NationStates Jolt Archive


Well...There's good news, and there's bad news about this...

Zarakon
16-06-2007, 15:55
The good news is, we may get A la carte cable...

The bad news is we may also get a further restriction on "indecent" programming.

Of course, those might be both bad news or both good news, or reversed, depending on your point of view.

A new bill introduced into the House of Representatives yesterday would force cable operators to offer a family tier of programming, along with an "opt-out" à la carte cable programming option. At the same time, it would apply broadcast indecency standards that restrict indecent programming to the hours of 10pm and 6am to cable and satellite networks.

The Family and Consumer Choice Act of 2007 is cosponsored by Rep. Daniel Lipinski (D-IL) and Rep. Jeff Fortenberry (R-NE) and would be the à la carte law that Federal Communication Commission Chairman Kevin Martin says is necessary. The bill has not yet appeared on the Library of Congress web site, but Ars was able to obtain a copy of the legislation from Rep. Lipinski's office.
Tiers and à la carte

The bill has something for everyone who has been advocating for à la carte cable. Those concerned by the amount of programming available on cable that's inappropriate for young eyes should be pleased, as there's a very real "think of the children" thread running through the bill. "Of those homes with children subscribing to cable service, the vast majority subscribe to expanded basic cable service," notes the bill. For that reason, the bill would mandate the creation of "real family tiers of programming," which the bill defines as all channels in the Expanded Basic Tier aside from those carrying programming rated TV-Mature or TV-14 between the hours of 6am and 10pm.

Those who are a tired of paying for channels that they never watch will like the bill's opt-out provision, which will give cable and satellite subscribers the ability to cancel channels on an individual basis. The legislation says that anyone electing to do so would receive a "credit on the monthly bill... for such blocked channels in an amount equal to the amount that such distributor pays for the right to provide such blocked channel."

That rumbling you're hearing is the heavy-duty lobbying machines of the cable companies being revved up and put into gear. Cable and satellite providers have consistently opposed à la carte programming, saying that it would raise overall programming costs while dooming niche networks that have a limited audience. A couple of cable companies—most notably Time Warner—have created family tiers, but those are the exception, rather than the rule. And despite all the discussion about à la carte cable, consumers are generally indifferent to it and unrealistic about its price.
Applying broadcast standards to cable

Moving beyond à la carte and family tiers, the legislation would extend indecent programming restrictions that are currently applied to terrestrial TV to cable and satellite networks. "In accordance with the indecency and profanity policies and standards applied by the [FCC] to broadcasters, as such policies and standards are modified from time to time, not transmit any material that is indecent or profane on any channel in the expanded basic tier of such distributor" except between 10pm and 6am.

Rep. Lipinski and FCC Chairman Kevin Martin, who has advocated for expanded indecency regulations, believe that parents need government help in protecting their children from objectionable content. "In today's culture, parents are increasingly worried that their children are exposed to obscene, indecent, and violent programming," Rep. Lipinski said in a statement. "While there is no doubt that parents are the first line of defense in protecting their kids, clearly they need more help."

With the parental controls built into every television set, set-top box, and DVR being sold these days, the need for such legislation seems questionable at best. Unlike broadcast television, which is available to anyone with a TV and an antenna, people subscribe to and pay for cable/satellite. Those who are concerned about the possibility of indecent programming during the daytime already have several options available to them, including not subscribing to cable or using some of the technological means available to block objectionable content.
Oklatex
16-06-2007, 16:02
We need to keep the government out of this. It isn't as if anyone with a TV can access cable or satellite TV so why should the government restrict when certain types of shows can be shown. Did anyone ever hear of parental controls? We need less government not more government interference. :mad:
The_pantless_hero
16-06-2007, 16:04
I rather pay $50 a month for cable that I watch 1/20th the total channels of that are already fairly censored and tell the government to go fuck itself than buy only certain channels with even more god damn censorship.
Utracia
16-06-2007, 16:04
I'd love to be able to pick and choose channels but then this is also filled with legislation to have government help lazy parents do their jobs for them in restricting what we can watch when we want it. Get a damn V-chip or something instead of censoring what the rest of us can watch to "protect" the kiddies.
Drunk commies deleted
16-06-2007, 16:04
Moving beyond à la carte and family tiers, the legislation would extend indecent programming restrictions that are currently applied to terrestrial TV to cable and satellite networks. "In accordance with the indecency and profanity policies and standards applied by the [FCC] to broadcasters, as such policies and standards are modified from time to time, not transmit any material that is indecent or profane on any channel in the expanded basic tier of such distributor" except between 10pm and 6am.


Who the fuck is government to tell me that programming I PAY for should be censored to make it safe for people's whiny little bastard kids? I hope everyone in favor of such restrictions gets gang raped by AIDS patients while their children watch.
Minaris
16-06-2007, 16:06
In honor of this bill's pro-censorship agenda, I have this analysis:

Fuck this motherfucking shitty bill.
----------------------------------------------------------

Now that I've said that, on to my point:

Censorship is bad. We need to let parents parent their kids, not the government parenting everyone.
New Manvir
16-06-2007, 16:12
http://www.english-blog.com/images/English%20Teaching%20Censorship.gif

lolz
Katganistan
16-06-2007, 17:20
Who the fuck is government to tell me that programming I PAY for should be censored to make it safe for people's whiny little bastard kids? I hope everyone in favor of such restrictions gets gang raped by AIDS patients while their children watch.

