Bush and the FCC - it all amounts to a crock of s___

Trancendental

Trancendental

CAGiversary!
Feedback
4 (100%)
Under the newly passed Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act of 2005, signed by President Bush on June 15, individual broadcasters can be fined $325,000 for using an "excretory" remark on television during daytime hours. While I'm on government fines, it's worth noting the penalty for hiring an illegal immigrant is $250 per worker.

But you know, at least the GOP's big government apparatus is going after guys who talk about poop on television...
Like President Bush, who said the word "shit" on CNN today.

...

So may I suggest that -- for the sake of the children -- President Bush be the first person to be penalized under the Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act of 2005? $325,000 in the government swear jar to set a good example because profanity on television is a bad trend, a bad sign. In addition, Senators Brownback and Stevens along with Rep. Upton get to wash his mouth out with soap. Perhaps spank him, like a good traditional parent. Because President Bush, a role model for children all across this flat Earth, said "shit" on television.
Or... He could ask Congress to repeal this ridiculous law which only succeeds in shitting on the First Amendment and furthering the president's caricature as a major league asshole.
Click to expand...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-cesca/thatll-be-325000-in-th_b_25194.html

I'm betting that rules against swearing only apply to the "little people".
 
So wouldn't that make the news organizations who aired the remark responsible for the fines?

Under the newly passed Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act of 2005, signed by President Bush on June 15, individual broadcasters can be fined $325,000 for using an "excretory" remark on television during daytime hours.
Click to expand...

That was a private conversation that happened to get picked up by a microphone, then aired/discussed over and over.

I think a far more telling story is how rude Bush was to Blair in that video. Talking with his mouth full, interrupting constantly. Blair must have extraordinary patience to deal with that.
 
[quote name='Quillion']So wouldn't that make the news organizations who aired the remark responsible for the fines?

[/QUOTE]

Exactly. Just like CBS had to pay for the SB fiasco.
 
[quote name='Kaijufan']Bush needs to stop signing everything that comes across his desk.[/quote]that would require reading:roll:
 
[quote name='Quillion']So wouldn't that make the news organizations who aired the remark responsible for the fines?



That was a private conversation that happened to get picked up by a microphone, then aired/discussed over and over.

I think a far more telling story is how rude Bush was to Blair in that video. Talking with his mouth full, interrupting constantly. Blair must have extraordinary patience to deal with that.[/quote]

He is Brittish. :lol:
 
[quote name='Quillion']I think a far more telling story is how rude Bush was to Blair in that video. Talking with his mouth full, interrupting constantly. Blair must have extraordinary patience to deal with that.[/QUOTE]
He deals with it bcause he actually cares abou tthe people who are dieing...
 
[quote name='Kaijufan']Bush needs to stop signing everything that comes across his desk.[/quote]
He still uses a pen? I could have sworn he switched to rubber stamps long ago... :lol:
 
It was played unedited several times on CNN, MSNBC, and Headline News. At least he didn't say he wanted Iran wiped off the map like they did about Israel.

About the cursing and talking with a full mouth, he's just keepin' it real dog. :roll:

Also, in regards to CNN and the other cable programs that aired the unedited s-bomb, I'm pretty sure FCC rules only apply to over-the-air broadcasts. I saw more nudity on PBS than the Super Bowl. But millions don't watch PBS when Masterpiece Theater is on either. Much ado about nothing either way you look at it.
 
[quote name='GuilewasNK']It was played unedited several times on CNN, MSNBC, and Headline News. At least he didn't say he wanted Iran wiped off the map like they did about Israel.

About the cursing and talking with a full mouth, he's just keepin' it real dog. :roll:

Also, in regards to CNN and the other cable programs that aired the unedited s-bomb, I'm pretty sure FCC rules only apply to over-the-air broadcasts. I saw more nudity on PBS than the Super Bowl. But millions don't watch PBS when Masterpiece Theater is on either. Much ado about nothing either way you look at it.[/QUOTE]

Not true. You should have seen the look on Craig Sager's face when Shaq dropped an F-bomb on TNT.
 
[quote name='CocheseUGA']Not true. You should have seen the look on Craig Sager's face when Shaq dropped an F-bomb on TNT.[/quote]

I could have sworn the FCC doesn't have the power to fine cable networks. Sager just know advertisers don't want any part of the colorful language.

http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/2005/08/30/fcc_indecency/index.html

The government does not regulate shows distributed over cable or satellite television for indecency.
Click to expand...
 
[quote name='GuilewasNK']I could have sworn the FCC doesn't have the power to fine cable networks. Sager just know advertisers don't want any part of the colorful language.

http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/2005/08/30/fcc_indecency/index.html[/QUOTE]

Heh. I figured when Stevens ("Billions and Billions of Tubes!") pushed for his law, it would have went through.

