h a l f b a k e r y"Not baked goods, Professor; baked bads!" -- The Tick
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
What should or shouldn't be bleeped out on television is an extremely subjective thing. A word that offends one person could easily create no impression on another. Here in the UK there was a media uproar a few weeks ago over what is or isn't appropriate, following a politician's appearance on a late-night
chat show. The only result of such events is that television shows get toned down to the point where they are so politically correct that nobody could possibly be offended. In an age where interactive television options to choose between commentators in sports games, this is plainly unnecessary.
I can see considerable value to an interactive feature to allow the user to pre-select the level of censorship that they would want from the shows they watch. Shows that support this feature would then appear in slightly different formats, with offensive words and terms being bleeped out (or indeed not, if you prefer) to suit your selection.
This may be pushing the envelope a little, but with the feature to pause or rewind live television, it may even be possible to add in extra scenes that wouldn't have featured in the cut version. Of course, even if it is possible, this feature would be quite limited in application.
Seven Dirty Words
http://en.wikipedia...i/Seven_dirty_words
"Wank" doesn't appear to be listed - what was all the fuss about? At least he never said "Mongolian Cluster Fuck" [zen_tom, Jul 11 2006]
(?) it took lip-readers to work out what caused this storm.
http://www.irishexa...qid=8010-qqqx=1.asp
[po, Jul 11 2006]
Video of head-butt with subtitles.
http://www.materazzisays.com/
And a chance to win an advertising agency internship if you can come up with something funnier. [jutta, Jul 13 2006]
[link]
|
| |
Interactive Censorship sounds like a euphamism for pressing the 'Off' button to me. |
|
| |
Likewise, what with the wildly publicised 9pm 'Watershed' and the ever marching trend towards more explicit language and subject matter in the media - this might be a pleasant option for the Mary Whitehouse brigade - (in addition to the ever present 'Off' switch of course) |
|
| |
On a related note, has anyone noticed the increasing frequency of the use of the word 'cunt' in the media? I'm thinking of Larry David's Curb your Enthusiasm, and Kill Bill 2 - yes - two examples is a small sample (they've probably said it loads of times in South Park too) - but 20 or more years ago, when 'fuck' was something special - noone would have dared broadcast the c-word. It makes one wonder what's left to get shocked/upset by. |
|
| |
//It makes one wonder what's left to
get shocked/upset by.// Ask Marco
Materazzi - he'll come up with
something. |
|
| |
Fishbone for the censorship - if that's what he said, that's what he said. |
|
| |
Having said that, I ceertainly agree that there is already too much bad language on daytime TV. Bad language serves a purpose - all languages have swear words, the NY Times reported a few weeks back - but that purpose is to shock, or to emphasize in a shocking way. |
|
| |
When we sprinkle swear words on everything we say, those words will simply become mainstream, and stronger, more shocking words will be required to achieve impact. Hence the appearance of c*** noted above - evidently f*** has been overworked on TV. (Of course, HBO has also been throwing c***s***** with gay abandon lately: I guess m*****f***** just didn't cut it.) |
|
| |
Dr Curry's comment was exactly shown in an episode of South Park- but I agree |
|
| |
I will vote for this idea if it incorporates an audio stream called "Ultra-swearing" wherein, for example, Huw Edwards have his every newsreading sneer punctuated with an intensifying fucking or shite. Just imagine shocked hush on Christmas Day when Her Maj's crisp tones reveal to the turkey-sleepy nation that her grandsons are, to a man, knobgobbling bumsnoggers and that she is vey vey proud of the bastards. |
|
| |
I agree, though, about the dimunition of the power of swearing, but really it's all about context. In certain areas of Scotland, "cunt" can be used interchangeably with "him" "it" "that" or "thing." But television, and the BBC in particular, is the last bastion of imagined Received Pronunciation, of the repressed ideal of 'polite society' and swearing on television is therefore unsettling. |
|
| |
//Fishbone for the censorship - if that's what he said, that's what he said.// With all due respect DrCurry (I´m on a Spanish PC and for the life of me can´t figure out where the square brackets are on this keyboard), this is an idea to reduce censorship, not increase it. Allowing something like this would let more broadcasters to broadcast shows with no words bleeped out as standard. They would be safe in the knowledge that those who doñ´t want to hear it, would set their televisions to avoid this. |
|
| |
Perhaps the shows could go out with a warning of impending bad language, so that people would have no excuse for not setting their censorship level. |
|
| |