In an Associated Press Story, some CBS affiliates are getting a little shaky about airing a 911 documentary next Monday from 8 to 10 about firefighters on 911. Hosted by Robert De Nero, the documentary contains footage and comments that are graphic and tells the events as they happened in their own words. It’s the language that is causing the problem for some affilliates. The program was aired before but new footage has been included for this showing.
The effects of Janet Jackson’s breast outage and the resulting stiffening of fines by the FCC has caused many broadcasters to take a second look. (At the documentary…not at Janet Jackson’s breasts).
Read the story and post what your opinion. What do you think our local affilate should do?
"Congress passed a law on February 1, 2006, setting a final deadline for the DTV transition of February 17, 2009. Most television stations will continue broadcasting both analog and digital programming until February 17, 2009, when all analog broadcasting will stop.." FCC http://www.dtv.gov/
23 comments:
God forbid we expose children to language that they already hear in the schoolyard. Give me a break. This is real life...this was the most important event of our lives. If you can't take it, DON'T WATCH!!!
Air this Program! Five years later people need a reminder that we are in a war! People in this country have an extremely short attention span. Time to remind them again!
The FCC needs to lighten up!
This country is worse off now than it was five years ago. At least on 9/11/01, we were united as a country. But now, it seems that that is not the case. It appears that these documentaries/ dramas that are coming out this year to memorialize what happend are only causing anger between liberals and conservatives... which is exactly what they shouldn't be doing. I think that if one of these television specials will further destruct our union, then it should not be aired... because it defeats the purpose of its making. However, if this documentary you speak of is being debated because of harsh language and graphic moments, and those are the only reasons... I say it is better than getting something politically bent. If it unites us as a country, then I say put it on the air, uncensored, and put a warning on it.
A lot of the flak stems from an organization called the American Family Association, which has decreed that the broadcast would be offensive. So, we have an unelected, authoritarian regime dictating to the FCC what should and should not be aired, based on this organization's preemptive outrage. Because of the outrageous fines that the FCC can now impose, several CBS affiliates have decided not to air the program. Since this is 180 degrees completely out of phase with reality, let me clear it up: I am not offended by a documentary depicting real-life emotions and reactions to a horrific event. What offends me is that madmen killed thousands of Americans that day.
We have contacted the FCC and filed a complaint against WSEE-TV. We do not want WSEE-TV to air this program. The language and subject matter are inappropriate for Network TV. We hope the FCC will levy the maximum fine ($350,000) against WSEE-TV.
CITIZENS FOR RESPONSIBLE TELEVISION
CRT.... that is interesting. You should be aware that, as a matter of FCC policy, all letters to the FCC are a matter of public record. I would be interested in knowing more about your group. Write me at gut104@yahoo.com
trisha...you sound like a very responsible parent. I wish more families would pre-clear what their children watch. I did that with my own kids and they are now 28 and 22. They were not sheltered from the world but they were allowed to be kids. They were not allowed to see a R rated movie until they were 17 or I had viewed it first.
I also agree with your assessment.
trisha...you sound like a very responsible parent. I wish more families would pre-clear what their children watch. I did that with my own kids and they are now 28 and 22. They were not sheltered from the world but they were allowed to be kids. They were not allowed to see a R rated movie until they were 17 or I had viewed it first.
I also agree with your assessment.
THE CITIZENS FOR RESPONSIBLE TELEVISION represent everything wrong with our country today. Take some responsibility for you own actions. If you don't want to watch something, turn the channel. If you don't want your kids to watch something, don't let them. If you can't control your own viewing habits or your kids, get rid of your TV. Why do people want the USA to become more of a nanny state than it already is?
oh yeah, and i'd like to watch that CBS special in digital. did you catch all that WSEE?
Bommai.
I quite agree with self responsibility. The TV was not created to be a babysitter.
So you have a Blue-RAY DVR or just an HD DVR?
