NationStates Jolt Archive

The Media Cleanliness Act is a proposal which strives to quell the rampant sexual content in the public media, including public radio, television, and publicly available magazines.

This is for, mainly, the sanctity of our youth. The impressionable minds of our children should not be disgraced or tampered with by such things when they may not be mature enough to handle them.

The proposal protects the universal right of free speech by insuring that paid services may still have sexual content at any time, and that the public media may have sexual content in a certain time slot when children are likely to be asleep. This is not unlike the real world FCC guidelines.



It also calls for the news media to try and report stories of better subjects to the people—not tweak reality, but instead make sure that the good stories make it into the news, with the bad.


I ask for all morals-based nations to step forward and help our future, our children, by approving this proposal.


John Quantas,

Honorable President of Quarka.

While this is a concern for the Holy Empire of Gethamane, our official stance has been, and always will be, against proposals based on a moral grounding that is not universal (or nearly so). If your nation is concerned about this topic, then pass legislation regarding it... but despite our religious nature, Gethamane does not believe in inflicting morality upon the unwilling.

Public television is a very strange thing; it gives stuff to everyone but doesn’t show the public... This is truly sad for if it doesn’t show the public, but claims to be public, it lies with its corn all full of mouth, and that's just bad. Have you ever even had mouth-filled corn? It tastes like dirt, maybe clay... common clay perhaps... just like people. So mouth corn tastes like people, and you don't see enough of those on television any more, penguins that is, not corn. But in all due respect, you UN proposal writing... uhm... people... yeah, that's it... you UN proposal writing people should quell the garbage that's shown to the public, I mean we watch 'Bigtopians Say the Darndest Things' but that's really funny, unlike this proposal. Where was I going? Oh yeah, don't stop the radio waves, they keep the aliens from controlling our brains, because they use radio waves too.
So, in parting, don't try to clean up public media, it'll never work, just like cleaning up the beach.
In the name of:
Ulala Ulala Ulala U
Ptang ptang
And apples

This seems to be clearly a non-UN issue. In Rehochipe, we don't believe that our children's welfare is best served by trying to make them believe sex doesn't exist. Concealing sex as a shameful activity is completely alien to our culture, and to have Christian-derived ideals of repression of the libido imposed upon us would, we believe, cause lasting damage to our nation's mental health. If you're so concerned about your kids being exposed to smut, you could always just, y'know, not buy a TV.

Of course, 90% of Rehochipe has no television coverage, so we're not too bothered either way.

Thackeray Sung
Ministry of Personal Development

* Sounds of out-rage splutter from The Rep of Komokoms lips, and his mighty frying-pan is raised high in judgement,

:shock:

The proposal protects the universal right of free speech by insuring that paid services may still have sexual content at any time, and that the public media may have sexual content in a certain time slot when children are likely to be asleep. This is not unlike the real world FCC guidelines.

:evil:

Protects, PROTECTS ! How the heck could you possibly think of protecting free speech by limiting it ! How dare you use the opinionated bias of morality, an argument so mired in the basis of perception of issues it can in no way support the diverse views of all member nations, nor a majority for that matter.

:?

Further more, you go on to say, lets reduce sexual imagery, well, you clearly have no idea what it is, as you do not define it, and nor to you mention that once again, "sexual imagery" is subjective to opinion.

:evil:

Public media, PUBLIC MEDIA, you mean that which caters TO THE PUBLIC, FOR THE PUBLIC? Exactly what to you plan to do when the "public" makes it very clear, they see what they want to. Realy, what will you and your conservative authoritarian co-conspiritors do then,

:?

So your planning to restrict "sexual imagery" to only those who can pay for it, huh, yeah, "sanctity" sans "equality", such aspirational ideals you have.

:shock:

Well, here's a little education for you, and do forgive me for the sexual imagery it may invoke, pfffrt...

:twisted:

"Now, if groups like Moral Majority have their way, there won't be any sex education at school, and our kids will be the dumbest in the world when it comes to sex.... But our parents are sexually retarded too.... Fear and primitive morals are creating a sexual pressure-cooker in this country and soon the top will blow.... Only in the U.S. do we find children drawing a picture of a baby coming from the clouds or from under a cabbage leaf."

- Dr. Floyd Martinson.

:?

We, the sensible liberal element of the U.N. who feel all forms of media are educational in at least some regard, and who feel education for all is a fundamental of human rights, deplore you and your so called "morals",

:evil:

Closed minded distress at something your not able to comprehend seems more like it. Get over yourself and accept your proposal in its current form is nothing more then the high-jacking of freedom of speech with misguided good intentions, by what is simply badly disguised religious intolerance of that which is not "sacred".

:roll:

(Spitting noise)

:wink:

And that ladies and gentleman, is how they do it down town. :x

(I must ease off of True Crime, Streets of L.A. :wink: )

- The Rep of Komokom. :)

(And might I add, I may be forced to launch a counter proposal for general inspection, something like, "Sanctity of Public Media" sounds poetically ironic enough.)

