Should we censor TV at all ?

VamPyroX said:
Thanks!

Yeah, I'm always hearing rumors all the time relating to a lot of things. For instance, my friend came to me with a printed out email of his that said that the government would shut down all captioning in 2001. I told him it was bullshit, but he kept rambling on about how it was true and that everyone should be upset about it. I never saw any article about it. No faculty/staff member at school could confirm it... including one guy who has close relations with media sources. By 2002, nothing happened. I saw my friend again and said, "Hey, I thought the captioning disappeared?" He responded, "I don't know what you're talking about." Heh! Denial! Now, it's 2004. Nothing's happened yet. Now, they're coming up with this kind of rumor. Usually, it's one person who decided to get carried away and exaggerate information like this.
Click to expand...

Well, I learned about this from NAD.org, which is a good source isn't it? Even there were larticles' links to it and I'm sure NAD.org wouldn't go that LOW to mess with our minds.
 
CyberRed said:
Oh.. yikes ! Well, I am glad that I don't vote ANY president *Whew* It's best to be a fugitive rather than to be a USA citizen - IMO
Click to expand...

Well, I rather to be a USA Citizen than being a fugitive ....otherwise you will be posted in American Most Wanted...They will hunt ya down for the rest of your life until you are caught....being a USA Citizen u can walk around not being restricted to laws that don't give us the freedom to be able to do the things that we're able to compared to being under tryancy, military rule, etc....

Just remember not all presidents we vote for will keep their promises ....either will any of US!...

I will continue to vote for any president that I believe he/she will be the best do the job in leading this wonderful and vast country of ours!!... :D
 
^Angel^ said:
Well, I rather to be a USA Citizen than being a fugitive ....otherwise you will be posted in American Most Wanted...They will hunt ya down for the rest of your life until you are caught....being a USA Citizen u can walk around not being restricted to laws that don't give us the freedom to be able to do the things that we're able to compared to being under tryancy, military rule, etc....

Just remember not all presidents we vote for will keep their promises ....either will any of US!...

I will continue to vote for any president that I believe he/she will be the best do the job in leading this wonderful and vast country of ours!!... :D
Click to expand...

Otherwise I will be posted in American Most Wanted ? :laugh2: I know that. You are funny to tell me that, because I know the answer before you tell me that. *Chuckles* Well... what I am tryin' to say is that I prefer to be a fugitive rather than bein' slave to almost no "freedom". Just forget it. I know what you are talkin' about "huntin' down". I don't have to vote anyways...just to keep myself in peace rather than to stir up an emotional if, I vote the president for nuthin' after I discover what he/she did do wrong. All I could do is to pray for the president, hopin' that he/she will follow the right way. *Winks*
 
I agree, ^Angel^! And I wanted to say that I think it is better to vote than let someone else to vote for you! That's the most mature thing an US citizen can do!
 
AquaMaiden said:
Excuse us! It's Bush! He has the POWER to veto or allow the bills that pass thru the house! Don't you know your goverment shit, you should've learn about them in school! Bush is the one who RUNS the country so therefore he knows what goes on and has the authorize to say yes or no so I personally hold him responible for shattering our future!
Click to expand...

wow, that's an insult that I doesn't appericate with your unprofessional post.
You are show an uneducation who use poor language to offense the people.

By the way, President doesn't have the power. What else who have power enough to remove Nixon from being the president?
 
Many of us tend to look at the U.S. President
and blame on U.S. President, BUT we should
look at WHO are on these various commissions,
committees/organizations
reporting directly to U.S. President.

I realize that U.S. President is NOT the only one
with the power only, include many people from
various commissions/groups, etc.
I mean it is almost impossible
for only one person to have all the power.
I recalled reading somewhere that
politicis power actually came from people
NOT only one person.

So many people look directly at Bush or Kerry or Clark,
but they also ought to look at who else are
closely associated with them ?
 
Someone should watch the movie called "Dave". It's another good example about president behind by someone.
 
http://www.robson.org/gary/writing/newswaves9802.html


But don't they have to caption these movies? No. The new captioning laws (see my December column) don't require previously-aired movies to be captioned until 2008, and only 75% of them then! Complaints from viewers are the only way to get captions on those movies.

