If you actually read some of the threads here, you would quickly see that the majority of people here have absolutely no problem criticizing the Chinese government, Gopher.
Chavez Bans Simpsons from Venezuelan TV
- Thread starter Toro
- Start date
If you actually read some of the threads here, you would quickly see that the majority of people here have absolutely no problem criticizing the Chinese government, Gopher.
DurkaDurka said:
Up to now, I have not seen anyone criticize China for banning the show.
As for Tiananmen Square, the only one here who has criticized Beijing has been me!
Why shouldn't it be banned? It's depraved and shouldn't be shown to children anyway. No one responsible would let their child watch that $h!t.
If networks aren't going to be responsible then get rid of the show. IMO networks should self regulate and this one is obvious. It's like a warning shot over the network bows and is a lot better than regulating what they can show. I suppose if they are going to pipe in XXX cartoons next as child entertainment then Chavez will need to ban that too. Seriously, how stupid are the networks anyway? This is a no brainer.
I'm all for freedom of speech for adults but not for children. Keep the depraved stuff for after hours.
If networks aren't going to be responsible then get rid of the show. IMO networks should self regulate and this one is obvious. It's like a warning shot over the network bows and is a lot better than regulating what they can show. I suppose if they are going to pipe in XXX cartoons next as child entertainment then Chavez will need to ban that too. Seriously, how stupid are the networks anyway? This is a no brainer.
I'm all for freedom of speech for adults but not for children. Keep the depraved stuff for after hours.
So you decide morality now?
Im still a favour of parents not being lazy and letting the kids run the thing. But if a network wants to ban it for the childrens point of view, I can dig that.
But switching Simpsons for Boob-watch? Come on..that is SOOOO not for the kids benefit.
Im still a favour of parents not being lazy and letting the kids run the thing. But if a network wants to ban it for the childrens point of view, I can dig that.
But switching Simpsons for Boob-watch? Come on..that is SOOOO not for the kids benefit.
If I had been elected by 80% of the population I suppose I might feel I had the authority. BTW when was the last time a Prime Minister or President got 80% of the vote?
I don't think it was probably Chavez that decided to put Boob-watch on instead of the Simpsons. That was probably some twisted TV exec that wants the power to show whatever he wants whenever he wants, having a tantrum. It isn't free speech to show anything you wish to other peoples children. That is depravity, short and simple, it shouldn't be a right nor guaranteed. Free speech and freedom of expression is a right of adults not children.
The Simpsons is depraved? Have you ever actually seen the show? Insinuating that porn is the next step up from the Simpsons is about the most ignorant thing I have read here in a while. I guess satire is a foreign concept to you.
How ya doin ITN nice to see they saved your fingers. haha (little accident joke) laughter is the best medicine eh.
The subject of terrorism was most recently launched onto the world stage by thee hydro-carbon junkie USAwans, grossly overwieght people mostly poorly educated religious fanatics with bad eating habits and bad planet manners and a totally boring national sport with too little stick violence, it's a whimpy game for whoozlers soft fluffy bums. Homer Simpson should be hung.
Think green buy chickens.
The subject of terrorism was most recently launched onto the world stage by thee hydro-carbon junkie USAwans, grossly overwieght people mostly poorly educated religious fanatics with bad eating habits and bad planet manners and a totally boring national sport with too little stick violence, it's a whimpy game for whoozlers soft fluffy bums. Homer Simpson should be hung.
Think green buy chickens.
As a children's show, definitely.
Even thirty years ago it wouldn't have been acceptable to adults.
Yes.
I didn't insinuate that.
Really?
So let me ask you, why the attack?
Last edited:
That's not an attack.:smile:
Are you getting the Simpsons confused with South Park perhaps? That could be considered depraved by some but the Simpsons really isn't likely to corrupt youths with obsenity and whatnot.
8O Durka, have you not seen an Itchy and Scratchy clip? Simpson's is not a good show for kids.