But Sager had a look on his face like, 'Oh fuck, there goes the Xmas bonus money.'
 
I heard Bush's S-bomb on CSpan and NPR, both on traditional radio. I don't know if any of the gutless networks played it, but I wouldn't be surprised if Fox ignored the expletive (kind of reminds me of Richard "Expletive-Deleted" Nixon)
 
Oh noes, the bad word was said!!!

Seriously, who the fuck cares that the president said one naughty word? There's enough fodder proving him to be a lying, incapable buffoon; you don't need to pick on everything the poor dumb bastard does. I fuckin' swear, you guys would have a thirty page thread about his goddamn hangnail if DailyKos mentioned it.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Oh noes, the bad word was said!!!

Seriously, who the fuck cares that the president said one naughty word? There's enough fodder proving him to be a lying, incapable buffoon; you don't need to pick on everything the poor dumb bastard does. I fuckin' swear, you guys would have a thirty page thread about his goddamn hangnail if DailyKos mentioned it.[/quote]

I'm not the one who signed a bill into law stating that expletives over the air was a 1/3 million dollar mistake, effectively 1200x worse then hiring an illegal immigrant in the eyes of the Feds.

Of course most of this board disagrees with the Bush policy, however we would at least like to see some consistency. Besides - if people can't understand the larger actions by which the executive branch is accumulating unconstitutionally large power, maybe they can be woken up by the small shit.
 
Do you think he signed this to keep people from airing him swearing? As it says, the fine is for the broadcaster, not the actual speaker of the word.
 
[quote name='Kayden']Do you think he signed this to keep people from airing him swearing? As it says, the fine is for the broadcaster, not the actual speaker of the word.[/quote]

If the airing of an expletive on the air is such a damaging act that Bush has confirmed it of deserving a $300,000+ fine, a reasonable person would expect Bush to refrain from swearing with a microphone in his face.

It's the equivelent signing a bill that endorses jailtime for prostitutes, and then going out to hire a pro.
 
He is such a fucking ape

smacking his lips and eating while talking at the same time while throwing around swear words, It's great insight into how he actually talks with people and conducts himself, although it's not shocking. It's alot more about his actual demeanor and the sheer stupidity of offering the advice "they should stop doing this shit".
 
In order to keep from looking bad by having it rebroadcast, they put a fine on it. Don't you fin it odd that theres only a punishment for "excrement" and not swearing in general?

If he gets caught saying fuck they'll probably make something simular for talking of copulation.

[quote name='camoor']If the airing of an expletive on the air is such a damaging act that Bush has confirmed it of deserving a $300,000+ fine, a reasonable person would expect Bush to refrain from swearing with a microphone in his face.

It's the equivelent signing a bill that endorses jailtime for prostitutes, and then going out to hire a pro.[/quote]
 
[quote name='Kayden']Do you think he signed this to keep people from airing him swearing? As it says, the fine is for the broadcaster, not the actual speaker of the word.[/quote]

I have always had a problem with that. Janet Jackson should have had to pay a "per titty" fine, not CBS.

[quote name='Metal Boss']He is such a fucking ape

smacking his lips and eating while talking at the same time while throwing around swear words, It's great insight into how he actually talks with people and conducts himself, although it's not shocking. It's alot more about his actual demeanor and the sheer stupidity of offering the advice "they should stop doing this shit".[/quote]

He said shit. The situation is shit. I wouldn't be surprised if Blair privately wished Hezbollah would "bugger off". They all just have to be wary of the mic. Yes, a higher standard must be held and all that but lets face it, like myke said it was one bad word. Whether people like Bush or not, that incident was barely newsworthy. It was amusing though.

Perhaps we can introduce him to fuck instead? :lol:
 
[quote name='GuilewasNK']I have always had a problem with that. Janet Jackson should have had to pay a "per titty" fine, not CBS.
[/quote]
Don't worry - through legales the corporations have insulated themselves, now the star journalist, producer, and/or sound editor will pay the bulk of a fine if an expletive is aired (or else they will get fired).

[quote name='GuilewasNK']He said shit. The situation is shit. I wouldn't be surprised if Blair privately wished Hezbollah would "bugger off". They all just have to be wary of the mic. Yes, a higher standard must be held and all that but lets face it, like myke said it was one bad word. Whether people like Bush or not, that incident was barely newsworthy. It was amusing though.

Perhaps we can introduce him to fuck instead? :lol:[/quote]

This is that whole "why are cops catching me speeding when they should be catching murderers" line of BS. Just because it isn't as big a deal as WMDs, it doesn't mean that we should ignore one more instance of the two-tiered system of rules (one for the ruling elite, the other for the little people)
 
[quote name='camoor']Don't worry - through legales the corporations have insulated themselves, now the star journalist, producer, and/or sound editor will pay the bulk of a fine if an expletive is aired (or else they will get fired).



