[BC] How far is ok?...

[Rich Wood]

------ At 02:41 PM 6/16/2006, Mike McCarthy wrote: -------

>The Supreme Court years ago got it right.  Its the context in which 
>the information is portrayed.  Is it titillating, sexually explicit, 
>or appealing to the prurient interests? While the malfunction could 
>be considered titillating, it's context is simply blown out of 
>proportion and I think CBS has a valid argument.

Are you kidding? No one has to admit it here, but I'm sure many of us 
relied on the National Geographic for our source of tumescence (how's 
that for getting around street language?) before we were brave enough 
to buy magazines depicting our own ethnic group.

>But the accidental F bomb or other incidental out of context 
>utterance should not receive the same harsh punishment as would 
>someone who laces up an explicit comment or planned program just to 
>skirt the issue.

It depends on the length of the skirt.

Rich


Rich Wood
Rich Wood Multimedia
Phone: 413-454-3258