Here's wishing you lots of readable, high-quality captions.

If you have captioning news or questions, please let me know! If you're on the Internet, the best way to reach me is by email: gary@robson.org. If not, write to me or fax me care of Newswaves....





http://www.robson.org/gary/captioning/rumor-killer.html



The rumor that Federal funding of closed captioning will cease in September, 2001 is just that: a rumor. A false one, in fact. The level of captioning is increasing, not decreasing, thanks to the FCC's implementation of the captioning provisions of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. Right now, broadcasters are required to caption roughly 25% of their programming, a number increasing to 50% on January 1, 2002.

The rumor has appeared in many forms, from email "petitions" urging the government not to stop funding captioning, to alerts that captioning is going away entirely
Want to help us kill this rumor? Please feel free to include a link to this page on your Web site. You can use the banner below by cutting and pasting this html into your page:
 
*Clapping*

Thanks Cheri....That's Clear everything up!..Well Done! ;)
 
sablescort said:
Yeah I recall that there was a law requiring CC's on 100% of prime-time programming by 2K5 yet one problem lies:

The producers moan and bitch about how it costs to CC a show yet pay their prima-donna stars 100K to 1.5 million a show. If the producers can afford that why not just be able to pay $1,000 to $10,000 to CC a show...that's fuckin' peanuts compared to paying the actors and crew. The producers would rather stick the cost of the CC's to the Government.
Click to expand...

LOL... I thought about that, too. Boggles the mind, certain moralities do, huh? Also, I am boggled by Bush being blamed... even though he might seem to take all the credit for this program cut. Congress comes to mind for me, more than it is Bush.

I got a reply from those responsible for the CC funding project for gov after making my own inquries about the rumor:

"Dear Ms. xxxx:

Thank you for your comments to Ernest Hairston concerning captioning activities supported by the Department of Education. Because I am the Project Officer for captioned television and video description, I will respond.

As you may know, funds from an award made under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) may only be used for video description and captioning of educational, news, and informational television, videos, or materials.

The 1997 Amendments to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) specified that after September 30, 2001, only educational, informational, and news programming could be captioned with IDEA funds.

Congress has already addressed the need to expand media access for individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing in non-classroom settings. The Television Decoder Circuitry Act of 1990 requires all new television sets to contain a decoder chip that is capable of displaying closed captioned television transmissions. The Telecommunications Act of 1996 (along with a 1997 FCC rulemaking) also contains extensive requirements for the provision of closed captioning, mandating that most television programming be closed captioned by 2006, and requiring captioning of gradually increasing percentages of programming before that date. Given this legislation, most programs no longer captioned with IDEA funds will continue to be accessible through the efforts of the private sector which would include program providers and the broadcast or cable networks.

I hope this information proves to be helpful. Thank you for your continued support of programs serving individuals with disabilities"

Jo Ann (McCann)
 
Last edited:
B.U.L.L.S.H.I.T.

Anyway, I heard from the news on TV saying that there were too much cussing on TV nowathesedays and said they wanted to censor the cussing, but others asked "uh what about that "freedom of speech" thingy?"...so, they never said anything about closed captioning...just wanted to cenor the cussing, or rather, just re-schedule the TV shows that are only for mature audiences can be shown only when kids go to bed...perhas about 10pm or later. They would have to re-schedule TV shows such as South Park (which is already at 10pm but might be later) the simpsons, friends, etc any other shows that shows crude humor and sexual suggestions, would have to be shown later at nights when kids go to bed but never said anything about taking the CC out...censoring the cussing seems fine, but taking out the CC is a BIG no no.
 
Cheri said:
http://www.robson.org/gary/writing/newswaves9802.html


But don't they have to caption these movies? No. The new captioning laws (see my December column) don't require previously-aired movies to be captioned until 2008, and only 75% of them then! Complaints from viewers are the only way to get captions on those movies.

Here's wishing you lots of readable, high-quality captions.

