Suppose the superbowl incident was was scheduled to happen. Suppose
there was a rating system to reflect that.

Well, if that was the case, enough people would have complained to keep the
incident from happening. I know that I would have complained, because that
is not what I want to see at the superbowl.

A rating system doesn't solve all problems. Children just don't have
the ability to choose what is good for them and what might be bad.
Those who think that good parenting can overcome this and that
children can be supervised constantly, can't be parents.

Technology can overcome these problems. Parents can block certain ratings
from TV, and if we could broadcast the ratings over the radio (which is
technologically possible at this point) we could put v-chip like hardware on
our radios too.

This helps the parents remain in charge, even when they are not there. It
also puts in in their hands to choose what their children should view/hear.

For example, a few years back, Schindler's list was played over national
television. While the movie is very emotional, and tells a story that
everyone should probably hear, it is done in a very harsh way, and at some
points, is probably unsuitable for children. It is rated R.

The Matrix, however, is a movie that I feel that my children could watch.
While the second is a little explicit in it's sexuality, and the third shows
a little more violence, the first movie, in my opinion, would be fine for
children from about 12+

Again, if all content is put out over the airwaves, and the technology is
created for the parents to keep control over what their children see, I feel
that our problems would be more or less solved.

Some parents may not regulate what comes through the TV/radio with their new
technology, but IMHO those are the people who probably shouldn't be parents.
Not the ones that think they can regulate it.

-Steve Michaelson

"Steve" wrote in message
...


Steve Michaelson wrote:

What it really breaks down to is the question of who really owns the
airwaves. The airwaves are supposed to belong to the people. If that
was
the case, IMHO, anything would be allowed to be broadcast, and it would
be
up to each individual as to what he/she wants to listen to.

Take a look at the Superbowl inncident, that I am sure everyone is aware
of.
I, for one, did not want to see that. But, there is a possibility that
some
people did. The only thing that needs to be regulated are the
ratings/content notification systems. If people can know ahead of time
what
type of content will be on a radio/television show, then they can make a
desision on whether or not to watch.

Americans are free to listen to/view what they choose (within certain
limitations, i.e. child porn, etc.) and it is not up to the F.C.C. to
regulate what goes out over the airwaves. However, I do believe that
the
FCC could do some good, by creating a ratings system that works. Nobody
wants to be suprised.

-Steve Michaelson

The fact that the airwaves belong to the people doesn't exclude the
possibility that the majority of people want some regulation.
A rating system doesn't solve all problems. Children just don't have
the ability to choose what is good for them and what might be bad.
Those who think that good parenting can overcome this and that
children can be supervised constantly, can't be parents.
Suppose the superbowl incident was was scheduled to happen. Suppose
there was a rating system to reflect that. Personally, I want to be
able to sit down with my kids and watch the superbowl. I don't want
to skip the game because it has a rating that worries me. I don't
even want to be put in a position where I have to turn off the half
time show because of content.

Steve ... feeling very prudish today, I guess.