Parents Television Council F*cking Pissed About Repeal Of FCC Indecency Ban

Not surprisingly, in the wake of yesterday’s decision by a New York court to scrap the ridiculous FCC rule against on-air profanity, the not-at-all-overprotective folks at the Parents Television Council are raising their hands in the air and asking, “What about the children?”

In a statement posted on the PTC’s site, president Tim Winter writes:

Let’s be clear about what has happened here today: A three-judge panel in New York once again has authorized the broadcast networks unbridled use of the ‘f-word’ at any time of the day, even in front of children. The Court substituted its own opinion for that of the Supreme Court, the Congress of the United States, and the overwhelming majority of the American people. For parents and families around the country, this ruling is nothing less than a slap in their face. FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski and the Obama administration must immediately appeal.

Today’s ruling comes as absolutely no surprise, given the hostile tenor of the judges during oral arguments. Members of the Second Circuit panel entered the courtroom that day wearing their intentions clearly on their sleeves. What does come as a surprise is the rationale of the opinion, which is devoid of reality. The Court’s illogical analysis would require the overturning of virtually every law on our nation’s books for lack of clarity.

The broadcast decency law, which our nation’s Highest Court has upheld, is clear: broadcasters must refrain from violating community standards of decency during hours when children are likely to be in the audience. The indecency law doesn’t prohibit broadcasters from airing indecent material; it only requires that indecent material air outside the hours when children are likely to be in the audience.

The PTC will vigorously work to defend the FCC’s legal authority to preserve the public airwaves as the last bastion of safety for children and families.

You might remember that the PTC is part of the coalition of so-called family oriented groups who recently demanded that Comcast reveal how much money they make from broadcasting porn.

So listen up, Supreme Court. Or else the PTC might seek advisory board members Michael Medved or Billy Ray Cyrus on you.

PTC Attacks Court Ruling Allowing Unedited Profanity to Air at Any Time of Day [PTC press release]

Comments

Edit Your Comment

  1. Dre' says:

    Let me be the first to say… Suck it, PTC!

    • Anonymously says:

      I doubt they would take you up on such an indecent proposal.

    • c!tizen says:

      Yeah, and F their stupid kids too! I’m so GD tired of being sensored every mother-f’ing time I’ve got some poo to say. MF’in beeches!

    • doctor_cos wants you to remain calm says:

      I believe you were going for Puck the FTC.

    • grumpskeez says:

      Why does it seem that the same people crying out for less government spending and taxes are the same ones crying out that the government needs to step in and control what their precious snowflakes hear and see on television?

      Sad sad hypocrites.

      • Pax says:

        Because those peole are convinced that THEY are perfect, and it’s US who need to be controlled, held back, oppressed,and otherwise f*cked with by the government – and that WE, not they, should be the ones paying for all of it.

        Yeah.

        That’s just how f*cked in the head these people are.

    • ktetch says:

      (Overheard outside the PTC yesterday)
      “You’re S**ting me! those f**ks in the appeals court did WHAT?? they can s**k my d**k if they think I’m letting them get away with this kind of cr*p!”

    • BobOki says:

      I have long felt that America loves to overly shield our children. In the name of religion usually we try to make them think the world is a disney cartoon and attempt to keep it that way as long as possible…. oddly those same people are always the ones that end up being gay, drug users, and criminals (kiddie porn). Makes me sick.
      PTC, you don’t like it, then learn some actual PARENTING and don’t let the tv baby sit your child.

      • Griking says:

        And I have long felt that America loves to purposely offend others just because they can do so under their First Amendment rights. The problem as I see it is that as American’s we all have rights but most unfortunately lack the maturity that should come with having them.

  2. Vanilla5 says:

    I would hope that the networks could police themselves and know not to drop the F-bomb during obvious times when children are probably viewing.

    That said – am I the only one that grew up hearing “colorful language,” if you will, every now and again in my house? And let’s not talk about grandma’s house.

    I’d be interested to hear how many members of this PTC group use “colorful language” around their kids. My parents simply said, “I’m grown – you’re not. I can say it – you can’t. Try me and see what happens.”

    • lim says:

      I grew up around quite a few mechanics and ex-military folks, so yeah. I was also allowed to watch movies and listen to music with “strong language” in it. My parents made it clear that, unless I was singing along, certain words were not to leave my mouth. It only took having my mouth washed out with soap one time to convince me that they were serious. Even today I swear only rarely and am more likely to go into Yosemite Sam mode.

      • NashuaConsumerist says:

        The phrase “Yosemite Sam Mode” made me spray my monitor with a mouthful of water. Hilarious…

    • the Persistent Sound of Sensationalism says:

      Lol. Fuck the PTC! I didn’t learn to swear from television, movies, radio, or books. I learned to swear from my father (during every minor car repair when I “helped”) and my grandparents on my mother’s side. What every kid catches on to is that awkward pause made after any f-bomb or profanity is dropped and realized mid-speech. If you make a big deal about the child not saying it, you might as well be telling them to say it. I wonder if there is a single parent on the PTC. All those nasty swear words were in my vocabulary by age 10 and my mother’s efforts were in teaching me about politeness and why people say certain things. I still seldom swear in front of my parents, and my mom no longer censors herself in front of me.

    • tbax929 says:

      I am 37 years old and never once heard a curse word in my parents’ home (or used one for that matter). My parents don’t swear – it’s a religion thing for them. I, on the other hand, curse like a sailor. It’s amazing how easily I can turn that off when I enter their home; gotta respect their rules.

    • jefeloco says:

      My grandparents on my mom’s side were devout LDS and went to church every Sunday. My grandma had Alzheimers (bless her) and really didn’t have that much control of her mouth. We went to visit my grandparents for a week or so when I was 8 or 9 and the Geeps made us go to church with them. The Geeps always sat in the front row, directly in front of the bishop and we sat there right along with them. After the “witnessing” and a few hymns the bishop started giving a sermon on something or whatnot and my grandma gets up, shaking her fists, yelling “get down from there you lying son of a bitch!”

      I miss my grandma.

    • Pax says:

      When I was just barely fourteen, my mother struck the PERFECTLY right note with me over the issue of profanity.

      She said to me: “I’m sure you know _all_ the swears out there – I certainly did, when I was your age. But when you’re around me, my adult friends, or your grandmother … you’re going to pretend you know NONE of them. And in return, I’m going to pretend to believe you.”

      That ever-so-slightly tongue-in-cheek approach, along with the inherent “you’re old enough to figure out for _yourself_ when is or isn’t the right time for swearing” acknowledgement of my growing maturity, was all it took. Even long after reaching adulthood, the only time I generally swore at all, is if I’d just HURT myself (e.g.: hammering a nail, and missing everything but my thumb: “SH*T! Damn! Ow, ow, ow!”).