You know, you were banned two weeks for comments regarding forced sodomy and rape by HIV-infected prisoners previously, and it seems that repeated deletions of your nations has not made an impression.

Goodbye.
Neesika
16-06-2007, 17:28
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

DC, why did you do it!?
Zilam
16-06-2007, 17:29
You know, you were banned two weeks for comments regarding forced sodomy and rape by HIV-infected prisoners previously, and it seems that repeated deletions of your nations has not made an impression.

Goodbye.



Wait, DCD is...deated for good? :eek:
Zilam
16-06-2007, 17:32
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

DC, why did you do it!?

http://www.anaitgames.com/wp-content/darth_vader_nooo.jpeg

I concur.
Neesika
16-06-2007, 17:32
Oh, it was his nature to do so, Neese.

I know, but damn, he knew he was on thinning ice. I really don't want to envison and NSG without Drunk Commies. I'm just hoping he hasn't become DoS.
Dobbsworld
16-06-2007, 17:33
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

DC, why did you do it!?

Oh, it was his nature to do so, Neese.
Dobbsworld
16-06-2007, 20:21
Well now, there's no need to let a perfectly good thread go to waste.

*bumps*

Personally, I think it's a poor trade-off. People have the means at their disposal to limit what their children consume. I don't think governing bodies need to kowtow to special interests any further than they have already. There is after all such a thing as personal responsibility. Perhaps it needs to be rediscovered.
Katganistan
16-06-2007, 20:27
http://www.controlyourtv.org/

Agreed.
If one were paranoid, one would almost believe that in a generation, the state will be raising children entirely and parents will not have a say in the matter.

When I was young, my parents restricted the amount of television I watched, and the content -- by being there to say, "Turn off the TV and do your homework/go play outside/read a book/help do the laundry" or, "That show is not appropriate for you. Turn it off."
Dobbsworld
16-06-2007, 20:39
http://www.controlyourtv.org/

Agreed.
If one were paranoid, one would almost believe that in a generation, the state will be raising children entirely and parents will not have a say in the matter.

Well, I think that require a less-than-healthy amount of paranoia to buy into that one to any great extent, but I can see it to some extent, sure.

When I was young, my parents restricted the amount of television I watched, and the content -- by being there to say, "Turn off the TV and do your homework/go play outside/read a book/help do the laundry" or, "That show is not appropriate for you. Turn it off."

No kidding. To be prefectly honest, I think it was because my parents (my father mostly) refused to go along with things like - colour television, cable TV, or even one of those big aerials to pick up more broadcasts from further away - that I find myself going without TV as easily as I do these days, as an adult.

In all fairness, after we relocated to Southern Ontario, we did get a colour TV, and we did subscribe to cable (old TV died, couldn't get a signal from the open air) and I kind of overloaded on the huge number of stations available - but it was like being a kid in a candy shop, I guess. I now have access to more television stations than at any other time in my life, and yet I hardly ever watch the thing.

Maybe parents should just go low-tech for their kids' formative years.
Multiland
19-06-2007, 22:46
Who the fuck is government to tell me that programming I PAY for should be censored to make it safe for people's whiny little bastard kids? I hope everyone in favor of such restrictions gets gang raped by AIDS patients while their children watch.

Sick. Disgustingly sick. Anyone who agrees with above view should research the effects of rape. Try http://www.rapecrisis.co.uk for a start, or goggle "effects of rape"
New Limacon
19-06-2007, 22:54
If I were to buy a la carte cable, and opted to not receive every channel but two, would I still have to pay the price for all of them?
Kahanistan
19-06-2007, 23:02
I'm afraid I have to concur with our resident intoxicated Marxist.

Government censorship has no place in a society that doesn't listen to right-wing whackjobs bitching about how the world is coming to an end because their five-year-old heard the word "fuck" on Simpsons.

I'm all for disbanding the FCC altogether and letting the airwaves be pretty much free unless someone starts crowding them out to eliminate competitors, and then antitrust cases can be brought.
Entropic Creation
19-06-2007, 23:46
Basic cable already adheres to 'decency' standards voluntarily (as in, we know if we didnt you would shove through some legislation making things unbearable).

What 'indecency' are they fighting against?
Premium channels like HBO have content that wouldnt be allowed on broadcast networks, but they are opt-in channels anyway.

There are many ways to control what is shown on your television - if you do not like it, turn it off, block it, or do not pay for it. Simple as that.

Censorship is completely unnecessary - it is only used by a minority wishing to force others to adhere to their views.
Khadgar
19-06-2007, 23:53
Can I opt out of all the channels that suck and get a reduced bill?
The_pantless_hero
19-06-2007, 23:53
Can I opt out of all the channels that suck and get a reduced bill?
Sure, if you want to watch news and Disney channels. Otherwise, hello to ubercensorship.

Don't they already fucking mandate the v-chip? Maybe they should mandate parents get the fuck up off their lazy asses and do their own god damn job.
Phantasy Encounter
19-06-2007, 23:54
How would the indecent programing section of the bill be enforcable with satellites broadcasting over mutiple time zones. 10pm to 6am whose time? I had satellite and my favorite shows would come on 3 hours earlier than my friends with cable. While ala cart is a good idea, I don't see how it can be practical. Most cable and satellite companies get huge discounts from the content providers for packaging many channels into one.