AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › HDTV Programming › The Creeping of Bleeping
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Creeping of Bleeping - Page 3

post #61 of 140
2/12/13 at 12:46pm
Why is all the profanity bleeped from the Comedy Network? Is it ever uncensored? Watching these roasts or a good standup and it's all bleeped. What's the point really to watch it? Is it bleeped because there are commercials? I never quite figured this out.
Reply
Reply

AVS Top Picks

post #62 of 140
2/12/13 at 12:58pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by hunter65 View Post

Why is all the profanity bleeped from the Comedy Network? Is it ever uncensored? Watching these roasts or a good standup and it's all bleeped. What's the point really to watch it? Is it bleeped because there are commercials? I never quite figured this out.

I think Comedy Central will sometime show un-bleeped content after midnight. I'd swear I've seen them advertise this point, ie "watch the re-run after midnight to see the uncensored show". But maybe they've stopped doing it, or I'm thinking of another channel.

I've seen two seperate explanations on why commercial cable channels self-censor. The first is they don't want to offend advertisers, or more accurately the advertisers are afraid that if they advertise during breaks from explicit programming it may hurt their brand. The second is they're afraid if they don't self-censor, the FCC will step in and start to regulate content on cable TV.
Reply
Reply
post #63 of 140
2/12/13 at 1:21pm
Comedy Central does offer uncut programming, usually late Friday/Saturday nights. I really wish they wouldn't censor some channels on cable, but I will save that rant for somewhere else.
Reply
Reply
post #64 of 140
2/12/13 at 1:27pm
Okay, thanks I'll have a look after midnight. or after 11PM.
Reply
Reply
post #65 of 140
2/12/13 at 1:36pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by lobosrul View Post

The second is they're afraid if they don't self-censor, the FCC will step in and start to regulate content on cable TV.

I don't think that's a plausible explanation. The FCC's authority to regulate the broadcast networks stems from those networks using the public airwaves. Cable networks are held privately, so the FCC can't control them. If you see something objectionable on cable, it's your responsibility to cancel your subscription, since you're paying for it to enter your home. The broadcast networks, in contrast, are available whether you want them or not, so they aren't allowed to transmit "offensive" content. Congress might be able to give the FCC power to regulate cable networks, but AFAIK they aren't currently in its purview.
Reply
Reply
post #66 of 140
2/12/13 at 2:40pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aleron Ives View Post

If you see something objectionable on cable, it's your responsibility to cancel your subscription, since you're paying for it to enter your home.

I agree, or if you are a parent learn how to control what your kids watch if you want cable. I never had an issue with my son seeing/hearing things he shouldn't because I took the time to set up the controls on the box. People are just so easily offended these days.
Reply
Reply
post #67 of 140
2/12/13 at 9:21pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aleron Ives View Post

Congress might be able to give the FCC power to regulate cable networks
Highly doubtful. That's a massive First Amendment issue.
Reply
Reply
post #68 of 140
2/12/13 at 11:09pm
That's why I said "might". Congressional action would be the only way to expand the FCC's powers to include regulating cable, and that's definitely not a likely scenario.
Reply
Reply
post #69 of 140
2/12/13 at 11:39pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by hunter65 View Post

Why is all the profanity bleeped from the Comedy Network? Is it ever uncensored? Watching these roasts or a good standup and it's all bleeped. What's the point really to watch it? Is it bleeped because there are commercials? I never quite figured this out.

Yes, the original Roasts, for example are uncensored. If you watch them on Netflix, no censorship; no bleeps.
Reply
Reply
post #70 of 140
2/12/13 at 11:40pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles R View Post

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.


So it took them 50+ years to figure that out?
Reply
Reply
post #71 of 140
2/13/13 at 9:09pm
Thread Starter 
Anyone watching the Jodi Arias trial? HLN is being ridiculous with its unnecessary censorship to the point that a guest judge when asked about the recordings said she could not say because there were too many bleeps. Well, there were ZERO bleeps in the recordings. There were ZERO bleeps played in the courtroom during the DAY. Then HLN decides, even though it is a cable station exempt from the FCC, and even thought they have banners and forewarnings of graphic talk, to bleep the heck out of the recordings. Sad commentary on journalism today and free expression.