This is that whole "why are cops catching me speeding when they should be catching murderers" line of BS. Just because it isn't as big a deal as WMDs, it doesn't mean that we should ignore one more instance of the two-tiered system of rules (one for the ruling elite, the other for the little people)[/QUOTE]

Perhaps he was showing everyone how it worked? :D
 
[quote name='camoor']This is that whole "why are cops catching me speeding when they should be catching murderers" line of BS. Just because it isn't as big a deal as WMDs, it doesn't mean that we should ignore one more instance of the two-tiered system of rules (one for the ruling elite, the other for the little people)[/quote]

?

I don't follow.
 
[quote name='camoor']Don't worry - through legales the corporations have insulated themselves, now the star journalist, producer, and/or sound editor will pay the bulk of a fine if an expletive is aired (or else they will get fired).

This is that whole "why are cops catching me speeding when they should be catching murderers" line of BS. Just because it isn't as big a deal as WMDs, it doesn't mean that we should ignore one more instance of the two-tiered system of rules (one for the ruling elite, the other for the little people)[/quote]

Talk about blowing this shit out of proportion. It is barely newsworthy, you're just looking for any justification to hate the man.

Hate him for the incompetence, the cronyism, the violations of the constitution, the profiteering, the ignorance, the inability to admit mistakes, the religious mandate, not for saying one dirty word.
 
[quote name='CocheseUGA']It really should be the CAG's "vs. Bush" forum.[/quote]

Hey, it's not CAG's fault that everything wrong with the world is because of the President.

I also like how camoor said that the rules of swearing only apply to the "little people." Yeah, the little people like Clear Channel, Viacom, Disney, News Corp... You'd think they'd want to take lots of money from these corporations.
 
[quote name='Ace-Of-War']Hey, it's not CAG's fault that everything wrong with the world is because of the President.[/QUOTE]

I pity you.
 
[quote name='CocheseUGA']It really should be the CAG's "vs. Bush" forum.[/QUOTE]

It seems that way sometimes around here, doesn't it? What really astounds me whenever I read posts on this board is how I, as someone who doesn't really like a lot of Bush policies, not to mention a lot of other things about him, end up coming off as his supporter as often as not due to the incessant bashing for literally everything wrong in this country and the world.
 
Ok, I can see putting this in the news. It's a nice light article, a little chuckle, then move on. I mean really, this is a non story, definately shouldn't be around longer than the first day. I mean he really shouldn't be sitting there eating and talking with his mouth full, but (considering he's supposed to be a world leader) I found that more amusing than this whole "shit thing".
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']I found that more amusing than this whole "shit thing".[/QUOTE]

You want a good chuckle, watch the House of Commons when Blair or any PM is there.
 
I've only seen that once or twice, but I used to love watching the canadian parliament. It was nothing like watching the senate or house in the u.s., it seemed like I was watching action politics. I watched that whenever I had the time. I'd love to see that here, Bush starts giving a speech and gets into a shouting match with democrats.
 
[quote name='Ace-Of-War']Hey, it's not CAG's fault that everything wrong with the world is because of the President.

I also like how camoor said that the rules of swearing only apply to the "little people." Yeah, the little people like Clear Channel, Viacom, Disney, News Corp... You'd think they'd want to take lots of money from these corporations.[/quote]

You think that Clear Channel, Viacom, Disney, News Corp... are going to end up paying that fine, and that it won't be passed on to the producer/sound engineer/reporter who slipped for a microsecond?

Are you still holding out hope that they'll find WMDS in Iraq too?
 
Using this as ammo, in way of claiming Bush is a bad president, is petty, and hypocritical, to say the least.

Why? If you're a "free-thinker", by any means, you know feel there's nothing wrong with cussing, and everything wrong with censorship. Now, that only leaves the option of thinking Bush is irresponsible for cussing on live television, when there are FCC standards and practices in way of doing so... even though he didn't voluntarily cuss on television, as it was picked up on accident.

Scrounging for complaints: rendered useless.

Air my talking head on CNN so's I can tell you to "get fucked."
 
[quote name='Brak']Using this as ammo, in way of claiming Bush is a bad president, is petty, and hypocritical, to say the least.
[/QUOTE]

I think that's pretty much my line of thinking as well. It's really petty to use this to pile on, so to speak. Want to hate on the President at every opportunity? Fine. Pick better arguements. I'm sure it would be easy.


BTW, for those interested, I did vote for Bush. I'm on the conservative side of libertarian. It was pretty much a given that I'd kill myself soon as see Gore or Kerry occupy the White House. If you want to ask me why, that's another thread.
 
