One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Check out topic: I Support..
Main
Had our eyes molested
Feb 26, 2020 19:00:34   #
America 1 Loc: South Miami
 
The Federal Communications Commission received 1,312 complaints after singers Shakira and Jennifer Lopez performed during the halftime show of Super Bowl LIV.

Shakira and Lopez’s routine included belly dancing, pole dancing, and other sexually suggestive acts which led to a torrent of criticism from viewers who said the show was far from family-friendly. Hundreds of people submitted complaints in notices to the federal government in response to the performance, according to WFAA.

"The show was not appropriate for a general audience. It was sexually explicit and would have been considered soft porn not many years ago," one Wyoming viewer wrote.

"I do not subscribe to The Playboy Channel, we do not buy porn for $20 a flick, we simply wanted to sit down as a family and watch the Super Bowl," a viewer from Tennessee said. "God forbid we expected to watch football and a quick concert but instead had our eyes molested."

Recommended For You

Bernie Bro in chief: Trump pumps up Sanders, hoping to run against him
"As a father of 2 teen girls I feel obligated, at this point, to file a complaint as I am at my wits end," a Maine viewer said. "We need to do better, much MUCH better. Please help put a stop this disgraceful type of behavior being pushed on our children."

Complaints poured in from 49 states, the most coming from Texas with 102. The state with no complaints was Vermont.

Roughly 102 million people tuned in to the Super Bowl on Feb. 2. The Kansas City Chiefs beat the San Francisco 49ers by a score of 31-20.

Reply
Feb 26, 2020 19:50:56   #
PaulPisces Loc: San Francisco
 
America 1 wrote:
The Federal Communications Commission received 1,312 complaints after singers Shakira and Jennifer Lopez performed during the halftime show of Super Bowl LIV.

Shakira and Lopez’s routine included belly dancing, pole dancing, and other sexually suggestive acts which led to a torrent of criticism from viewers who said the show was far from family-friendly. Hundreds of people submitted complaints in notices to the federal government in response to the performance, according to WFAA.

"The show was not appropriate for a general audience. It was sexually explicit and would have been considered soft porn not many years ago," one Wyoming viewer wrote.

"I do not subscribe to The Playboy Channel, we do not buy porn for $20 a flick, we simply wanted to sit down as a family and watch the Super Bowl," a viewer from Tennessee said. "God forbid we expected to watch football and a quick concert but instead had our eyes molested."

Recommended For You

Bernie Bro in chief: Trump pumps up Sanders, hoping to run against him
"As a father of 2 teen girls I feel obligated, at this point, to file a complaint as I am at my wits end," a Maine viewer said. "We need to do better, much MUCH better. Please help put a stop this disgraceful type of behavior being pushed on our children."

Complaints poured in from 49 states, the most coming from Texas with 102. The state with no complaints was Vermont.

Roughly 102 million people tuned in to the Super Bowl on Feb. 2. The Kansas City Chiefs beat the San Francisco 49ers by a score of 31-20.
The Federal Communications Commission received 1,3... (show quote)


All they really had to do was turn off their TVs. Talk about snowflakes!!!!

Reply
Feb 26, 2020 20:08:25   #
America 1 Loc: South Miami
 
PaulPisces wrote:
All they really had to do was turn off their TVs. Talk about snowflakes!!!!


Maybe they didn't have a remote.

Reply
 
 
Feb 27, 2020 06:30:16   #
American Vet
 
PaulPisces wrote:
All they really had to do was turn off their TVs. Talk about snowflakes!!!!


The FCC's job is to monitor television broadcasts. How will they know concerns unless the public informs them?

Reply
Feb 27, 2020 12:03:16   #
PaulPisces Loc: San Francisco
 
American Vet wrote:
The FCC's job is to monitor television broadcasts. How will they know concerns unless the public informs them?


Perfectly OK to let the FCC know when one does not like content.
But to expect the government to do the family's job of controlling what is seen is not acceptable to me.

Reply
Feb 27, 2020 13:08:50   #
American Vet
 
PaulPisces wrote:
Perfectly OK to let the FCC know when one does not like content.
But to expect the government to do the family's job of controlling what is seen is not acceptable to me.


I believe most shows have a warning if there is violent content, etc. That half time show should have had a warning "strong sexual content". That is the FCC's job.....

Reply
Feb 27, 2020 16:55:06   #
PaulPisces Loc: San Francisco
 
American Vet wrote:
I believe most shows have a warning if there is violent content, etc. That half time show should have had a warning "strong sexual content". That is the FCC's job.....


Im surprised to hear this response from someone whose posts on OPP lead me to believe you are someone who might advocate for LESS governmental control. Perhaps I am mistaken, but you don't sound to me like someone who would be supportive of "The Nanny State."

I think your best bet might be to take matters into your own hands and just avoid watching television completely.

Reply
Feb 28, 2020 06:08:12   #
American Vet
 
PaulPisces wrote:
Im surprised to hear this response from someone whose posts on OPP lead me to believe you are someone who might advocate for LESS governmental control. Perhaps I am mistaken, but you don't sound to me like someone who would be supportive of "The Nanny State."

I think your best bet might be to take matters into your own hands and just avoid watching television completely.


Posting a warning is not 'government control' - it is an advisory, just like the info on cigarette packages.

Reply
Feb 28, 2020 13:02:08   #
PaulPisces Loc: San Francisco
 
American Vet wrote:
Posting a warning is not 'government control' - it is an advisory, just like the info on cigarette packages.


Not quite the same, my friend.
The advisory on cigarettes is based on scientific, empirical evidence.
What you are advocating for involves a judgement that is entirely subjective.
I for one do not want the government making that decision for me.
I'm all for informing folks that a coming performance contains nudity or violence.
Those are factual.

Reply
Feb 28, 2020 15:35:42   #
American Vet
 
PaulPisces wrote:
Not quite the same, my friend.
The advisory on cigarettes is based on scientific, empirical evidence.
What you are advocating for involves a judgement that is entirely subjective.
I for one do not want the government making that decision for me.
I'm all for informing folks that a coming performance contains nudity or violence.
Those are factual.


Again - no one is making any decision for you: Just providing anyone watching what may (or may not) be seen in the program.

"The TV parental guidelines are a television content rating system in the United States that was first proposed on December 19, 1996, by the United States Congress, the television industry and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), and went into effect by January 1, 1997, on most major broadcast and cable networks in response to public concerns[1] about increasingly explicit sexual content, graphic violence and strong profanity in television programs. It was established as a voluntary-participation system, with ratings to be determined by the individually participating broadcast and cable networks."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TV_Parental_Guidelines

Reply
Feb 28, 2020 17:21:17   #
America 1 Loc: South Miami
 
American Vet wrote:
Posting a warning is not 'government control' - it is an advisory, just like the info on cigarette packages.


A warning should be posted at Walmart,
my eyes are always molested there.
Also not safe with the 300-400 pounders wheeling around shopping carts.
My visits there are limited to no more than 3 times a year.

Reply
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.