      I only became a foul-mouthed sewer-spewer when I ENLISTED. :(

    • dg says:

      I give a shit if some kid hears profanity on TV. My 8 yr old niece knows all the colorful vernacular, and she learned it at school, not TV… when something does come on CABLE or on a movie, she laughs…

      We explained the terms to her. She knows what they mean. She tries not to use them (at least around her mom :->)

      This PTC group can kiss my ass, and the ass of everyone forced to pay more for a TV with that damned V-Chip technology that NO ONE uses…. Oh, and it’s built into cable boxes, satellite boxes, DVRs, DVD’s, etc… So PTC – program your TV’s so your delicate spawn can only watch G-rated shows… I’d be willing to bet that you’re not gonna get much profanity on Sesame Street…

  3. whogots is "not computer knowledgeable" says:

    “Unbridled use of the f-word”? Because the court came down against multimillion-dollar FCC fines for little accidents?

    Can someone get this guy on the line and explain that unbridled use of the victimpants does NOT tend to endear you or your organization to anyone?

    • RvLeshrac says:

      It endears them to the retards who listen to the PTC, and follow them in lock-step whenever there’s a petition drive because someone’s Precious Little Asshole was offended by some comment on a TV show at 2 AM.

  4. ldavis480 says:

    What about children?

    What about the parents I say — they should be monitoring what the children watch. As long as Oscar the Grouch doesn’t drop f-bombs (I would if I were him) then Seseme Street should be fine.

    • Paintmann says:

      +1

    • Applekid ┬──┬ ノ( ã‚œ-゜ノ) says:

      If *I* lived in a trash can, I’d have to admit my language would be considerably more salty than his.

    • GrymOne says:

      Came here to say the same thing.
      Thanks

    • WayneB says:

      I was going to say the same thing too. It’s not “What about the children?” but “What about the parents” who won’t take responsibility of being a parent and instead want the government to make absolutely everything perfectly safe for their spawn.

  5. Lucky225 says:

    What about WATCHING your children instead of letting them WATCH TV. Either that or stop spreading your legs. Oh, I’m sorry, I come from Internet, did that offend you, are you not watching your kid and he/she is now reading this comment? Too fucking bad.

    • smo0 says:

      Agreed: I’m sick of this whole “that needs to be banned because it’s marketed towards children” and “we need to fine this network because someone dropped an f-bomb” or “we need a recall because my kid strangled himself on the window dressings.”

      PARENT YOUR CHILDREN OR DO NOT HAVE THEM.

      • mythago says:

        Oh, right, you’re the same guys who blow a gasket about “overprotective” parents who monitor their kids’ viewing habits and won’t let little precious watch TV.

        • cynical_reincarnation says:

          The word of the day, is moderation!!

          • mythago says:

            Somebody who thinks allowing your children to watch television is incompatible with responsible childrearing and can’t tell the difference between “PTC, the conservative advocacy group” and “parents” is pretty much by definition not moderate.

            • Lucky225 says:

              Some of you seem to be under the impression that by me saying to ‘Don’t bitch if you’re not going to do something about it’ somehow equates to what I would do if I had children. Ahem, let me reiterate and underscore the point of my original post, it is not to say what I would do if I had children, I would def. let them watch TV, because I know they’re going to hear words in the real world regardless of what they hear or see on TV. My point was if you’re going to /BITCH/ about what your child hears on TV, then maybe you should have been keeping an eye on your child. I for one am not going to bitch, because I don’t care what the networks air on TV or if a child of my happens to hear or see it. My point was if you are so worried about things that happen in this world, perhaps you should have thought about those things before spreading your legs, as they were here way before you did so and will remain after. Again, don’t bitch about things if you’re not going to take responsibility for them. That is all.

        • smo0 says:

          Personally, I don’t think kids should watch TV until a certain age….
          Stick a book in their hands… kick their asses outside “come back dirty or don’t come back at all!”

          all of this “childrens info-tainment” and learning DVDs are BS anyway.

          • chefboyardee says:

            i like you and both of your comments in this thread quite a bit (no sarcasm)

            • smo0 says:

              Thanks… I was a child of the “play outside until dark.”
              And if I asked my mother the definition of a word, she handed me the dictionary and told me to look it up.
              Wasn’t until I found the Atari that my life went down hill.
              Kidding, best day of my life… but I still enjoyed playing outside.

              Now-a-days, you’d be lucky to peel me off of World of Warcraft – but that was a sound adult decision.

              • mythago says:

                And if parents actually pushed their kids aside to “play until dark”, folks like you would be screaming about how people should actually parent instead of letting their brats run around unsupervised and expecting the neighbors to watch out for them. Doubly so if the kid gets hit by a car, or sets off firecrackers, or disappears for a day or two, or is caught playing on a construction site (all actual examples of things that happened to myself or friends of the “play until dark” generation).

                • smo0 says:

                  Sorry for your scary childhood! Must have been so horrible.

                  No… not I.

                  We lived in a cul-de-sac and the neighbors took turns watching the groups of kids playing outside, mostly my childhood best friend’s grandfather – he’d sit and read, keep an eye out for us – pretty much was the “father” of the neighborhood – had all of our names etched into a leather strip hanging in the garage for if we got out of line. (not that he ever used it, but it’s the thought that counts, really!)

                  Good times, good times. Of course everyone in this neighborhood was of Italian (and latino) descent… things were done differently I guess, and most of the families in the neighborhood were tight knit.

                  Everyone’s house had a pool as well – never had any “drowning” incidents.

                  Sure cars would pull in, but we all knew to “get out of the fucking way” of them.

                  Otherwise, literally raised by the village…. I miss those days… very much so.

                  • mythago says:

                    No, you’re lumped into the “hilarious” category. Everybody’s a perfect parent until they actually have kids. Most parents have probably declared “My kid will NEVER do X” before they had kids, then once they had kids found themselves doing X.

                • BomanTheBear says:

                  Easy solution: lock the kid in a fuckin’ soundproof bubble until they’re 18. They’ll be safe, lobotomized, and a totally productive societal cog when they enter the workforce after never having been challenged by anything in their lives.

                  I’m so sick of this trend. Everyone bitches about how fat our kids are getting as a whole, but shits themselves at the idea of them playing in any unstructured (Z0MG DANGEROUS) manner, or licks their lips at the idea of lawsuits when their kids get injured on playgrounds.

          • mythago says:

            You can always tell the people who don’t have kids and never want any. They’re the first to run right over and blat out dumbass parenting advice. Generally that advice is “whatever you’re doing, I don’t like it and I would do it better”.

            • smo0 says:

              I learn by observing the behavior of others.
              So just because I would not feed my kid fast food… means that I am already lumped into the “you’re wrong” category because I don’t have children?
              I’d rather observe the wins and fails of society and those parenting around me before jumping in unknowingly.
              There are plenty of people who don’t let their kids watch tv or SEVERELY limit the time that they do. There are a lot of parents who do a lot of things…. sometimes it takes a life time to see the outcome. I don’t think I’m wrong on my views but they may not be for others…

              but if your kids are actively being “harmed” mentally, emotionally or physically by something you have complete control of – you have no one to blame but yourself.

