The Creeping of Bleeping - Page 2

Yep - all of those dramas are shown post-2100. Bleeping is pretty unusual on original content pre-2100, and blurring is pretty unheard of, as original commissions are aware of their transmission timeslots. If a show is commissioned, you're normally aware of its timeslot, so you know what is and isn't acceptable for broadcast in that timeslot.

Where bleeping and blurring IS used is when clips from other shows/movies are shown on pre-2100 programmes AND are editorially justified.
The BBC's "Film 2012" movie review show frequently airs movie clips with "f" words and worse, but this airs at 2325.

KOTCS is on NBC right now and Mutt just said the S word, no bleeps or anything . My wife and I had to rewind the DVR to be sure. I have never heard that on regular primetime TV before. WOW

It was left intact on CBS when they first aired "Network" in the late 1970s, in the line where Peter Finch's character declared that he had run out of the taurine variety.

Thinking about it I worked on an OTA show in the UK in 2003/4 which did a report on the list of words that had to be referred to very senior management to be broadcast, and in doing so had to say them, and thus had to refer the broadcast to very senior management.



We were given permission as it was editorially justified, but were told we couldn't be seen to enjoy saying them. The show aired at midnight. No bleeping, no blurring.

I think most would thoroughly enjoy repeating those words to their management, especially with creative combinations which may imply physically impossible actions and could make Chris Rock blush.

Actually, Inside the NFL on Friday nights (late night) runs ahead of "Dave's Old Porn". Yes a real series, not family safe.

It repeats at 8AM on Saturday. Hence the bleeping.

You're tilting at windmills, iGreg, and seem to be the only one bothered by this.

I dunno, I find them annoying too, but certainly not the biggest problem with HDTV today. I'd rank bitstarving, annoying popups, cropping "scoped" movies, and constant on screen bugs all higher.

The only context where I'd find them appropriate is on the news covering a story where someone said 4 letter words not allowed on broadcast TV before 10. Any other context and they can be aired at a more appropriate time without bleeping, or at least do something comical, ala Craigy Ferg.

In fact the whole concept of bleeping is just goofy. Viewers can almost always figure out by context what the word being said is. You know what it is, you've heard it before, but somehow hearing it again on TV and radio is going to damage you? And beyond that, almost any subject no matter how vulgar, degrading, or misogynistic is OK... just so long as you don't say one of a handful of words. I know if I had kids I'd sure as hell rather them hear the "s" word than watch certain sitcoms on CBS.
Edited by lobosrul - 11/29/12 at 2:39pm

a 1997 episode of Rosie? Cool, let me take a look at that clip real quick.

Now...the bleeps used in Arrested Development actually added to the comedy. So much so that they left them in on the DVD releases. As well, when AD's "4th season" hits Netflix in the spring, the new eps will also obscure profanity with bleeps.

The AD episode where Buster unleashes an obviously obscene & very long tirade about his mother has a solid minute (if not more) of bleeped dialog. The looks on the faces of his siblings during it is priceless, and goes a long way towards assisting the imaginations of viewers wondering what was being said.

In this age of digital television, where any given broadcast can carry a number of different audio tracks, perhaps viewers should be given the option to hear the uncensored audio program.

We have a V-Chip, but no broadcaster makes proper use of it to present uncensored content because viewers can't be depended upon to use it. The first time someone picks the wrong channel, the whole thing would be smacked down in order to protect little Joey or Sally from accidently hearing a curse word they've likely heard out of their parent's own mouths.

When I was a kid there was a Radio Station in Detroit (WRIF) that would edit a song that contained a "Bad Word" by playing that word BACKWARDS. For example The line in Pink Floyd's Money that said "Don't give me that do goody good Bull (Expletive Deleted) would go "Don't give me that do goody good Bull "Gibberish"). A friend of mine found that out when he played that part backwards. From that time on every time a song had "Gibberish" on it we'd all laugh knowing it was a word we didn't DARE say in front of our parents!

I used to do sort of that same thing when I would DJ school dances (I was an AV geek in school, so I didn't get many dates but I was always the first one asked to DJ - go figure).

