[BC] How Far is OK and Common Decency...

[Larry Bloomfield]

I agree with Burt, but if we take a good look at our society, we are all 
hypocrite with multiple standards that apply when we think they should 
and don't when it is MORE  convenient. It is OK for us to tell off 
colored jokes on or off the air when it suits our purposes for whatever 
reason - neither case makes it right. Morals are something, IMHO, that 
are fixed and apply across the board. It the good book it says unless 
you become like these (referring to children) you don't have your act 
together. Yes, that is a very loose paraphrase, but you get the point. 
So, if I understand that that correctly, if something is wrong for kids 
to see or hear, then it is wrong for everyone. Based on this, morality 
is not something conditioned by age. If it is wrong for one part of 
society then it is wrong for all parts of society. 

I see folks look at the Discovery Channel, the Animal Channel, National 
Geographic books etc. just to see animals, and people in the buff; in 
some case having sex. I believe it is the context in which these things 
are presented that makes the difference. Some folks are mature at a very 
early age and yet some forks never mature when it comes to things of 
this type. I don't believe we should have to live by anyone else's 
standards but our own and if we can't handle things of this sort, there 
is an on/off switch on our receivers and we don't have buy the sponsor's 
products.

That said, IMHO again, we put too much emphasis on sex and sexually 
related things. The human body is a beautiful part of creation and it 
should never be taken as an object of either ridicule or lust. Perhaps 
some of us just have never grown up.

I'm off the soap box. It's your turn.


Larry Bloomfield - KA6UTC
Bloomfield Enterprises, LLC
1980 25th St. - Florence, OR 97439
(541) 902-2424 (My Everything Phone #)
WWW.Tech-Notes.TV 
See you on the Tech-Notes
Taste of NAB 2006 Road Show



Burt I. Weiner wrote:

> I think that with the courts and the precedents that have been set 
> along with the motivations behind those precedents, you can't really 
> make decency rules.  It certainly appears that decency, like audio 
> processing, is a matter of opinion.  Some look at it as $$$ and others 
> look at it as a way of living.
>
> The Janet Jackson and what's his name "incident" are not really the 
> issue but more of a convenient battle cry whose time has come.  Poor 
> taste indeed, but what is more of an issue, in my opinion, is the 
> extent to which many of the shock-jocks and stations will go to in 
> order to try to get attention and ratings.  Like it or not, the fact 
> is that these actions do set examples and people do start to see this 
> as normal and acceptable.  I suppose I could go on about trying to 
> raise kids and external influences outside of the home that you have 
> to contend with, but those of you who have been through this know 
> exactly what I'm talking about, the others, well, they've never been 
> there.
>
> I'm certainly no prude and have done a fine job of telling inanimate 
> objects just what I think of them (and it does help), but just not in 
> front of my kids, wife or other people.  Common decency and respect.
>
> Burt
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> This is the BROADCAST mailing list
> To send to the list, email: broadcast at radiolists.net
> For sub changes, archives and info on this other lists: 
> http://www.radiolists.net/
>