Fcc Fines To Cost More Than Nuclear Violations
DOOManiac
Worst. Critic. Ever. Join Date: 2002-04-17 Member: 462Members, NS1 Playtester
Worst. Critic. Ever. Join Date: 2002-04-17 Member: 462Members, NS1 Playtester
in Off-Topic
Found this on /. as well:
Here's a snipplet:
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->A review of fines levied by other federal agencies suggests that the government may be taking swear words a bit too seriously. If the bill passes the Senate, Bono saying "flipping brilliant" on the air would carry the exact same penalty as illegally testing pesticides on human subjects. And for the price of Janet Jackson's "wardrobe malfunction" during the Super Bowl, you could cause the wrongful death of an elderly patient in a nursing home and still have enough money left to create dangerous mishaps at two nuclear reactors. (Actually, you might be able to afford four "nuke malfunctions": The biggest fine levied by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission last year was only $60,000.)
If Bush has his way, Howard Stern may soon have a tough choice to make: Tell a sex joke on the air, or dump toxic waste in New York's drinking water while willfully placing an employee at risk of injury or death?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
(<a href='http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/_/id/7047694/bobdylan?pageid=rs.NewsArchive&pageregion=mainRegion&rnd=1109433788842&has-player=unknown' target='_blank'>Entire article</a>)
Kind of sad actually.
Here's a snipplet:
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->A review of fines levied by other federal agencies suggests that the government may be taking swear words a bit too seriously. If the bill passes the Senate, Bono saying "flipping brilliant" on the air would carry the exact same penalty as illegally testing pesticides on human subjects. And for the price of Janet Jackson's "wardrobe malfunction" during the Super Bowl, you could cause the wrongful death of an elderly patient in a nursing home and still have enough money left to create dangerous mishaps at two nuclear reactors. (Actually, you might be able to afford four "nuke malfunctions": The biggest fine levied by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission last year was only $60,000.)
If Bush has his way, Howard Stern may soon have a tough choice to make: Tell a sex joke on the air, or dump toxic waste in New York's drinking water while willfully placing an employee at risk of injury or death?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
(<a href='http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/_/id/7047694/bobdylan?pageid=rs.NewsArchive&pageregion=mainRegion&rnd=1109433788842&has-player=unknown' target='_blank'>Entire article</a>)
Kind of sad actually.
Comments
So let's go have a punch up instead.
and nudity.. so what its not like we wont see it eventually.. its all over the internet.. hell as infants we suck on our mothers ****..
and nudity.. so what its not like we wont see it eventually.. its all over the internet.. hell as infants we suck on our mothers ****.. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Don't you see?! If young children see naked people they'll be asking "What's that?" and "What's it for?" and before you know it, we'll have 5 year old orgies in the middle of the streets! 6 Year olds being pregnant! STDs spreading at an amazing rate, and killing people before they're even of working age!
WORLD WIDE PANIC!
And it's all Janet Jackson's fault.
I don't think that the human body isn't inherently <b>ALWAYS</b> sexual. Yes, it is some of the time, but not always. I believe that every single part of the body is beautiful and I certainly don't see a problem with having it exposed.
This bill isn't gonna pass. Americans won't let it, it's a violation of free expression.
well i have to disagree with u, feet are kinda ugly
So if I went and did some public nudity in the US while on live TV I could get fined more than if I caused an accident in a nuclear power station?
No offense but Americas messed up....
How on earth is nudity going to kill people? Unless of course it distracts you while driving or something. But still O.o
maim
murtilate
as much as you want.
Just don't let a titty slip or dare to swear cuz then your in trouble mate.
God I love cultural hangups.
Us Americans with nudity, the british (If I remember correctly) with violence, etc <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
you kill some one with radiation, you get killed with radiation.
you swear on TV, the millions of poeple you said that infront of swear back.
You flash something on the TV, the world flashes you back.
<span style='font-size:30pt;line-height:100%'><b>Best. Idea. Evar.</span></b>
<span style='font-size:30pt;line-height:100%'><b>Best. Idea. Evar.</span></b> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Quoted for truth.
On a totally related note: I should sue the Federal Communications Commission for stealing my name.
<span style='font-size:30pt;line-height:100%'><b>Best. Idea. Evar.</span></b> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Have you seen most of the world?
Does it have chicks?
Does it have chicks? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Only if you drink the water the government has approved for you.
<span style='font-size:30pt;line-height:100%'><b>Best. Idea. Evar.</span></b> <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Have you seen most of the world? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
that was actualy my chain of thought <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
I don't think that the human body isn't inherently <b>ALWAYS</b> sexual. Yes, it is some of the time, but not always. I believe that every single part of the body is beautiful and I certainly don't see a problem with having it exposed.
This bill isn't gonna pass. Americans won't let it, it's a violation of free expression. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
You're forgetting a major factor here; stupidity.
If George dubya calls it the "Freedom bill" or the "America bill" it'll be all over for swearing anywhere ever.
If George dubya calls it the "Freedom bill" or the "America bill" it'll be all over for swearing anywhere ever. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
*chirp* *chirp* *chirp*
Last time I checked, the verdict on the 'right way' to live was still out. Guess I should move with the times...
If television stations were more willing to provide "wholesome" entertainment that would appease the audiences who don't like nudity and/or bad language, then I doubt the argument against such things would be less vehement. However, there is very little on television that is worthwhile.
Which is strange, because the recent election shows that a majority of the US is more moral-focused than what is being presented on the television.
But, to answer your question, yes, the "right way" to live has been discovered for some time now.
<!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Heh. After the things I said in that last homosexuality thread I figure I'm posting on borrowed time anyways.
<span style='font-size:30pt;line-height:100%'><b>Best. Idea. Evar.</span></b> <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Have you seen most of the world? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Something tells me if he flashes someone, he will.
Or maybe I'll just photoshop a giant collage from uglypeople.com and email it to him.
I have talked to a few Republican voters, and not many of this, admittedly not representative, batch of the rough 50% of the rough 50% of the American public that voted were really that taken in by the morallic stances. The more frequent reasons for the decision were positions on certain civil liberty questions such as gun ownership, sympathy for the candidate, and 'lesser of two evils' considerations. All in all, not exactly a sign for the advent for a unifiedly value-conservative America.
Not that this makes a difference as long as the US consider themselves the home of the free - freedom is, as was once so aptly pointed out, always only measurable in the freedom of the dissenting thinker.