            • Oranges w/ Cheese says:

              How ironic it’s always the people that have children who are the first to say they’re 100% right and the people they don’t agree with “just don’t understand”.

          • the Persistent Sound of Sensationalism says:

            Agreed. Oh, the dirt I played with as a child; how I miss it!

          • Wolfbird says:

            This.

            Allowing children to experience the world first-hand in a responsive manner is not “dumbass parenting advice”. You’re not exactly coming off as if you’d want to burn them on purpose to teach them to respect fire.

            • mythago says:

              Blathering on about how when we were kids we did blah blah blah and kids today are spoiled and just sit in front of the TV and need to get outside more? Dumbass, period. People were whining about that when *I* was a kid, and we got kicked out during the day to get dirty and play unsupervised rather a lot too.

        • Keavy_Rain says:

          You’re (probably) the same parent who buys Grand Theft Auto IV for your kid, tells the clerk at the store that you don’t care about the M rating, then comes back within a few hours and demands the clerk be fired for not telling you about all the violence, swearing, and sex in the game.

          Then you immediately log onto every conservative website to tell everyone about the horrors you witnessed (they had foreigners in the game! FOREIGNERS!) and how the Christian Nation needs to mobilize to ban this filth.

          See, I can make outrageous assumptions and assault the character of someone I know nothing about, too.

      • the Persistent Sound of Sensationalism says:

        I don’t see the PTC complaining about the alcohol commercials during the Superbowl, or the violence in children’s programming. They only care about sex and profanity, as if THAT’S what is ruining society. I think it’s the stupidity of groups like the PTC and Focus on the Family and the 700 Club that is destroying society, and there’s plenty of evidence for it too. I doubt that I’ll get my day in court though, because they’re “trying to make the world a better safer place.”

        I’m willing to bet that these are the same people that vote against referendums that give money to public schools, support the death penalty, think that “No Child Left Behind” is fantastic, that gays are what’s wrong with their marriage, etc., etc.

  6. Grimchord says:

    What about the children? I say it’s time those who are irresponsible parents become responsible, rapidly, and mind what their children are watching.

    • Conformist138 says:

      My parents had a great solution: I spent years of my childhood without a TV in the house at all. Then, we got one, but it was kept in my parent’s bedroom.

      Please note: my family owned and operated a chain of video stores and I still had no television of any kind. If they needed to view something, they took home one of the rental TVs (anyone remember when you could rent a TV and VCR along with your double-cassette of Titanic?). The cobbler’s children really had no shoes.

      If a parent is so concerned that their kid is learning bad things or just having his brain seep out his ears, I wonder why the TV is there in the first place. Either TV isn’t so bad, or these parents value their own fix over the well-being of their kids.

  7. OSURoss says:

    Fuck the FCC and Fuck the PTC, overbearing shitheads.

    • Nick1693 says:

      The FCC *does* have a legitimate purpose (to divide the wireless spectrums) but sadly, they’re known for what they do that’s bad (censoring what should be 1st amendment freedom of speech.)

  8. ktetch says:

    And meanwhile, while they’re complaining about certain words (which are not a crime to say) and sexual content (which are not illegal to perform) being on television (and which the members of the PTC have, undoubtedly, partaken of themselves), they see nothing wrong with violence or gore (not Gore as in Al) on television, which is usually a crime to perform for real, and which they have (I hope) not done themselves.

    Sort of double-standards there.

    • mythago says:

      Actually, no, they object to anything that isn’t “wholesome”. Racist sterotypes are fine, conservative propaganda is fine, just no blood and no boobies.

      • SkokieGuy says:

        Just no blood? What about churches busing children to see Passion of the Christ? I can only imagine how many young children were scarred by all the violence.

        On the other hand, can anyone show any concrete harm to a child from the display of Janet Jackson’s nipple, (only viewable if Daddy stopped and rewound and slow mo’d over and over).

        • mythago says:

          Oh, but that’s not broadcast television so it doesn’t count.

        • AI says:

          And the nipple was covered in a sticker, meaning, we didn’t actually see her nipple at all. Am I the only one that watched that in HD? They show more tits on CSI Miami than Janet showed.

  9. Dr.Wang says:

    of course you have to remember this is a “community decency standard” and in NYC there is no decency, so no standard is violated. Elsewhere, it would be a violation.

    • johnva says:

      “Community standards” are a patently absurd notion that shouldn’t exist as any sort of legal doctrine. There is no such thing when it comes to inherently subjective content (not trying to argue with you specifically, but make a general point). Since there is no consensus over what is objectionable and what isn’t, and there never can be, what it amounts to is one subset of society getting to impose their values on the entertainment and media enjoyed by the rest of society. This isn’t necessary at all in this age of advanced technology: everyone can now control their own media consumption, and there is no need to create any sort of societal “rules” about what there can be. It’s okay for one person to be watching Disney movies on their television while another person watches hardcore porn: neither is affecting the other’s life.

    • Mecharine says:

      What a facetious argument. Are you saying that “community standards” extends to nationwide conformity to YOUR standards? In NYC its not illegal to wear short skirts or swear at cabbies who dont know how to drive. I guess in your end of Butfuq USA, being rude is considered a crime against prudish harmony.

  10. johnva says:

    Now we only need to get a court to rule that the FCC has NO authority over television content whatsoever anymore. The original reasoning used in the series of court cases that gave them that authority is obsolete and based on the notion that there is no other practical way besides government censorship for parents to prevent their children from seeing objectionable content (of course, the whole idea is fundamentally flawed since that’s an entirely subjective notion…unless you think the government should just prohibit all but the most puritan-friendly content, which is the real agenda of groups like the PTC). That notion is now false, as every television set sold contains a V-chip. So we can just do away with ALL of the FCC’s authority over content with no problem now.

    I highly doubt their contention that the “overwhelming majority” of the American public supports government censorship of “dirty words” on television. The overwhelming majority of the American public, including kids, USE those same words all the time, themselves. Maybe in Jesusland Oklahoma or Utah things are different, but for the most part that ship has sailed. What we have in the PTC is an authoritarian attempt to use government force to impose a minority viewpoint on the majority.

  11. mythago says:

    Of the things I worry about my kids seeing and hearing on TV, the occasional F-word is about 3,295,392th on the list.

    The PTC is not a “parent” group. It’s a social-conservative group of finger-waggers who don’t believe anyone should hear the F-word. Hiding behind kids is an excuse.

    • lettucefactory says:

      Seriously. As a parent, I don’t give a shit about the f-word. Or the FCC.

      I worry about violence. I worry about advertising. I worry about images that are demeaning to women.

      Cursing is not even on the radar.

      • mythago says:

        Seriously. This is what ratings are for. If I’m firmly opposed to my kids hearing bad language, I can turn off shows with an “L” rating. Unfortunately, there is no rating for “portrays everything important being done by white people with humorous black sidekicks” or “shows women as brainless arm candy whose only role in this show is to gratefully screw the hero”.