*politely hands the Rep from Komokom what is colloquially known as a "chill pill"*
Been overworking ourselves, dearie?

“The Sanctity of Public Media”

Category: Human Rights, at this time.
Strength: Strong, I would hope.

Aware, that some nation states within the United Nations membership may intend in the future to actively attempt to reduce or dilute the impact of the idea of equality and the principle of freedom of speech, by avoiding any direct contradiction of passed international law, in member nations by reigning in the power of the public media, by misusing the over-riding legal power of international (Hence this United Nations) law,

The Rep of Komokom requests the following on the behalf of the rights of all peoples who are citizens to United Nations member nations, and any future such persons,

That, the United Nations, now and forever more (Allowing for the possibilities of future game mechanics issues and Moderation or otherwise Administrative interferance where due and found to be required by said staff of N.S. and the aforementioned game mechanics),

Enshrines, in international law: The idea that public media is a collection of media, known as currently, but not limited to word of mouth, electronic based or printed form information services, privately or publicly owned, be able to actively use their right of free speech, as protected by past proposals for any afore-mentioned citizen, in an unrestrained fashion, subject only to sovereign law of the nations they are based in, provided such sovereign law does not contradict this proposal and said previous passed acts. In the event such an event happens, then by the natural act of current game mechanics, this proposal would over-ride said sovereign laws, but only in the interests of the human rights of equality and free speech for the citizens of the sovereign nations, which are an acknowledged protectorate via this organization.

Thus, it is to be considered with the passing of this proposal, that the aforementioned ideas in this proposal are passed, and will thus engage the said ideas as international law, and also re-enforce any previous passed proposals, which would aid the sanctity of human rights, in the form of freedom of speech and equality.

So ends my proposal, and all I do say further is it is always right to do that which I right, and I hope any government of a member nation who deserves the respect of their people would agree and vote yes for this proposal. I thankyou all for your time and consideration.

- The Rep of Komokom.

...

Heh heh heh... Eat my championing of equality, heh heh heh...

(Meeep, I need to get some sleep, I whipped this up in 15 mins there about, came back and posted it, any ideas? Enough support and I shall make it its own thread... And run it past a mod, naturally.)

BTW: Spelling should be roughly accurate... Too tired to care at this time.

I smile inside every time someone uses the proposal format that was outlined in my guide. Its a lot like some metaphor for feeling really happy about someone maybe using your ideas.

Anywho, tangent aside, I think I like yours better, Komokom.

Sincerely yours,
Daniel M. Hillaker
Minister of Foreign Affairs

What can I say Sophista, its so pretty!

That, and it grabs attention better then a mentally constipating block of text would, :wink:

- The Rep of Komokom, who having done that in 15 minutes, is now beginning to wonder if this weekend he should start up his other proposalising idea-a-fies... :wink:

The Sophistan delegation would like to remind the representative from Komokom that they need not kiss our ass, as we already agree with most of their proposals, and it would take much more than ass kissing to shift our views on the ones where we differ in opinions.

But hey, thanks anyway.

Sincerely yours,
Daniel M. Hillaker
Minister of Foreign Affairs

* The Rep of Komokom chuckles then speaks,

Ha, what do you mean ass kiss, I don't ass kiss...

I'm a major diplomat, I have staff to do that.

WHat I do, errr, do, is type stuff all funny.

Or pretty.

I really need to go lay down... Meeep.

:)

- The Rep of Komokom,

No thanks needed, I just call it as I see it, mean-while, I've decided to thread my proposal for a bit. See thread of same title as proposal.

We apologize for the delay. An error in translation had our delegation terrified you had staph for the official ass-kissing duties, and a panic had ensued. Again, our deepest regrets for any inconvenience. We'll see you in the other thread.

Sincerely yours,
Daniel M. Hillaker
Minister of Foreign Affairs

im so glad to see someone already blasted this proposal... in the mean time my entire nation who value their freedoms quite highly would like to extend our invitation to have the writers of this proposal come and be the first to jump off of our highest cliff.. and dont worry its ok because god said so..

If people want to show pictures of naked people to children, and the children want to watch, there's no problem. So long as noone is forcing children to turn the television on and watch the bouncing, we just don't see as how this could even be an issue.

Last time we checked, people still needed to actively intercept radio and television broadcasts, so things going over the "public airways" would still be invisible and inaudible unless you wanted to see and hear them.

If you see something that you didn't want to see on TV it is your own fault. Noone's installing televisions that you can't turn off into your head, and until they do you are relatively safe from all the big bad boobies on the airways.

Suck it up guys.

Don't make me come over there.

This proposal would encroach on our right to freedom of speech and expression. Our right to publish whatever we wish is sacrosanct in a democratic society and if we begin to 'clean' up our media, what is the next step? For fear of starting a slippery descent into censorship, i must submit that we do not support this proposal.
There should be rules, as there are, to prevent children obtaining such material and parents should take better care that their children are not subjected to such material. However, it is not the State's job to restrict this material in its entirety.