Indecency makes strange bedfellows

Indecency makes strange bedfellows

: There’s an odd consensus of sorts forming around the notion that thereal solution to is to kill broadcast and increase choice.

Jonathan Rintels at CreativeVoices. just sent me this email:

We debated the Parents TV Council on CNBC last night. Rather than endorse Sen. Ted Stevens’s call today to extend FCC broadcast indecency regs to cable and satellite, we were pleasantly surprised (shocked?!) that PTC agreed that our solution was far preferable: give consumers the right to pick and choose what cable channels they want, rather than eat the broadcasters’ and cable companies’ “packages,” larded with channels that offend them. PTC went on to say that technology would soon solve the problem of objectionable content on cable, via VOD and digital cable boxes.

In many ways, I think the debate may be between Old School/Old Media vs. Technologically Savvy New School/New Media

  • http://misterpundit.blogspot.com MisterPundit

    “: I’ll say it again: The internet is next. They will try to go after what you and I say here. Welcome to Maylasia.”
    You’re much too exciteable. Remember Tipper Gore? Exactly. Trust me, we’ll still be here 10 years from now surfing for porn. The only thing that will come of this is that it will end Stevens’ political career, which is a good thing.

  • Mike

    Jeff, Mr. Stevens’ words and ideas have been met with much discourse on conservative/libertarian blogs, including Lileks, Instapundit, Ankle biting pundits, NRO, and more. I don’t think there is anything to worry about here. His ideas are going to be met with much resistance.

  • Dishman

    I believe it would be fair to characterize this as a wingnut (or someone coming across as one) getting slapped around by the right. I’ll probably be sending him a request for a retraction today.

  • Steve Garriott

    Unless you follow the money, you won’t understand what’s going on. As Tom Leykis said yesterday, this is about the fact that network television is losing viewers and dollars. It’s “not fair” that cable gets to play by a different set of rules. Follow the money; that’s where the real answers are and not in a smoke screen of morality. If Stevens said he was representing the networks, no one would support him; but because he hides behind the religious right, he can get away with it. And speaking as someone who is a Christian but abhors religion, his tactics are reprehensible. Using the on-off button or choosing to give up television entirely shows that you are human and not an automaton. I agree with Howard Stern: no one is forcing you to listen or watch.

  • richard mcenroe

    If Senator Bluenose tries to go ahead with this, you don’t want to think about what you’ll have to pry “from my cold dead hands…”

  • http://thebronxblogger.blogspot.com Matthew Goggins

    The grand American experiment in freedom and democracy has proven to be an interminable quagmire.
    The U.N. Security Council should immediately vote to invade Alaska and set up re-education camps for all the politicians there so that they can learn and come to appreciate the Bill of Rights.
    Only then can couch potatoes everywhere sit securely on their behinds knowing that the FCC will not be monitoring their favorite cable shows.
    Howard Stern for U.N. Secretary General!

  • http://www.oregoncommentator.com Timothy

    Could Stern be worse than Kofi? I wonder…

  • Jim S

    Correct me if I’m wrong, but aren’t there people who are lucky if they can afford a TV and the electric bill to keep it going, much less cable or satellite? Are those who think that the plug should be pulled on broadcast going to just shrug those people off?

  • ron

    Its Malaysia.

  • Dishman

    I agree with Steve G on following the money. If PTC isn’t behind this (and they’re claiming not), then that really leaves only the broadcast folks. They’re dressing themselves in the banner of religion, which is really humorous considering they also dress themselves in the banner of journalism.
    Jim.. Count me in the crowd who favor pulling the plug on broadcast.
    I don’t own a television. It is possible to have a fulfilling life without one. In fact, I’d even argue that my life is more fulfilling without it.
    Sorry, but I really can’t get too worked up about thinking television is a necessity.

  • http://thefatguy.com/ Scott Chaffin

    I’d like to meet the man who could pull the plug on broadcast. Are you gonna have a Million Stern March, backed by new TeeVeePolice, to turn in old broadcasting and receiving equipment?
    You’re a liberal, so I guess you’re gonna hand everybody a satellite dish and a Tivo to go with it, too. And free Sirius, too, to get rid of those non-revenue radio stations.

  • http://democracyinmedia.typepad.com Alex Rowland

    The FCC and PTC will do a good job of pulling the plug on broadcast all by their lonesome. No “liberal” intervention or “Million Stern Marches” required.

  • http://thefatguy.com/ Scott Chaffin

    How are they going do that? You seem to believe it’s not possible to broadcast a signal without the blessings of Our Betters. I reckon they managed to broadcast before the FCC existed, and I doubt we’ve lost the technology.
    The worst the FCC can do is de-license it and drive it undergound. The worst the PTC can do is sanitize it till it’s worthless to whiners. Neither one of those is a bad thing. It’s time for some creative destruction in the broadcast teevee biz.