        • Murph1908 says:

          I am not saying what you describe doesn’t exist.

          But I also wanted to point out that, in American TV, the white guy or gal is always the moron in the commercial.

          Watch for it.

        • johnva says:

          On the other hand, there is no reason why we couldn’t have very detailed metadata for television or movie content that DOES show those things. With modern technology, we could easily make it simple for people to rate shows based on whatever criteria they want or based on the recommendations of whatever third-party group they want. Then people could make their own choices about what is offensive to them instead of having the government impose some busybody group like the PTC’s viewpoints from the top down. (Or people could just stop being lazy and research their media consumption beforehand if they’re so offended by things…but that’s probably asking too much). But I doubt that would satisfy the PTC and similar groups, since their agenda is plainly to ban this stuff for ADULTS as well as children.

          • mythago says:

            Correct. As for previewing media, that works fine when you have accurate information, which is not always the case.

            • johnva says:

              You can almost always obtain plenty of accurate information, though, with a relatively minimal effort. Why can’t people who are offended by silly things just fucking Google it before they watch? Why is it our problem to worry about not offending their arbitrary and delicate sensibilities? Shouldn’t the burden be on them, in the absence of existing technology to make it super-convenient for them? I don’t think we should have to put up with government censorship of entertainment intended for adults just because some people are too damn lazy to avail themselves of technology and information that is already out there.

        • selianth says:

          NO KIDDING. +1

        • BomanTheBear says:

          Damn straight. Unfortunately, that’s not something that can really be policed. Except maybe “This program has been rated i for strong ignorance.” What a glorious bag of worms that would open.

  12. RickinStHelen says:

    unconstitutionally vague . . . fleeting instance … this does not equate to unbridaled use. Heavan forbid a child get a less than one second glimpse of a nipple. Remember the network premiere of Saving Private Ryan? Stations were concerned they would be fined for indecency because of the language. Not the unbridaled violence, but language. Of course these are the same types of rules that allow the advertising of beer as long as no one actually drinks one. So the beer babe in a suggestive pose is okay, but a blue collar worker actually drinking a beer is not. Go figure.

    • johnva says:

      The Saving Private Ryan thing is a perfect example of why arbitrary and abstract government rules about things like “language” are a stupid fucking idea (sorry, can’t resist throwing in some “offensive language” out of contempt for this stupidity). The fact is, the context in which something is shown MATTERS as to how it is interpreted. Violence in an artistic or historical movie like Saving Private Ryan or Schindler’s List is different from violence used for purely gratuitous entertainment, and so on. Same goes for sex, and same goes for language. It’s impossible to draw a line that covers everything fairly and according to everyone’s personal standards, so WE SHOULDN’T TRY. Instead, simply provide accurate tagging of content and let people decide for themselves. With modern technology (DVR, instant streaming, Netflix, V-Chip etc) there is no reason that anyone has to be exposed to anything they don’t want to see: no government censorship needed.

  13. nosense22 says:

    Finally, maybe networks can start producing interesting TV like HBO.

    • jdsmn says:

      Seriously, the F word is what it takes to make a show interesting?

      • BomanTheBear says:

        Two of my favorite shows of all time are Breaking Bad and The Shield, both of which played on networks. But you can tell that the shows are aware how close to the line they are. It’s kindof like how it’s way easier to be a dark, gritty movie with a R rating than a PG-13 rating, even though it can be done competently with either. I see your point, but will say that in general, shows on HBO and Showtime and the like feel far more unsterilized than most things on networks, and that’s the way I prefer it.

  14. Tvhargon says:

    Parents: “WHAT ABOUT THE FUCKING CHILDREN!!?!”

  15. Mike says:

    No kid is better off with cable and broadcast TV than they are without it. You can get Netflix, choose which shows your kid watches, and never have to worry about their young, virgin ears hearing bad words. This method also helps by not exposing them to all the advertisements that turn them into little prositit-tot consumer whores. And if the adults absolutely must have TV, then reserve it for the adults, let the kids watch the DVDs you give them and keep them away from TV.

    Or heaven forbid we get our kids out and playing.

  16. dulcinea47 says:

    Um, yeah… were they paying attention to the same court I was? B/c I interpreted it as, they realized that charging people up the wazoo for an occasional accident is unnecessary . Not that swearing right and left is okay.

    • mythago says:

      This is an advocacy group that makes money ranting about how we all need to go back to Imaginary Leave It to Beaver Planet. Honesty and reasonable consideration of what a court decision really said are beside the point to them.

  17. LACubsFan says:

    Every other god damn word on the fucking school bus, the god damn playground, or in the stupid hall way at these schools is a bad word. My 5 year old niece came home and asked me what a bastard was the other day.

    Hey PTC…. “if you don’t like it, you can suck it!”

  18. duncanblackthorne says:

    Memo to Parents Television Council: It’s your responsibility to raise and monitor your children, NOT the government, so stop whining.

    • lihtox says:

      My guess is that most of the members of the PTC aren’t actually parents, but are concerned about hypothetical children. At least, I hope so.

  19. Miz_Ivy says:

    News flash…not all TV is designed for children. Adults watch TV too, so why should all programming have to be “child safe”?

    Seriously people, chances are TV is not going to be the first place your child hears the words you’re so worried about.

  20. Skipweasel says:

    In the UK we seem to have a fairly workable system. Before 9pm there are reasonable guidelines about what’s said and shown. After 9, things are a lot more relaxed.

    Overall it seems to generate very few “real” complaints – by which I mean ones that get upheld by the complaints bunch, OfCOM.

  21. LMacConn says:

    I, for one, would like “the overturning of virtually every law on our nation’s books for lack of clarity.”
    Perhaps then we could establish a system of laws intended to be understood by the governed. Perhaps we could even get crazy with it, and create laws intended to benefit the governed, and based on the real life behavior of the governed rather than anecdotal oddities.

    • johnva says:

      You want empirical reality to be considered by the law? That’s never going to happen as long as most members of Congress are lawyers. Their peculiar mindset leads to the idea that opinion trumps reality, or even that opinion IS reality. Try electing some more scientists and engineers, as a start.

      • mythago says:

        Bwahaha! Yes, let’s do that. Then when people run rings around the law because, you know, people are complicated and that’s what they do, you can turn to the engineers, always well-known for their astonishing people skills, to sort everything out. Meanwhile, the lawyers can handle all the engineering and science stuff. I mean, dude, how hard can it be?

        • johnva says:

          All I’m saying is that there should be a lot more diversity of professional viewpoints in Congress than there currently is. The extreme tilt towards lawyers creates a certain biased viewpoint in the law. And there is no reason that members of Congress cannot get technical assistance on the actual writing of the laws from people who ARE legal experts. Their job should be to set policy, not necessarily to write all the words. Their staffs (and lobbyists) do a lot of that work anyway. The law should be a tool, not an end in itself.

          On the other hand, lawyers DO think that they can write policy on subjects they know nothing about, like science. That’s what I’m complaining about. Don’t get me wrong: lawyers should be involved in writing the laws. But they shouldn’t ALL be lawyers.