When I started do it, I had to run the record off to reel-to-reel tape to edit it and all I would do is reverse the word.

Later, when CD Burners were available and I picked up an early model, I used software to flip the word, split it, then flip the back half (now the front half) back to normal. Finally I would insert a louder drum beat or some other sound from the music over it to disguise it further. So, for example, in the case of Alanis Morissette's "You Oughta Know", the f-word would sound like "cuff", somewhat drowned out by a drum beat.

I always hated using the actual "clean" versions of the music that would simply blank out the swear because it sound like something was wrong with the sound system.

If you'd prefer something less cacaphonous than a bleep or a buzz, OK, but silence is a bad idea.  When a profanity is completely muted out, the viewer gets an audio dropout and can't be sure that the signal or his/her equipment didn't fail at that point.
  Exactly.
 

I want to add, in my house the penalty for being caught swearing (or using the Lords name in vain!) was a teaspoon of Tobasco Sauce, and NO Milk or Water for 30 Minutes!

Punishing a child with Tabasco Sauce is tantamount to child abuse. You or anyone who would do that over a mere word or speech should be punished with jail time.

Just watch out for....soap poisoning....


That's a wee bit extreme.

While the act might come under the definition of not being a good idea (it's a good way to make a child develop a food phobia), people eat Tabasco sauce every day, sometimes in large quantities. It's not a toxic substance and isn't going to cause any physical harm. Discomfort, yes, but harm, no. Tabasco sauce is an irritant, not an acid or solvent. It's like ingesting too much pepper.

Now, there are certain hot peppers that can injure you if mishandled, but those aren't in the average off the shelf hot sauce brands.

I will agree that it's on overreaching punishment, but far less overreaching than you're call for jail time as punishment for it.

There's plenty of real, dangerous abuse out there to keep child services and the court system busy. Having worked in the news industry, some of the cases I've seen would make your average spanking look like a downright reward. The worst was a case where a step father poured bleach down the throat of a child for crying over being hungry. The kid survived, but the burns required dozens of surgeries just to allow him to swallow and eventually speak again.

That's a case for jail time.
Edited by NetworkTV - 1/26/13 at 8:21pm

That was 40 years ago, and after having to do it once, it served as one HECK of a deterrent. On the other hand If I suspected a word was "dirty" I Could ask them if it was good or bad without getting punished (although I was given a STERN warning NOT to get caught using that word, OR ELSE). Bear in mind Child Protective Services weren't as "sensitive" as they are today, just as corporal punishment was once allowed in schools. And yes, there was a time I thought the sole use of Tobasco was to punish those who got caught swearing. One day, I saw my Father put Tobasco on the open-face Cheese and Bacon Sandwiches he was serving us, and when I said "Dad! I didn't do anything wrong today (I was eight-years-old at the time)!" He explained what it was really for, learning it's primary use was to put a "zing in the flavor"!

PS Most of you know about how I feel about Today's TV, so I won't delve on it except to say If those 'ED Pill" Commercials were on at that time, and my Dad saw one of them aired at a time I was watching alone or together He would have had a HISSY FIT!!! He would have called the Cable Company (If that was available in my community at the time) to cancel the subscription, ten he'd BAWL THEM OUT! He then would have called (and "FLAME") the TV Station, the Network, and the Company that made the brand of the offending product.
Edited by borntocoast - 1/26/13 at 9:03pm

One of the reasons for bleeping instead of silencing is that people will think something is wrong with the audio, that it keeps cutting in and out and will call their TV provider to complain.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzz... Much ado about nothing.
Edited by BoilerJim - 2/12/13 at 4:42am

Some of the crawls for upcoming episodes are so large & intrusive, I find myself watching the crawl as the real show & get upset when the crawl slithers away & my show is gone!

When watching Jay Leno, a bleep is way low on my list of things wrong with it. His corny monologue should be one long bleep.

 

This is beyond simple. It attracts attention and or plays as funny (entertaining). If one wants to see it performed as an art form check out Craig Ferguson.

I totally agree with this one. Bleeps come and are gone in an instant. Crawls are intrusive, take up valuable screen space, and seem to go on forever.