[quote name='camoor']You think that Clear Channel, Viacom, Disney, News Corp... are going to end up paying that fine, and that it won't be passed on to the producer/sound engineer/reporter who slipped for a microsecond? [/quote]

I guess that's why Howard Stern's ass was kicked to the curb? Clear Channel kicked him off instead of "passing on" the fines. Why would they kill arguably the most recognized and popular man in radio when they could just make him pay for his offensive bs?
 
[quote name='Ace-Of-War']I guess that's why Howard Stern's ass was kicked to the curb? Clear Channel kicked him off instead of "passing on" the fines. Why would they kill arguably the most recognized and popular man in radio when they could just make him pay for his offensive bs?[/quote]

Howard Stern quit - he wasn't "kicked to the curb".


Further, Clear Channel — the industry’s largest radio chain with more than 1,200 stations — has reworked its talent contracts to include “indemnification language,” said Andy Levin, executive vice president for government affairs. Translation: If a Clear Channel host says anything that prompts an FCC fine, that host — not Clear Channel — is responsible for paying.
Click to expand...
http://www.cantonrep.com/index.php?ID=296926&Category=20
 
[quote name='CocheseUGA']Please don't use Clear Channel as an example. Everytime I see their name I want to vomit for the utter shit they trot out as formats.

And don't get me started on Beasley. So craptastic, they have to air Lex and Terry to lower themselves further.[/quote]

You should really address this to Ace-of-War, I was just factually refuting him about a point that he was 100% incorrect on.

Although I have no idea what "formats" have to do with any of this.
 
[quote name='camoor']You should really address this to Ace-of-War, I was just factually refuting him about a point that he was 100% incorrect on.

Although I have no idea what "formats" have to do with any of this.[/QUOTE]

Clear Channel make Hulk angry.
 
How is one who describes themselves as "the conservative side of libertarian" bothered by a highly successful corporation? Forgive me if I would like more of an explanation than "Hulk angry."

I'm deliberately threadcrapping because this topic is silly and demonstrative of people's Pavlovian reactions to Bush's actions. To criticize him for saying shit makes you look like a fool. Criticize him for vetoing a bill that 70-75% of Americans supported, criticize him for the phony logic in "preserving life" that he purports to background his feelings on the issue. But for saying "shit"?!?! Yinz would criticize him for breathing if you could.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']How is one who describes themselves as "the conservative side of libertarian" bothered by a highly successful corporation? Forgive me if I would like more of an explanation than "Hulk angry."
[/QUOTE]

It's not the business, it's the type of music and format they push. They continue to throw shit music on the air, and try to buy up every single station they can. While I support business, I don't support an oligopoly. Especially one that pushes pop punk feces.

And on a personal note, they've destroyed one of my favorite stations in Atlanta (AM). Fired almost everyone, and I wouldn't put it past them to fire the one reason I have left to listen.
 
[quote name='camoor']Howard Stern quit - he wasn't "kicked to the curb".[/quote]

Right, let's just call it forced retirement.

http://www.cantonrep.com/index.php?ID=296926&Category=20
Click to expand...

Do you have an example of them actually shifting the fine to the person rather than the corporation? The rules I know of at Clear Channel invoke firing the person instead. I read your article but I don't see any examples of the policy in action. I have seen many places fire people for a breach of decency though.
 
 
[quote name='camoor']Or we could look in the facts.



[/QUOTE]

He quit, but he really didn't have a choice. I think this is one of those gray area situations. If he stays, he has to change his show. He does that, he's gonna get fired eventually because of low ratings.
 
[quote name='CocheseUGA']He quit, but he really didn't have a choice. I think this is one of those gray area situations. If he stays, he has to change his show. He does that, he's gonna get fired eventually because of low ratings.[/quote]

There's no way he's going to be fired. They might lower his pay to a rate that he finds unacceptable or scale down the markets that he would operate in, but he would have still been too popular to fire outright - IE it would have been a bad business decision, and Howard has enough business saavy that he could have used the firing to his advantage in business negotiations and marketing for future ventures.
 
[quote name='camoor']There's no way he's going to be fired. They might lower his pay to a rate that he finds unacceptable or scale down the markets that he would operate in, but he would have still been too popular to fire outright - IE it would have been a bad business decision, and Howard has enough business saavy that he could have used the firing to his advantage in business negotiations and marketing for future ventures.[/QUOTE]

That's the point. That's why Sirius hired him, he's popular. He brought (some) listeners to Sirius. You make him water down his show to comply with FCC rules, he's not going to attract near as many listeners. Once it reaches a point where they see the profits disappear (big contract, little ad revenue), he's gone. He can only broadcast one way, much like those hackjobs Lex and Terry (no talent assclowns).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top