If you have captioning news or questions, please let me know! If you're on the Internet, the best way to reach me is by email: gary@robson.org. If not, write to me or fax me care of Newswaves....





http://www.robson.org/gary/captioning/rumor-killer.html



The rumor that Federal funding of closed captioning will cease in September, 2001 is just that: a rumor. A false one, in fact. The level of captioning is increasing, not decreasing, thanks to the FCC's implementation of the captioning provisions of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. Right now, broadcasters are required to caption roughly 25% of their programming, a number increasing to 50% on January 1, 2002.

The rumor has appeared in many forms, from email "petitions" urging the government not to stop funding captioning, to alerts that captioning is going away entirely
Want to help us kill this rumor? Please feel free to include a link to this page on your Web site. You can use the banner below by cutting and pasting this html into your page:
Click to expand...
Whoa! I'm impressed!

See? It's probably just another bullshit rumor! Heh!
 
Then I wonder who keeps getting those on the internet, but not in newspaper, news, or even the radio about cutting CC...
 
Deaf258 said:
What if it is not bullshit?
Click to expand...
Bullshit or not... I prefer to wait until I see a real article online, newspapers, or magazines. They wouldn't just publish some bullshit online articles if it wasn't real.
 
You know, to be honest with you guys...

I don't think it'll happen. There would be too much resistance to the idea and quite frankly, too many disgruntled people to deal with. It is much easier to keep the captioning.

Bush has other things to worry about...so please don't concern yourselves over something that's very unlikely to happen...after all, what would it do to the ratings? The deaf population these days is an incredibly high number, and not too many networks want to chance losing a percentage of their viewers because we can't understand them without the captions...

Malfoyish
 
Malfoyish said:
You know, to be honest with you guys...

I don't think it'll happen. There would be too much resistance to the idea and quite frankly, too many disgruntled people to deal with. It is much easier to keep the captioning.

Bush has other things to worry about...so please don't concern yourselves over something that's very unlikely to happen...after all, what would it do to the ratings? The deaf population these days is an incredibly high number, and not too many networks want to chance losing a percentage of their viewers because we can't understand them without the captions...

Malfoyish
Click to expand...
that's right dude! without captions, the popularity of such TV shows would decrease... :thumbd:

So I NEVER hear any such thing related to that topic on the news or in the newspaper...but on the internet? a little advice for you people, DO NOT let the internet fool you. Listen often from the news, newspaper, or even the radio (for some people who aren't that deaf anyway)

I dont always believe the internet so whenever I hear something unusual and it comes from the internet, it's unlikely that it will come true, you know?

...even my family doesn't think they'll take the captions out because it was already stated as a law...a law for the ADA (Americans with disablities act) saying that most TV programs should be capitoned to show respect for the audience...
 
Steel said:
that's right dude! without captions, the popularity of such TV shows would decrease... :thumbd:

So I NEVER hear any such thing related to that topic on the news or in the newspaper...but on the internet? a little advice for you people, DO NOT let the internet fool you. Listen often from the news, newspaper, or even the radio (for some people who aren't that deaf anyway)

I dont always believe the internet so whenever I hear something unusual and it comes from the internet, it's unlikely that it will come true, you know?

...even my family doesn't think they'll take the captions out because it was already stated as a law...a law for the ADA (Americans with disablities act) saying that most TV programs should be capitoned to show respect for the audience...
Click to expand...

I already posted that with an actual email from the real source. Did not anyone read it? LOL...

Thank you for your comments to Ernest Hairston concerning captioning activities supported by the Department of Education. Because I am the Project Officer for captioned television and video description, I will respond.
Click to expand...

Congress has already addressed the need to expand media access for individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing in non-classroom settings. The Television Decoder Circuitry Act of 1990 requires all new television sets to contain a decoder chip that is capable of displaying closed captioned television transmissions. The Telecommunications Act of 1996 (along with a 1997 FCC rulemaking) also contains extensive requirements for the provision of closed captioning, mandating that most television programming be closed captioned by 2006, and requiring captioning of gradually increasing percentages of programming before that date. Given this legislation, most programs no longer captioned with IDEA funds will continue to be accessible through the efforts of the private sector which would include program providers and the broadcast or cable networks.
Click to expand...
 
Back
Top