Couldn't agree more. And, since it doesn't happen very often, I thought I'd point out that I saw Scalia speak on the subject a few years ago and embody essentially the same position. Then again, referencing Paul's earlier post today, I think taking away peoples' Sopranos would be just about enough to give the more conservative social conservatives their walking papers.
Actually, I'm pretty much with mouldy on this one. There's a thing called the power button. Use it.
While I'm often appalled by what's on television these days, the solution is simple and I agree with you: turn it off. As a parent, it's my responsibility what my child watches, not the FCC's or the cable company's. If I don't approve of something, I don't let him watch it. I am so sick of the ED commercials, but we now have digital cable with a DVR and, by starting a program 20 minutes into it, we no longer have to watch the commercials.
Agreed also. If people don't like a package, they can get rid of it. If we don't like what we see, we can change the channel or just turn it off without a nanny state telling us it's "bad"
As for the "walking papers" comment - isn't this position more representative of the "liberal" side of the aisle or does the PMRC not ring a bell?
I always get a bit nervous when everyone agrees with me. This time, however, I'm so sure I'm right that it doesn't bother me at all. Of course the unanimity of opinion begs the question, what is it that offends the supporters of such rules for cable? What are they watching that we're not? Or, am I missing the point completly, and it's simply knowing that there are people out there that watch FX, MTV, SkinaMax (CinaMax), or whatever offends that is enough to justify the heavy hand of the state?
PMRC? Please illuminate me as to how liberals would in anyway would be for increased censorship of pay-television.
Well, the PMRC was bi-partisan, but Mike has a point. I do think that that censorship is pressed by both sides, but there is a different element underlying it. For example, Howard Stern is often reviled by both conservatives offended by his crude behavior and by liberals for his anti-pc sentiments. There might be more of a push on the conservative side to censor him or regulate him through the FCC, though of course that becomes moot in 16 days. 
But I don't think liberals are innocent either of attempting to silence those who express displeasurable viewpoints.
We seem to all be in agreement today... how often does that happen??? I have to admit, however, the a la carte programming option would be pretty cool... if for no other reason than getting rid of all the spanish-language and home shopping channels.......
I have to admit, however, the a la carte programming option would be pretty cool...
I'm with Alexa on this one. There is no reason other than expense that this option is not available, and I have no doubt that the industry could make it profitable if they had to/wanted to. Think about it: how many of those channels they force you to buy do you actually watch? Put another way: if you had to pick five or ten channels and could lop 25%-50% off your monthly cable bill in the process, are you saying you wouldn'tdo it?
Bonus question: which channels would you pick?
ESPN and Comedy Central, and maybe the Cartoon Network (if I can stay up for Family Guy and Aquateen Hunger Force). That's enough for me.
Oh, and USA for the occasional episode of RAW. And TBS for Mets-Braves game. And HBO once the Sopranos comes back. And NESN for Nats games.
Hmmm, maybe a la carte is less desireable than I thought.
Commenting by HaloScan
