectionable &
> > not for children so.........
> >
> > Why not just block the FX channel off your set Mr. or Mrs PTC member?
>
> yes, that might work with FX, since the entire channel doesn't offer any
> family-friendly programming anyway.
>
> It's not a solution for programs that run on the major broadcast
> channels. If you block out NBC just because there's one NBC program
> unsuitable for children, and block out ABC because there's one ABC
> program unsuitable for children, pretty soon you've blocked out most
> big-budget shows.
>
> The right answer is for the networks to adopt a code of conduct in which
> they broadcast at least some family-friendly programming in prime time
> every night.
Let me guess... "family-friendly" as defined by the religious zealots?
Quiet Desperation
> I find this a bit baffling-I mean, it's not a show kids would likely
> watch, and it's on very late for kids (10:00). If it was on at 8:00 it'd
> be different, but is 10:00 considered to be part of the family viewing
> time? Isn't that more like 7:00-9:00?
I remember lightly debating a PTCdroid online when they were protesting
the Shield a few years back. I discovered that they were seeing it early
in the evening due to the satellite systems beaming the East Coast feed
to the West Coast for some channels, so The Shield was airing at, like,
7pm for them.
I offered to reverse the Earth's rotation for them, but they were not
amused. :)
Tony Calguire
>
>
> The right answer is for the networks to adopt a code of conduct in which
> they broadcast at least some family-friendly programming in prime time
> every night.
>
Perhaps the real right answer is for them to work very hard to overcome
their irrational fear of syllables, body parts, and lifestyles, and
then, work even harder to NOT pass those neuroses on to their children.
Then, we can all watch television in peace.
video...@yahoo.com
> video...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > http://www.parentstv.org/PTC/campaigns/rescueme/main.asp
> > I don't understand; yes the content of that program is objectionable &
> > not for children so.........
>
> yes, that might work with FX, since the entire channel doesn't offer any
> family-friendly programming anyway.
> It's not a solution for programs that run on the major broadcast
.
Yes it is. You can program your TV not to receive any programs higher
than TV-G which can only be over-ridden by a Parents Passcode (if you
want to watch the news for example). That way YOU control which shows
your children can watch.
Censorship of what *I* like to watch (such as broadcast tv's heavy
language/violent 24) is not an acceptable solution. I'm not a child,
and I don't want you treating me like I am. You try to yank 24 off the
air, and succeed, I will become VERY angry.
>You can check the GLAAD website for
> details on the campaign they waged to get Dr. Laura off the airwaves.
> And I *NEVER* recall liberals objecting to that.
I'm not a liberal. I liked Dr. Laura's advice show, because it was
(mostly) common sense. For example:
Caller: "My husband is a drunk."
Laura: "Was he a heavy drinker when you were dating him?"
caller: "Yeah he was."
Laura: "Then why did you marry him?"
caller: "......"
Laura: "You shouldn't marry someone you know has problems; you wouldn't
buy a car that has a broken engine. Best advice I can give you is:
Don't marry him. But since you already bought the car with the broken
engine, that advice comes too late. See if you can get your husband to
join Alcoholics Anonymous... my screener will give you the number to
call."
Basically, she's saying a lot of our problems happen because WE cause
them with our own foolish decisions. (And for me, that particular call
was good because it taught me to avoid marrying people who are drunks
or have other problems, that could cause marital issues.)
And yes I object to people trying to get her canceled. If you don't
like Laura, just turn the dial to something else.
.
video...@yahoo.com
>
> *Is* anyone actually calling for a boycott of Bill O'Reilly? The PTC
> should do what I do. Take FX off their remote the way I do Fox News
> (and MTV, which I find as objectionable as Bill O'Reilly).
.
An intelligent American. He doesn't like what he sees, but recognizes
that other people DO enjoy those programs (for whatever reason), and so
rather than try to ruin those other persons' enjoyment by yanking the
show off the air.....
..... he simply self-censors himself and blocks the channel off the TV.
He exercises his right to self-determination while still respecting
others' rights to watch whatever they want (including FX's adults-only
programming).
That's how it SHOULD be. Respect other people's freedom, rather than
try to dictate to them what they can or can not watch.
.
video...@yahoo.com
> bkl...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > video...@yahoo.com wrote:
> >> http://www.parentstv.org/PTC/campaigns/rescueme/main.asp
> >>
> >>
> >> Erase the channel off their set.
> >> Don't go around and ruining shows that I happen to enjoy.
> >
> > Because they are fascists. They believe that everyone should live by
> > the same value system as they do.
>
> If you heard about a boycott of the sponsors of Bill O'Reilly (Fox News)
> by liberal activists, to get the sponsors to stop advertising on that
> program, would you oppose it?
.
Yes. For the same reason. I disagree with O'Reilly's viewpoints, but
I still enjoy listening to him; it's good exercise to mentally debate &
shoot-down his points one-by-one. It's a form of entertainment for me.
Who are the liberals to tell me that I can NOT watch O'Reilly (by
trying to yank him off the air)? Makes them no better than the Parents
TV Council.
.
Dano
<video...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1152802461.1...@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
with him maybe 10% of the time...if that. But I wouldn't ever want to take
him off the air or boycott him anymore than Bill Maher, who I might find
agreement with 50% of the time. And he was bounced off the air after
political and sponsor pressure. When has a conservative been so
screwed...please spare me with the Dr. Laura crap...her ratings went in the
crapper or she'd still be riding high.
It's funny that I somehow missed these so called liberal activists trying to
censor. Who called for the boycott, I didn't get the memo, am I not liberal
enough these days? I don't care for any censorship of any sort. The fact
is that the rightists/conservatives/neo-cons...whatever label you care to
attach to the dominant power in control of the vast majority of government
currently, is the biggest censor of all. The FCC, under the stewardship of
that Powell kid, has become frighteningly activist in shaping what can be
shown on the airwaves in recent years. Boycotts at least are a grassroots
effort by citizens, not the authoritarians trying to tell people what to
watch. If people want to do that, it IS their right.