          • mythago says:

            You’re providing a pretty good example of exactly why engineers generally aren’t lawmakers.

            It looks like what you were trying to say is that lawmakers who are not experts on a particular subject ought to consult people who are before writing laws that set policies on that subject. To pick a silly example, if a legislator wants to write a law setting the value of pi, she should consult with a mathematician.

            But the reason most lawmakers are lawyers is that the legal process itself – how a law is written, what it needs to take into account, how it fits in with existing law, whether it will have unintended consequence as to other laws – is something legal expertise is all about.

            • johnva says:

              I just don’t agree with this, sorry. I care more about policy than I do about whether the particular person with a vote is an expert on writing laws. Their job should be to come up with policy, and then set their staff to working on how to make it happen, legally. I’m speaking about how I think it should work, not how it DOES work currently.

              • mythago says:

                When you’re done contradicting yourself let me know.

                • RadarOReally has got the Post-Vacation Blues says:

                  I followed Johnva’s posts fine, and don’t see a contradiction.

                • BomanTheBear says:

                  Yeah, I see no contradictions there, although I also see what you’re saying. I come from a family full of lawyers, and yeah, that’s kindof where, you know, the LAW plays into it. But I also agree with johnva in way, because politicians tend to try and exert their influence over things they have no clue about (google Ted Stevens Series of Tubes). I think that in general, lawyers should be translators for people more informed than they themselves are.

                  But of course, that will never happen.

  22. Loias supports harsher punishments against corporations says:

    “Let’s be clear about what has happened here today:”

    Insert complete obfiscation of the ruling here.

    • axhandler1 says:

      Yeah I found that funny, too. He starts off his rant with “let’s be clear” and then proceeds to do the exact opposite. Listening to him, one would think the court was telling networks that they need to curse at children all day. What an ass.

  23. Hooray4Zoidberg says:

    It’s all a futile effort anyways, the kids will have to start using the internet (or worse Xbox live) soon enough and good luck keeping them from learning all sorts of new fun phrases there. They’re also likely to be smarter than you at computers so unless you’re going to be watching over their shoulder all day every day there is no stopping them from being exposed to it. How about we just teach them that all words are harmless, but some are best left out of resumes.

  24. ragesoadrules says:

    I wish George Carlin was still around for this one. But seriously, the PTC needs to learn some boundaries, what ever happened to actual parenting? I grew up just fine and dandy hearing slews of words (my mom and grandparents are from Brooklyn and Upstate N.Y., and I live in Jersey to boot), you just have to use some common sense as to when the right time to use them are.

    I always wondered why you can show a ton of blood, as in CSI, but I’ve always wondered why certain words could never be said. You can say ‘son-of-a-bitch’ of you’re shot in a show, but not shit. That always seemed quite strange to me.

    Also, who else know the South Park episode “It Hits The Fan”? Hit the nail on the head with that one haha.

    • Fafaflunkie Plays His World's Smallest Violin For You says:

      As I was flipping though BrainDroppings to find a memorable quote from the late God (don’t call him that) of Comedy, I came across your post. So I’ll reply to you with this brain dropping from the late, great George Carlin:

      “What is all this nonsense about parental guidance, parental control, and parental advisories? The whole reason people in this country are as fucked up as they are and make such ignorant decisions on public policy; is that they listened too closely to their parents in the first place. This is an authoritarian country with too many laws, rules, controls, and restrictions. “Do this! Don’t do that! Shut up! Sit still! No talking! Stand up straight!” No wonder kids are so fucked up; traditional authoritarian values. It starts in kindergarten: They give you a coloring book and some crayons, and tell you, “Be creative…but don’t go outside the lines.” Fuck parents!”

  25. Smashville says:

    I say fuck em!

  26. pcPhr34k says:

    Oh for the love of whatever the fuck it is that you worship: Be a parent and keep an eye on what your kids are doing. If you think what they are watching/doing is bad, lay down the parental law and do something about it. Don’t bitch at EVERYONE ELSE ON THE GODDAMN PLANET and ruin things for those lucky/smart people without kids.

    It’s shit like this that pisses me off. If you don’t like what you see/hear, then change the channel and get on with your life instead of wasting it by yelling at everyone.

    *Steps off soap box*

    • pcPhr34k says:

      Oh yea: LOVE the title of this post!

    • mythago says:

      Reading comprehension fail. PTC is not a group of parents. PTC is a conservative morality group that uses What About The Children to get things they object to off the air. Period.

      • dolemite says:

        Well, they do have “Parents” as the first word of their name…

        • mythago says:

          Right. I’ll start an advocacy group called “Consumerists for a Decent America” and when it rants about boobies on cable TV, you’re all on the hook.

          • RadarOReally has got the Post-Vacation Blues says:

            I don’t think anyone hear is misunderstanding the fact that PTC doesn’t speak for ALL parents. pcPhr34k seems to be saying that THOSE parents that believe what PTC believes should follow the advice he or she gives above.

  27. Gregg Araki Rocks My World says:

    The PTC is responsible for fucking up children in this country. We live in a nation where violence is a-ok, but “naughty” words are the real scourge of the children.

  28. inelegy says:

    BABABOOEY! BABABOOEY! HOWARD STERN’S PENIS!!

  29. Harmodios says:

    I hate children so much, they take away everything I love. Profanity, peanuts, quiet swimming. They need to be banned

  30. edicius is an acquired taste says:

    I think I’ll defer to the late, great George Carlin on this one:

    “Something else I’m getting tired of in this country is all this stupid talk I have to listen to about children. That’s all you hear about anymore…CHILDREN. ‘Help the children, save the children, protect the children!’ You know what I say? Fuck the children! They’re getting entirely too much attention. And I know what some of you are thinking. ‘Jesus, he’s not going to attack children, is he?’ Yes he is! He’s going to attack children. And remember, this is Mr. Conductor talking! I know what I’m talking about!”

  31. Moosenogger says:

    Why doesn’t the PTC fine parents who curse like sailors in front of their children? We have quite a few of those floating around.

  32. seishino says:

    1. Rules are struck down all the time due to being unclear. They usually come back with further clarification and specific guidelines. Frequently, they come back more stringent but clearer. As a creative professional myself, I’ve seen the chilling effect on speech that comes from trying to adhere to unspoken, unclear, and undefined rules.

    2. The Supreme Court had found the case had merit, and sent it back to the Second Circuit to review the general constitutionality issues. To say this goes against a Supreme Court ruling is ludicrous. The Supreme Court asked the Second Circuit to decide the case. If the Supremes don’t like it, they can agree to hear an appeal.

  33. Mecharine says:

    Considering that the fleeting expletives often occurs on live broadcasts, and rarely in pre-recorded broadcasts (which is plainly near unlikely), the likelihood that it would happen while children are around to hear words that mommy and daddy casually use is proportional to the crystal meth the parents are consuming.