By the way, for whatever reason the bleeps on Dr. Drew are quite a bit more high-pitched and longer lasting than on Nancy Grace. Anyone explain that since both shows are on HLN and shown back to back?
Edited by igreg - 2/14/13 at 12:06am
Reply
Reply
post #72 of 140
2/14/13 at 2:20am
Quote:
Originally Posted by igreg View Post

Anyone watching the Jodi Arias trial? HLN is being ridiculous with its unnecessary censorship to the point that a guest judge when asked about the recordings said she could not say because there were too many bleeps. Well, there were ZERO bleeps in the recordings. There were ZERO bleeps played in the courtroom during the DAY. Then HLN decides, even though it is a cable station exempt from the FCC, and even thought they have banners and forewarnings of graphic talk, to bleep the heck out of the recordings. Sad commentary on journalism today and free expression.

By the way, for whatever reason the bleeps on Dr. Drew are quite a bit more high-pitched and longer lasting than on Nancy Grace. Anyone explain that since both shows are on HLN and shown back to back?
Also, before they play any clip they always have to say "If you've got kids in the room, get them out" or "Just wanna warn you" etc. Every freaking time. There's a big warning across the screen that says GRAPHIC LANGUAGE, we get it. This is one time where I actually agree with you. Half the time they'll bleep something, then you'll hear the exact same clip unbleeped like an hour later.
Reply
Reply
post #73 of 140
2/17/13 at 6:41pm
Thread Starter 
For those of you that think my writing on this subject lacks foundation.......another example of the creeping of bleeping......a new recent trend that is not even legal in the UK.......during the NBA All-Star game a commercial aired for the new game Black Ops 2, and it featured an obscenity laced bleep. I think this is the FIRST EVER national commercial with a bleep. Fast food restaurant Jack in the Box had one a while back but that was regional. More undeniable evidence of the creeping of bleeping in our culture. Not only are obscenities not edited out, not only are they unnecessarily placed over obscenities, but now, all over the media, in family hour and even in commercials, television executives actively seek out opportunities to insert bleeps into program material. This was all but nonexistent prior to 2000.
Reply
Reply
post #74 of 140
2/17/13 at 7:01pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by igreg View Post

For those of you that think my writing on this subject lacks foundation
I'm not sure if anyone's saying that. Most of us are just saying that we don't care.
Reply
Reply
post #75 of 140
2/18/13 at 4:47am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeremy W View Post

I'm not sure if anyone's saying that. Most of us are just saying that we don't care.
+1
Reply
Reply
post #76 of 140
2/23/13 at 4:02pm
Thread Starter 
Even if you do not like it, it is a cultural shift that is unabated. Today VH-1 Classic ran a commercial for one its shows "On Tap" featuring a profanity laden bleep. It's a cultural shift from avoidance to promotion of profanity. Instead of apologies for slips of the tongue, they are now promoted and in many cases deliberately placed. For example, on The Tonight Show this week Meredith Vieira was a guest. Leno highlighted an on-air incident where Meredith slipped up in air. Leno replayed it, and, of course, loudly bleeped it out with a high-pitched noise, reveling in the obscenity. A few years from now the whole Janet Jackson fiasco will be looked back on with amusement about the fuss. In fact, such exhibition will probably be promoted just like verbal obscenity is today. Not that I object to the latter.

National Geographic, an upper-tier cable channel ala HBO, just promoted one its upcoming shows with a bleeped out obscenity.
Edited by igreg - 2/23/13 at 11:31pm
Reply
Reply
post #77 of 140
2/24/13 at 9:25am
Quote:
Originally Posted by igreg View Post

National Geographic, an upper-tier cable channel ala HBO, just promoted one its upcoming shows with a bleeped out obscenity.
National Geographic is nowhere on the level of HBO - in cost or quality. Have you seen what they air now?

Maybe that's the issue: you seem unaware of where to look for shows with good culture, manners and quality.
Reply
Reply
post #78 of 140
2/24/13 at 4:16pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by igreg View Post

It's a cultural shift from avoidance to promotion of profanity. Instead of apologies for slips of the tongue, they are now promoted and in many cases deliberately placed
Now your agenda makes much more sense. I can't wait until the bleeping is gone myself, because I want to hear the profanity.
Reply
Reply
post #79 of 140
2/24/13 at 7:47pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by NetworkTV View Post

National Geographic is nowhere on the level of HBO - in cost or quality. Have you seen what they air now?