Has anyone heard about the movie "The Path To 9/11" on ABC? Apparently our ex-President Bill "I love Interns!" Clinton called ABC President Bob Iger and demanded certain scenes critical of him and his administration edited and changed. Naturally ABC obliged! Why does everyone kiss Clinton's Ass!? He is a morally bankrupt person. If a Republican did what he just did there would be hell to pay!
Anonymous...
I also want to set the record strait. The Republicans did the same thing with the "Reagons." Rush, Hannety and the a host of Republican congressmen and senators, all demaned that CBS not just re-edit it but pull it. CBS did pull it and placed it on their cable network...Showtime. Later released it on DVD. In my view, right or wrong, the Dems are just copying what the Repub's did.
But I am glad you brought that one up. I am sure others will post their feelings about the ABC controversy.
I agree with the last anonymous, Bill Clinton is a morally bankrupt individual. I blame him for not letting us get Bin Laden. He did nothing after the bombing of the USS Cole. Bill Clinton should be an unidicted co-conspirator of the 9-11 attacks.
This is not a political blog, but I can see why the ABC show has generated strong feeling on both sides of the issue. It does have to do with the program and Bill Clinton is a public figure.
Jack
It became a political blog when you wrote about this topic. Why not just focus on the real topic of your blog - the destruction of WSEE-TV - and leave politics to the professionals.
By the way, when the USS Cole was attacked what did our so-called greatest President in History do? NOTHING!!!!!
What I wrote about was a media issue but I can understand how politics can creep in. And just so you know,...I don't have the power to "destuct: anything. That sole power is in the hands of the management and they seem to be doing a very good job without my help.
My interest is in keeping Erie current and seeing Erie broadcasting grow in the same spirit as its pioneers.
How can you keep Erie current if there is no money to keep it current? Seriously, where are they gonna get the money for Digital if there is no money to borrow?
You can't get water out of a rock!
.....I think I finally figured you out Jack. You advocate government financed Digital TV. YOU ARE A SOCIALIST!!!! I have a new name for your blog....JACK'S ERIE DIGITAL SOCIALISM FORUM! Pretty nifty, huh?
Comrade?
I have a question for you. If a TV station goes dark in Erie, PA does anyone hear it?
Capitalism at its Finest
I was at Brian's premiere party. The money he should have spent on Digital he spent on Chillean Sea Bass, Shrimp Cocktail, Grilled Grouper and Filet Mignon. Damn! That was quite a nice spread.
What's this I hear about you being a socialist? I thought you were Democrat? (Wait..SAME THING!)
This is easy. I will answer the last few comments with the same answer. Lilly has the money. They bought stations on the west coast and in Hawaii for many milions. Surely they would have under a million for Erie.
If they spent it so foolishly, maybe they should sell it like they did Altoona channel 10. They got 56 million for that from from Nexstar.
I am very much against government financing of any commercial entity.
The real answer is, if you can't take the heat...then sell to someone who knows how to make something of it. That is true for all stations.
I see a real pattern and believe that the last few posts all coming within minutes of each other is from the same ego centric person. And they still keep coming. Some I won't post becasue it has nothing to do with the subject.
I wouldn't be hard on Brain for what he had served to guests. It is the cost of doing business and it always has been. Just like the cost of converting to digital. Except he could trade out the food...he can't the digital. Although the trade probably will cost WSEE about 2 to 3 times in adversing it will have to put on the books. (and get no cash) Trade... one of the sins of broadcasting. It has taken many stations down the road to ruin.
Jack wrote "Trade... one of the sins of broadcasting."
It seems to me that "trade" (a form of "barter") is not necessarily bad. In fact, it is the very essence of the free market in action. Used properly, it can keep a station supplied with what it needs during cash flow crunches --- or enable the cash to be better used for other purposes even considering the 'premium'. 2x or 3x is not a big deal if those avails go unsold otherwise. Everyone wins. Of course, like anything, it can be abused....especially if a station does not have decent financial controls in place.
On the other hand, "trade" cuts out the middleman (agency commissions, etc.) which may somewhat explain your strong reaction against it.
Post a Comment