  34. Wang_Chung_Tonight says:

    and the sliding board to hell tilts a bit further…

    • mythago says:

      Huh? The court decision was against punishing the F-word. This post is about a bunch of moralists sending out a press release saying “waaaaa”.

  35. SkokieGuy says:

    In terms of long term harm to children, I’d like to suggest that the entire crop of reality shows are far more damming.

    American Idol? Gee, let’s watch people be humiliated for entertainment! Wow, great zinger from the judges! Watch people’s dreams be shattered, make fun of people who might have physical or mental limitations. What a wonderful message to send to children, humiliating others is fun!

    Jersey Shores? Gee, it’s fun to be poorly educated! Kids, when you’re a little older, you can look forward to drinking, fighting, promiscuous sex, and no responsibility!

    America’s Funniest Home Videos: Wow, hilarity ensues when someone falls, stumbles or hits someone in the nuts. Accidents and pain are fun!

    I could go on and on. If PTC wants to truly be a useful resource, issuing your own reviews and television watching guides to let people who WANT YOUR ADVICE make their own choices.

    Don’t you dare attempt to legislate my choices.

  36. johnrhoward says:

    The f word does not harm children in any way. Also, they will hear it whether it’s on TV or not.

  37. GuidedByLemons says:

    Hearing swears doesn’t hurt children. Shut up, PTC.

  38. tz says:

    Numerous are the stories about some physical product that contains something objectionable or toxic or that people are allergic to or just don’t want and there will be a long post about labeling or having the government prevent the evil purveyors from selling something without being regulated.

    Just tell your children not to drink from McDonald’s Shrek cups, or just don’t give it to them or take them there if you don’t like cadmium!

    I’m all for saying whatever you want on the internet, you-tube, XM satellite, or cable.

    Broadcast is different until the FCC will not shut ME down or throw ME in jail for broadcasting without a license, or if I can get them on an equal basis. We have decided as a country that a certain portion of the spectrum at a certain time which is PUBLIC, not fenced, private, but should be safe and open to all and thus be G rated in exchange for giving networks access to this public commons.

    I also suspect that any of those judges would throw me in jail for a few nights for contempt if I said something far less clearly obscene in any of their courts. They might not know it but they probably don’t take chances. If the federal courts really think this is prudent, let the courts conduct their business by the same standards, your F***ing Ho – Honors.

    I don’t see a right to pollute every public space, park, or peaceful area with profanity. Or will you let me change my Harley exhaust to 105db and ride through your neighborhood at night “expressing myself”.

    • SkokieGuy says:

      We have decided as a country that a certain portion of the spectrum at a certain time which is PUBLIC, not fenced, private, but should be safe and open to all and thus be G rated in exchange for giving networks access to this public commons.

      According to whose standards? You want G rated to avoid dirty words? Well, I think that violence is obscene. I think portraying women as a sexual commodity is obscene. Let’s ban soap operas (on during the day when young children might be watching) since they often show adultery and other child-inappropriate behavior.

      Television watching is not a required, government mandated activity for children. As has been said over and over in this thread, since different parents have different standards for what they deem acceptable, it is up to the parents to monitor and determine what their children watch.

      • smo0 says:

        I gotta say, watching any few minutes of Soap Opera’s (damn the open remote TV in the lunchroom!) they are NOT for children…. and whatever I’ve caught a glimpse of in recent years just strengthens that opinion. Like whoa…..

    • Rectilinear Propagation says:

      There is a huge difference between me accidentally stepping on your foot and me bashing your head in with a bat on purpose.

  39. evnmorlo says:

    Just like public homophobes often turn out to be gay, the PTC is probably composed mostly of child abusers. Who else would be so passionate about children’s “innocence”? Unfortunately it will be decades before their victims come forward, and even then the PTC will shamelessly continue.

  40. Sparty999 says:

    Do people really think that broadcasters won’t censor themselves in the same manner they have been for years? I don’t think we’ll see a major change in television programming… but Radio may be a different story… The rules were ridiculous!! amen to repealing this confusing legislation. It will allow the terrestrial TV and Radio stations to compete with cable & satellite! they can say that people don’t want it… but they do… we all do… we like hearing cuss words, because we say cuss words!!

  41. CtrlAltTabby says:

    What about the children? There’s a lovely OFF button on the TV, and lots of toys to play with. Parental censorship is way more effective than government censorship.

  42. AI says:

    I would like to find the children of the people on the PTC and teach them every swear word I know, and context in which to use them.

  43. Happy Tinfoil Cat says:

    I understand PTC’s concerns since some of my friends are what I’d call “ultra-religious”. Some only let their home-schooled children watch their pre-screened personal library of videos from about fifty years ago, even then censoring John Wayne’s single inadvertent use of the expletive, “damn”. No live TV means no prerecorded or live broadcast at all. No terrestrial, satellite, or cable connections seems to work for them; In the meantime, the PTC can “keep fucking that chicken”.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ss8LDBNcsWc

  44. sir_eccles says:

    fuck the fucking fuckers

  45. Emily says:

    Anything that makes the Parents Television Council unhappy makes me happy.

  46. RomeoCharlie says:

    If you rely on the “public airwaves” to be the “last bastion of safety for children and families,” then you are a shitty fucking parent. As someone already pointed out, there is an OFF button. There is also a Hallmark network, Lifetime, Learning Channel, and ABC Family, where you are very likely not to hear a curseword ever. These people sound like a boatload of prudish twits who want to be able to leave their children alone in the living room to be raised by TV, but only TV that exclusively broadcasts whatever they like.

  47. NoRegrets78 says:

    The PTC angers me to no end. I grew up around swear words, and I was always told, we’re allowed to say it, you’re not. If I didn’t listen, I got smacked, plain and simple.

    Parenting is not what it used to be. All of a sudden the children are precious little snowflakes that must be protected from EVERYTHING. But its not the parents job to protect them, its society. Well I say FUCK THAT! If you want to have children, BE A FUCKING PARENT! Do NOT rely on society or the government to raise them, THAT IS NOT THEIR FUCKING JOB! I am so goddamn sick of these so called “parents” who blame everything but themselves for shit that happens to their children. CONTROL YOUR FUCKING OFFSPRING! My parents got it right, and I turned out just fine. Stable relationship, great job, house, cars, toys, etc…

    I am also sick of regulations that control what I can/cannot watch or do because god forbid some fucking breeder isn’t watching their litter and they get offended by something that I have every god damn right to see. KEEP YOUR GODDAMN KIDS OUT OF MY LIFE!!! I had a vasectomy a few years ago simply because I did not like the idea or the concept of children. My future wife agrees 100% and we are so blissfully happy being completely free to do what we want when we want and we have all the money to do it for ourselves. I cannot tell you what a wonderful feeling it is to know that we’re free and always will be.

  48. ChemicalFyre says:

    Fail: If you’re not watching your beloved crotchfruit, the TV is not an acceptable babysitter. Double Fail: Not monitoring what your kids are watching in the first place.

