Maggie's Farm

I don't think that Google qualifies as a utility, but it should fall under the guidelines set by the FCC. But that ass-clown we have right now, Ajit Pai, clearly is not up to the job.

Google makes most of its money distributing pornography (through ad-sense) and poisoning the minds of our children. That needs to stop. In addition, all pornography needs to be removed from the web. It's not a free speech issue, it's a public morality issue.

Of course, there are those who argue that restricting pornography is impossible for technical reasons, like this guy:

"Obviously, the one thing that the FCC has no power to regulate is taste, and that, after all, is the real menace to both the intellectual and moral well being of our society. Violence and sexual allusion and disgusting bathroom humor are the mainstays and keystones of much of what is available to us from broadcast to unregulated cable to the Internet. Some of the "dirtiest" (if that is still a word that has meaning) of the shows on broadcast are of the animated variety where it seems anything goes, and not very subtly.

Dashing to hold a pillow over the screen as my wife and I did or grabbing for the remote to switch the channel are useless gestures. There just isn't anything left to watch that isn't offensive by past standards except old-time movies and pre-1970s reruns. Warnings about the content of R-rated films serve mainly to get the broadcaster or channels off the hook.

Actually, it has long been a psychological truism that these notices generally just make the flicks more attractive to youngsters, and if they aren't getting it at home, they will somewhere else.

If that comes across as a poor argument for justifying a freedom of expression, so be it, and, in fact, I agree with that. But this is not the time when Elvis (the Pelvis) Presley was shown on national television only from the waist up to hide his gyrations. Culture, for better or for worse, has moved on. Movies decades ago abandoned the oppressive Hays Office standards — many of them ridiculous, like showing married couples sleeping in twin beds — for graded codes. Who were they kidding? Certainly not the kids.

It really makes little sense, no matter how desirable, to single out one segment of an industry for such censorship, especially when doing so seems not only impractical but also nearly unenforceable. An enormous amount of complaints pending at the FCC won't get resolved.

The FCC derives its governance over broadcast radio and television from the theory that the airways are public, that one must have a license to operate in them and, therefore, they are fully subject to regulation. Cable systems are under no such obligations since they do not use airways.

http://www.njherald.com/story/16543087/fcc-cant-impose-morality-on-tv-shows#//

This guy is an apologist for evil and nihilism. According to him, there's nothing wrong with showing a little girl a picture of a woman with a cock in her mouth. It's just one of those things.

There needs to be a sweeping overhaul of the entire media system. I mean shutting down all porn and gambling sites, removing most sex and violence from TV, and a return to the Hays Code.

www.artsreformation.com/a001/hays-code.html

As the twig is bent, so shall the tree grow.