Maybe that's the issue: you seem unaware of where to look for shows with good culture, manners and quality.

I wasn't referring to the quality but, rather, that NG is not a basic or even second tier station, at least on DirecTV. I agree that usually shows of lesser quality usually display more profanity and bleeping. The trend somewhat began with the emergence of the wasteland to television programming, reality TV.
Reply
Reply
post #80 of 140
3/1/13 at 12:20am
Thread Starter 
There is so much freaking bleeping going on today on television....I am so freaking sick of it. I just turned the channel to Fox News rather than a late-night show and, boom, within five seconds one of the panel lets out a profanity-laden speel that is very super-high pitch bleeped out. Tonight when arriving home before I had a chance to turn the channel I heard two bleeps; yesterday three bleeps. Before I can take off of my coat let alone my suit, I hear multiple bleeps two days in a row. Just freaking unbelievable.
Reply
Reply
post #81 of 140
3/1/13 at 4:50am
Quote:
Originally Posted by igreg View Post

There is so much freaking bleeping going on today on television....I am so freaking sick of it. I just turned the channel to Fox News rather than a late-night show and, boom, within five seconds one of the panel lets out a profanity-laden speel that is very super-high pitch bleeped out. Tonight when arriving home before I had a chance to turn the channel I heard two bleeps; yesterday three bleeps. Before I can take off of my coat let alone my suit, I hear multiple bleeps two days in a row. Just freaking unbelievable.
You freaking know what freaks me out? Freaking people who freaking complain freaking continually about every freaking thing like it's the freaking end of the freaking world! I can't freaking believe there's a freaking thread about freaking bleeping, especially that it freaking bothers so many freaking people so freaking much. Get a freaking life!! rolleyes.gif
Reply
Reply
post #82 of 140
3/1/13 at 7:43am
For most of the complainants in this thread, when they air their opinions, I'm still left unsure whether the particular poster is objecting to

1. the amount of profanity on television,
2. the threshold for deciding something needs bleeping,
3. censoring a profanity instead of airing it,
4. the use of a noise instead of silencing the audio,
or
5. the particular noise used to mask a profanity in contrast to some other replacement sound that the poster would find less cacaphonous,

because most of them haven't made clear what they'd rather hear: inoffensive language in the first place, the original word untouched, silence, a different replacement sound?  We know what you don't want; what do you want instead?
Reply
Reply
post #83 of 140
3/1/13 at 7:52am
Quote:
Originally Posted by dattier View Post

For most of the complainants in this thread, when they air their opinions, I'm still left unsure whether the particular poster is objecting to

1. the amount of profanity on television,
2. the threshold for deciding something needs bleeping,
3. censoring a profanity instead of airing it,
4. the use of a noise instead of silencing the audio,
or
5. the particular noise used to mask a profanity in contrast to some other replacement sound that the poster would find less cacaphonous,

because most of them haven't made clear what they'd rather hear: inoffensive language in the first place, the original word untouched, silence, a different replacement sound?  We know what you don't want; what do you want instead?

Ok to be clear:

First, I am against government censorship, as far as bad words go (censorship for military and diplomatic purposes would be outside of the scope of this discussion). There is a rating system that can be used to automatically keep yourself and your precious children from hearing dirty language. If you think your children above about the age of 5 don't commonly hear four letter words from their friends anyways... well you had a very different childhood than I did. Finally, I find silences or working the censoring into comedy (ala Craig Ferguson) to be much better than bleeping.
Reply
Reply
post #84 of 140
3/1/13 at 8:06am
Thank you for elaborating, Lobosrul.  As I said earlier in this thread, I disagree about silences vs. bleeps, because a silence leaves one wondering whether there was an audio dropout.