    Yay – again lets make it a societal responsibility rather than a familial one to raise, pay for, and teach children how the world works and how to get along in it. Why bother when everyone else does it for you?

    Telling others how to raise their kids is a social faux paus, unless you asked to hear it.

    Because society is perfect. Riiiight. No double-standards there.

  49. fedupbs says:

    these idiots would probably be the first ones demanding the right to issue a ticket to everyone on the street for a word they don’t approve of.

    you know what – if you don’t like the chance – don’t watch tv.. it’s really that simple – there is no state or federal law that i know of that forces you to keep your tv on and your(or your childrens) eyes glued to it.

    as for the possibility of “unedited profanity” F*** YA!!!!!!

  50. maztec says:

    Dear Parents Television Council Members and Board:

    We appear to be at the cusp of a conundrum. Collectively, you claim that our government should spend our tax dollars on policing the language of live television. However, our government has an unprecedented short fall in money and people screaming murder over the use of taxes on public services that benefit the public at large.

    The desire to reduce taxes and police television are diametrically opposed. You are proposing a nanny state government that will protect the beautiful minds of our children. Yet, the minds of our children are clearly implied as being out of bounds of the federal government by way of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. This is why there is no fundamental right to education, and the government is not allowed to directly restrict that which is taught to your children. As a result, using our tax dollars to pursue a nanny state is a form of socialized mental health. Thus, if your members are against socialized mental health care for the public at large, they should also be against an overly maternalistic government telling us what our children should be allowed to hear.

    As a fellow citizen of this glorious country, I suggest that you be responsible for the mental welfare of your own child. Instead of babysitting them with a television, put your child out to pasture – let your little ones roam and play like you did when you were young. If you must allow your child to watch television, either watch it with them or keep them from watching programming that may offend you. This means that you should not let them watch cable television (as the FCC indecency requirements do not apply to cable), live television, or late night television. As a result, you will protect yourself from the filth of humanity and your children from being exposed to the reality outside of the Bible. But keep in mind, that most holy of holies contains many indecent remarks and acts – you best censor your child’s exposure to it in order to protect them.

    Finally, your three legged stool may be missing a leg, if you do not prevent exposure of indecent communication to your children in all venues – not just television.

    Cheers!

    - Parents Who Care For Their Children, Rather Than Babysitting Them With Television

    • maztec says:

      P.S. Why is it acceptable to expose your children to gratuitous violence, blood, death, acts of flatulence, rude and perverse jokes, and mayhem, but not to consensual loving intercourse or random acts of inappropriate language? It would seem that your children would be more damaged by it being shown as acceptable to murder someone, rather than it being shown that when you get hit upside the head you can resort to your reptilian brain and scream a typically inappropriate word.

    • mythago says:

      When were you a kid, the 1940s? I’m really not getting why a bunch of single young Internet dudes are suddenly getting in touch with their nostalgia-hallucinating Inner Geezer and ranting about how awful TV is for kids and why when WE were children, by crikey, we went outside and played in the dirt as God intended and then came back inside for a hearty sing-along beside the pianoforte with the rest of the family.

      (And let’s face it, 99% percent of the currently childless geezer wannabes will, if they have kids, find themselves happily plonking their kid down in front of the TV so they can get an hour’s extra sleep and/or squeeze in a little powerleveling for their WoW alt.)

      PTC isn’t about quantity of TV watching for kids, or really kids at all. It’s a bunch of conservative moralists who don’t want ANYBODY seeing boobies on TV. Kids are just the excuse.

  51. Jeff-er-ee says:

    “The PTC will vigorously work to defend the FCC’s legal authority to preserve the public airwaves as the last bastion of safety for children and families.”

    Because profanity is so f%#king unsafe!

  52. ninabi says:

    As much as I enjoy a choice swear, this ruling caused me to recall a scene from the film Idiocracy.

    “Fuddruckers” had devolved into “Buttfuckers” in the (deteriorating) future and little children could be seen having a happy birthday party within the restaurant.

  53. cromartie says:

    Hey. Your television has a V-chip. F***ing use it.

  54. AgitatedDot says:

    Best title ever!

  55. ronbo97 says:

    What planet does this Tim Winter character live on ? The article doesn’t make it clear.

  56. lihtox says:

    If the “vast majority of Americans” oppose this ruling, why do the vast majority of complaints received by the FCC come from the PTC? (As in 99.8% of all complaints in 2003, and similar numbers the following years.)
    Source: http://www.pff.org/issues-pubs/pops/pop12.22indecencyenforcement.pdf

  57. DEVO says:

    So can I say FUCK on consumerist now, since it’s so anti PTC

  58. HighontheHill says:

    Fuck the PTC. I pray they all contract savage cancer of the asshole and die long slow deaths. Fuck the FCC too, the whole operation should be scuttled. Ridiculous, useless dinosaur of bureaucracy that it is.

  59. H3ion says:

    What the fuck are the community standards of decency in your community? MERDE!

  60. kujospam says:

    It is now required by law that ever TV have a Vchip. I think it’s time that they figure out how to use it. As long as the shows are rated properly so these parents can go on banning sprees, I’m ok with them F’ing around.

  61. shibblegritz says:

    Wow, such displays of linguistic prowess here … all you kiddies running around swinging your …. adverbs … around now that you feel free to show them off. I’m very, very impressed.

    This is precisely what sitting around watching television gets you … the mentality that instead of striving for some sort of higher common denominator, we should instead race to the bottom and force everyone who wants to enjoy any public amenity to accept whatever licentiousness the lowest loser feels entitled to dole out in the name of free speech, art or commerce.

    I’m no prude and there aren’t many days that pass that some sort of profanity doesn’t cross my lips. But I use the words sparingly, in context, and with deference. I don’t toss them around when I’m in public or when I’m around children or those who I don’t know to be unoffended by salty language.

    All of your parents must have been too busy watching TV to teach you that lesson.

  62. factotum says:

    “Or else the PTC might seek advisory board members Michael Medved or Billy Ray Cyrus on you.”

    Um, that should be sic not seek.

  63. Fafaflunkie Plays His World's Smallest Violin For You says:

    The first time I ran across this wackjob group was about 11 years ago, when Mrs. Partridge (Shirley Jones)’s husband Marty Ingles was on the Howard Stern show, pissing on Stern over his then syndicated TV show being so naughty and bad for children (despite the fact stations that aired it did so at about 1am on a Saturday night, and then back in the age before Tivos, BitTorrent, and other assorted PVRs, I’m guessing most kids weren’t watching it.) Which brought about a shitstorm of fans going on to the PTC’s website forums giving them hidden messages “praising” them. Man, that was fun.

  64. SilverBlade2k says:

    I think it’s high time that the parents monitor what their kids are watching and become responsible instead of forcing the television networks to do that for them…

  65. RayanneGraff says:

    When I was 4, I said fuck in front of my mom. Did I hear it from TV? Nope. I heard it from the very person I said it to, and she kicked my ass for saying it. When I asked why she can say it but I can’t, she said “Cause I’m an adult and you’re a kid”. I grew up learning that adulthood came with certain priveleges- like cussing.

