The Black Informant | African American Commentary, News and Community Building

Indecency guidelines that over-the-air broadcasters must follow should be extended to cover cable and satellite broadcasters, congressional Republicans who are influential on telecommunications issues said yesterday.

Most viewers do not differentiate between traditional TV and cable, so they do not know when they might be exposed to objectionable programming, Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, the head of the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, told the National Association of Broadcasters in Washington. (more…)

Someone please take the power button away from this guy!!!

In order for me to address this issue, I must address it as a parent.

There is nothing more frustrating to me as a parent than to walk out of the room between shows only to return to see two or more people “gettin’ it on” WHILE MY KIDS ARE IN THE SAME ROOM. This is especially aggravating when it happens on broadcast as opposed to cable TV. Let me quickly explain the difference.

Back in the days of television minus the cable box, I had absolutely no way of blocking out programming based on rating/content. In other words, when a show came on, it just came on PERIOD. I had to be in the room to change the channel if I did not want to see what I may have deemed to be offensive. With the technology that is included with most cable boxes, I as a parent now have the ability to block out all shows and channels with a password so that my kids will only see what I allow them to watch on the television in our home.

Now, I do know that most TVs today come with a v-chip, but as far as I know (someone please correct me if I am wrong here), this only flags a show off of its rating only. I am not aware of any blocking technology built-in the television itself.

In any event, Conservatives begin to cross a dangerous line when seeking the federal government to muzzle media that is deemed “unfit” for little ears. For starters, like “the right to public education”, or “the right to health insurance”, policing the airwaves is not something that is Constitutionally supported. Although I can understand the intent, the government does not need to get itself involved in this area.

What most Conservatives and Republicans fail to see is that by forcing a mandate to censor what they deem as unacceptable, they are also leaving the door open for secularist to enforce the same laws to censor programing that they deem to be offensive. Trust me, all religious programing will be the primary target. I could play out the various scenarios here, but I think that you get the idea.

So does this mean that you are in favor of programing like soft to hard porn?

Absolutely not! As long as the content that I have selected for viewing via my cable box does not contain what I personally deem “offensive”, I am fine with the “arrangement”. Kids can be very crafty when it comes to figuring out technology, however, the buck stops with me as the parent, not the federal government. As long as my kids are under my roof, they know full well what is and isn’t allowed. When they walk out of the door to play with friends whose parents don’t share my same views, all I can do is hope what I have instilled in them at home will stick even when I am not around. This is very hard for a parent (I know), but remember, our own parents had to go through the same thing with us.

I especially direct this piece to Christians that feel that the world must be sponged of anything offensive in order for the message of the Gospel to take effect. I submit to you that the true message of the Gospel is seen best in the midst of a world that is anti-Christ anything. How can I as a Christian exhibit Christ if I require anybody who wants to be by friend to rid themselves of anything that is deemed “unholy” (example: “When I come your house, make sure you have Christian music playing in the background, no MTV, BET, or HBO in my presence, otherwise, I cannot be your friend.)? It is this mindset that is anti-Christ. The reason why Jesus was so effective in His day was because He engaged in the culture that was around Him. This does not mean that He condoned it. In other words, His very life was so attractive, people who were in sin were almost “compelled” to follow Him without the use of many words on His part. He became the change, not the culture that surrounded Him.

So in conclusion, I simply submit that as long as the programing that I choose to watch or listen to in my house steers clear from “covert obscenities” (example: Bugs Bunny and Elmer Fudd somehow admitting on an episode that their ongoing squabble is really a cover-up for the love they have for each other); let the music play and let the people choose, not the government.