Right, might as well classify the news as depraved as well, or the bible perhaps? I know those 2 have a hell of lot more violence in them then the Simpsons.
Hell yeah. The news isn't targeted at kids though, and I certainly don't sit down and watch it with them right now, at this age.
And if aimed at kids, the Bible is generally dumbed down and the blood and gore left out. My kids each have a kids' bible given to them by family. Very sterilized.
Karrie, children are not the Simpsons target audience. The Simpsons certainly isn't an ideal show for kids to watch, but neither is it "depraved" as Scotts would describe it.
Here is link to a broadcast regulator who received a complaint due to the use of the words "wanker" & "ass" in a episode.
from
http://www.bsa.govt.nz/decisions/2004/2004-201.htm
Authority's Determination
[17] The members of the Authority have viewed a tape of the broadcast complained about and have read the correspondence listed in the Appendix. The Authority determines the complaint without a formal hearing.
[18] The Authority does not uphold the complaint and accepts the reasons advanced by TV3 in its decision. When the Authority considers complaints which allege a breach of good taste and decency, it takes into account the context in which the broadcast complained of occurs. In the present case, there are a number of contextual factors that operate to keep the programme within the boundaries of the good taste and decency standard:
- The show was rated PGR
- The item was broadcast in a PGR timeslot
- The Simpsons is a well-known show with a highly satirical tone that is aimed at a more mature audience than other cartoons
- The references were used in an ironic and satirical, rather than abusive, manner
Durka... Chavez banned it when it was being shown in an 11AM time slot. That's pretty aimed at kids. Anything on TV at 11AM, short of being on a dedicated news channel, ought to be pretty damn palatable for children.
And Zzarchov, is perhaps it's the lack of blood spray, intestines, and brains flying through the air that makes Tom and Jerry more palatable, but even it I've head complaints about. I can't stand Tom and Jerry, but, that's another story.
And Zzarchov, is perhaps it's the lack of blood spray, intestines, and brains flying through the air that makes Tom and Jerry more palatable, but even it I've head complaints about. I can't stand Tom and Jerry, but, that's another story.
Im just teasing you Karrie
I always liked Itchy and Scratchy because its such good satire of Tom and Jerry, for the reasons described above,
Its ok for a mouse to shoot a cat in the face..unless the injury is as graphic as the action that caused it.
I love the way no one saw anything wrong in the simpons with Children watching a show depicting such gruesome violence, but still reacting so negatively to things like the nudity in Michaelangelos "David"
I always liked Itchy and Scratchy because its such good satire of Tom and Jerry, for the reasons described above,
Its ok for a mouse to shoot a cat in the face..unless the injury is as graphic as the action that caused it.
I love the way no one saw anything wrong in the simpons with Children watching a show depicting such gruesome violence, but still reacting so negatively to things like the nudity in Michaelangelos "David"
Karrie, this thread has mutated from Chavez banning the Simpsons into the simpsons being depraved etc etc. I agree 11am probably isn't a good time slot for the show, but who would be to blame for that and why would it be replaced by Baywatch? Is tits and ass less damaging to a child?
Aside from the word depraved, I totally agree with Scott though... ban the show if the networks don't have the brains to selfregulate and not show violence at 11AM. Why should a government have to run around holding their hands and telling them to think like responsible business people? Ban a couple shows and they'll soon figure it out.
As for Baywatch, tits and ass... I never watched it, but, is it much worse than, say, Wonderwoman, or any host of cartoons with skimpy outfits? I've never found the human body and a bit of skin to be overly damaging to kids in the same way violence is. But, I' haven't watched it, so, I have no idea the sex scene content, etc.
Karrie, banning a a TV show is certainly a heavy handed approach to the issue. Also, you are totally exaggerating the amount of violence in the Simpsons.
Yes, it would be much worse then Wonderwomen or any cartoon you can think of. If you believe glorifying stereotypes about women is alright for children opposed to animated violence between animals, all the power to you.