    Why can’t parents teach their kids not to imitate everything they see? Why does everything have to be made “safe” just so some dumbass kid won’t put his eye out or- god forbid- hear a bad word? Life is no fun anymore, everything fun is outlawed to protect the children.

    • shibblegritz says:

      What a whiner! I’d hardly say everything fun is outlawed because of children. Porn, for instance, is freely available and I’m perfectly fine with that.

      But, as one of these wretched people who were supposedly somehow tricked into having children and now live a life filled with lollipop-colored drudgery and devotion only to sniveling children, my concern is not about the use of profanity in television. It has its place. For instance, the dustup mentioned elsewhere here about tv stations being concerned about airing Saving Private Ryan because of the profanities? Stupid because I’m pretty sure that just about anyone who waded onto the beaches of Normandy that day used up a lifetime’s worth of profanities, and for good reason, too.

      No, my concern is the rising attitude in our culture that people who choose to be modest must submit to the whims of those who choose to be vulgar in word and deed because, “it’s my right,” and that every public amenity must tilt towards a modest attitude, but instead cater to the most debasing extreme.

      Remember when seeing a bare butt on TV was titillating? When using the word hell, much less ass or god damn, were unheard of? That’s how it begins. You start with a little bare ass here and there, then you toss in a few “accidental or infrequent” profanities. Then, when everyone is desensitized to that, you work your way up the titillation ladder until it’s perfectly acceptable to bang strangers at the park in plain view of everybody because, well, they have a right to have sex, don’t they?

      I’m fine with limited government regulation. In fact, I love it. I’d like to get rid of about 80 percent of what we have. And I, unlike so many people who vote for Democratic politicians, think it’s not right for the government to tell me what I and my children can and cannot read, do, etc.

      But I do believe that we should strive as a society to rise up to a greater standard of conduct instead of slumping down to the lowest common standard we can possibly find, which is the direction we’re headed.

      That’s not going to do anyone any good.

  66. RayanneGraff says:

    I’m sorry, but I just gotta get this off my chest- FUCK parents and FUCK their stupid wiener kids. I’m sick of all these self-righteous, child-obsessed, entitled yuppie parents demanding that the entire world change to protect their delicate little babies. Just because you decided to shit out a few twat-droppings doesn’t mean you have the right to say what I can watch & listen to. Do your goddamn job as a parent and protect your delicate little Cznowflaykes from the real world if you must, but do it on YOUR damn time, not mine. I am childless by choice, and I plan to stay that way. I have no desire for children in my life. I enjoy my freedom, and it really cheeses me off to have any of my freedoms impinged upon because OH MY GOD LITTLE BRATLEIGH MUST BE PROTECTED!!!

    As the late, great George Carlin once said- “Think of the children? No- FUCK THE CHILDREN.”

  67. Anaxamenes says:

    Really, we are in the middle of an economic downturn and people find the time and money to work on this? How come I never get a cushy job that gives me enough time to rabble-rouse?

  68. Levk says:

    OMG!! God forbid that the parents actually you know watch there fuckin kids, I mean come on they will learn the words anyway it is the parents job to make sure they learn it correctly if they just going to let there kids watch anything, or you know the parents can be parents and make sure the programs the kids are watching are safe

  69. Conformist138 says:

    Billy Ray Cyrus? He of the great parenting that allowed his underage daughter to do a suggestive dance move against a pole while showing off her jail-bait figure? All on TV on a show that was MEANT for kids to watch? I didn’t have too much of an issue with that, but it made me raise an eyebrow far more than even the Janet Jackson fiasco (legal-age accident vs underage on purpose).

    Yeah, like I should be more worried that NBC won’t get a million-dollar fine if a jackass manages to get through the censors. The censors that the networks already have and are not getting rid of.

    Letters like this one are fucking ridiculous and actually hurt their own cause. I know the FCC didn’t give “unbridled use of the ‘f-word'” and to suggest they did isn’t just wrong, it’s a downright lie. Yup, pole-dancing teens in short-shorts is great, lying is totally fine… but the word FUCK will do so much damage when those sound waves enter tiny ears. Oh no!

    I would like to share a fact about MY parents, the ones who took me to church and sent me to private school… My father’s favorite thing to scream when he’s suddenly pissed: Goddamnmotherfuckingsonofabitch!

    I turned out just fine ;)

  70. regis-s says:

    Life must be pretty good if this is the worst thing these people have to worry about.

  71. MrEvil says:

    The PTC already forces cable networks to censor broadcasts WITHOUT GOVERNMENT MANDATE. Seriously, Comedy Central, AMC, MTV, et al, aren’t required by any government agency to censor programming. They do it because the PTC shames not only the network but anyone advertising with the network.

    Why these idiots think they need the government to do what they’re already doing is beyond me.

  72. sqeelar says:

    Damn anti-Union Republicans. Trying to eliminate the union bleeper’s job by advocating no censorship. Wait. What?

  73. proscriptus says:

    How about we just don’t let our children watch TV? Every shred of evidence ever produced says it’s bad for them, no matter what it is. Wouldn’t that be a more elegant solution than trying to abridge the First Amendment? I think my three-and-a-half year old has probably sees about 10 hours a year, and none of that broadcast. Every now and then we watch the NOVA on monitor lizards. You want to see a smart fucking cookie? Find a kid who doesn’t watch that shit.

    Fuck those fucking PTC fucks, anyway. And oh year, I’m pretty sure my kid has seen a nipple before.

  74. goldilockz says:

    Am I the only weirdo that makes sure the programming my children are watching is age-appropriate? I’m pretty sure Sesame Street and Curious George aren’t going to be throwing around the f-bomb.

  75. pot_roast says:

    “even in front of children.” – Eff you and your sensitive widdle children.

    “broadcasters must refrain from violating community standards of decency” – guess what? ‘community standards’ have evolved, unlike you pious fools that expect every ‘community’ is all white, christian, god-fearing, and Mayberry-esque.

    If they really want to protect children from the evils of TV, it’s easy. Turn off the TV.

  76. guspaz says:

    This only demonstrates just how out of touch with reality the PTC is.

  77. momtimestwo says:

    So I can finally watch Hell’s Kitchen with no bleeps?

  78. docwhat says:

    Can someone explain to me why a child hearing the occasional “fuck” uttered on adult-oriented tv programming (news, etc.) is a bad thing?

    Obviously using it during Sesame Street would be inappropriate, but that’s not how it usually is used.

  79. ~Ian~ says:

    I managed to attract the attention of one of their employees on twitter xD heres a screenshot http://kttns.org/y3mjk

  80. Jabberwock says:

    PTC: Either learn how to use the v-chip that is in your TV (thanks to Clinton) or here’s a novel idea, either monitor your children and educate yourself about the shows they are watching, or TURN THE TV OFF! The PTC are just proving just how bad their parenting skills are. I think they need to change their priorities.