I certainly agree that children are already familiar with most obscene words (even if not with every aspect of their definitions; I remember a point in my childhood where I knew which words were bad but knew the meanings of only a few), but children also get the difference between hearing them on the street (or from you when you've just hammered your thumb) and encountering them in professionally edited media.  I do not dispute your point that the ratings system could take care of it without censoring any audio; the problem there is that most parents won't bother implementing the controls nor even learning how.
Reply
Reply
post #85 of 140
3/1/13 at 9:55am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoilerJim View Post

You freaking know what freaks me out? Freaking people who freaking complain freaking continually about every freaking thing like it's the freaking end of the freaking world! I can't freaking believe there's a freaking thread about freaking bleeping, especially that it freaking bothers so many freaking people so freaking much. Get a freaking life!! rolleyes.gif

You sound really intelligent. Cannot stand or comprehend an opposing point of view. Yes, I complain about needless irritants. For example, I also complain about people's second-hand smoke getting in my lungs. And you complain about me. Get a freaking life and stay out of mine.

By the way, INSESSION on TruTV covers Jodi Arias's trial unedited, and in the same time slot while reviewing the case the next day they extremely loud, extremely high-pitch bleep out the many swear words. That is unnecessary censorship, and finger nails on the chalkboard irritating. It would not happen if I was the producer of the show.
Reply
Reply
post #86 of 140
3/1/13 at 9:59am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dattier View Post

Thank you for elaborating, Lobosrul.  As I said earlier in this thread, I disagree about silences vs. bleeps, because a silence leaves one wondering whether there was an audio dropout.

I certainly agree that children are already familiar with most obscene words (even if not with every aspect of their definitions; I remember a point in my childhood where I knew which words were bad but knew the meanings of only a few), but children also get the difference between hearing them on the street (or from you when you've just hammered your thumb) and encountering them in professionally edited media.  I do not dispute your point that the ratings system could take care of it without censoring any audio; the problem there is that most parents won't bother implementing the controls nor even learning how.

Then why do the Academy Awards not use bleeps? Because the show has an amount of decorum and civility, severely lacking among several of the commenters on this forum.
Reply
Reply
post #87 of 140
3/1/13 at 10:00am
Quote:
Originally Posted by dattier View Post

I do not dispute your point that the ratings system could take care of it without censoring any audio; the problem there is that most parents won't bother implementing the controls nor even learning how.

 

That's not the case in a lot of situations... such as live sports, award shows, news or whatnot. I think the underlining complaint is two-fold. One being the simple fact they are being spoken and aired (acceptable behavior) in the first place and finally to some degree they are being celebrated and or promoted via bleeping versus silence. At least that's my take and I can see where they are coming from even if I don't care enough to agree or disagree. Complaining about anything else (within the topic) I can't understand...

 

Bottom line it's a topic not related to this forum. :)

Reply
Reply
post #88 of 140
3/1/13 at 11:12am
The thing is that in other countries like the UK they don't do this. Recently I had someone on a discussion group from the UK say that an upcoming episode of "Ripper" beeped and blurred in the US and indeed we did. We are treated like children in the US.
Reply
Reply
post #89 of 140
3/1/13 at 11:56am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Conrad View Post

The thing is that in other countries like the UK they don't do this. Recently I had someone on a discussion group from the UK say that an upcoming episode of "Ripper" beeped and blurred in the US and indeed we did. We are treated like children in the US.

And that's because Jill Six Pack doesn't want her kids to potentially hear the f-word on TV that she utters out of her mouth at least 15 times a day in front of her said kids.
Reply
Reply
post #90 of 140
3/1/13 at 12:30pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Demolition Man View Post

And that's because Jill Six Pack doesn't want her kids to potentially hear the f-word on TV that she utters out of her mouth at least 15 times a day in front of her said kids.
Believe it or not, not all people use the f-word or similar words in front of their kids and not all people use disgusting language either in the home or out of it. I'm not so naive as to believe my kids never heard "such talk" outside our home, but they sure as heck never heard it inside our home. I like to feel that we brought up our kids "the right way" and, coincidentally, they have done the same. So mute it or bleep it. I don't want to hear that crap when kids are around.

Don't even begin to characterize "Jill Six Pack" as a model for all mothers. I've been married to the same woman for a long time and NEVER heard her say the f-word or saw her drink a beer.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: HDTV Programming

AVS Top Picks

AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › HDTV Programming › The Creeping of Bleeping