Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Fox v. Conservative Christian-backed FCC...

Posted by Evan Derkacz at 8:11 AM on December 21, 2006.


Jesus, who do you root for?
superbowljanetjacksoncopy

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get PEEK in your
mailbox!

 

On the eve of the second anniversary of Janet Jackson's breast-baring incident, we're left with a terrible (as in: terribly enjoyable) conundrum: Fox News or conservative Christians?

In the wake of that incident, and Bono's F-bomb, Conservative groups flooded the FCC with letters urging them to jack up fines on broadcasters.

It worked. FCC fines increased ten-fold to a max of $325K PER incident. The new rules neglected to specify whether "assclown prudes" would receive one or two fines.

Groups like Brent Bozell's PTC rejoiced in Bush's signing of Congress's authorization, gloating:

But look who's fighting it: Fox. Calling it "radical," Fox spokespersons are arguing that, you guessed it, "it violates broadcasters' right to free speech."

No surprise, of course. It's clear that much of Fox's conservatism -- its social conservatism in particular -- is fueled by its finances.

Others, as this self-professed "Conservative Christian" points out, have been fighting that fight for awhile. In particular, CBS, the network that hosted the Jackson breast.

I wonder if that Conservative Christian will point to Fox's efforts with the same disdain?

Digg!

Tagged as: fox, fcc, conservative christians, media

Evan Derkacz is an AlterNet editor. He writes and edits PEEK, the blog of blogs.


Is Palin a Step Backwards for Women in Power?
Sarah Palin is a milestone, for we achieve true gender equality when an incompetent woman goes as far as an incompetent man.
Post by Suzanne Braun Levine. September 5, 2008.
Bush's White House Spying on Iraqi Prime Minister
White House Press Secretary Dana Perino wants to make it clear, the White House IS NOT denying spying on Maliki.
Post by Amanda. September 5, 2008.
Fox News: 'McCain's TV Commercials Contain ... Out-Right Lies'
Wait, we're seriously talking about Fox News? The Fox News?
Post by Steve Benen. September 5, 2008.

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Personally, I am MAXIMALLY tired...
Posted by: Ian MacLeod on Dec 21, 2006 3:19 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... of the so-called "Christian" right trying to tell everyone what we can watch, what we can read (as in the EPA Library), who we can marry, what scientists can do and say, and on and on and on. It's getting to be a theocracy no matter HOW we vote!

It strikes me that they are the same kind of religious cowards a lot of radical Muslims are: remove ALL temptation of all kinds from any possible contact with the faithful, and they will never HAVE to be tested. Never mind that there are controls with, for instance, television, that allows parents to choose what their kids watch, as well as an off-switch. Besides, those are OUR airwaves, WE pay for the cable package we want, and it's in our own homes, not out in the public square. Worse, they don't seem to see bloody violence as obscene - in fact, if sex is involved, they often all but DEMAND that violence be the punishment! Intestines strung all over, fine and dandy; a bare breast, even with a baby attached to it, OBSCENE! That is a seriously TWISTED mindset.

The C.R. is loud, obnoxious, and they stick with what they're doing, but damn it, they are only a relative handful. Why should we have to be subjected to their medieval ideas of propriety? For that matter, they've made it VERY clear that it's the IMAGE of propriety they care about, not the real thing. As far as I can tell, THEY can do whatever they damned well please, and they DO.

Many moons ago, there was a nude beach I liked to frequent, not being a fan of the "racing stripes" left by bathing suits; I also thought wearing clothes into the water was as stupid as wearing clothes to bed, to take a shower, or to make love. Well, a bunch of "good Christians" took the 1 1/2 mile hike through the woods and steep rocky trails, showed up, took pictures and verbally abused the people there (they actually screamed at some kids, some just toddlers, and made them cry) until they ended up swimming (nude) themselves, whereupon they tried to have us all arrested for assault. No witnesses, so nothing happened, but why do people DO that? I just don't get it. In another place, a cop blew up a beautiful old hot spring bathing pool that had been there for over sixty years, carefully built, and maintained by people who just took it upon themselves to maintain it. He did it TWICE. Why? Because his 18 year old daughter liked to frequent that "den of iniquity", so he took it away from everyone. They showed up another time at an art class and manhandled and humiliated the model! (I noticed that, in the gross anatomy class, they didn't mind the female cadaver).

We really need to set aside a "coventry" type place for people who just can't face or stand the real world, I think. And we need to make religiously-motivated attacks like this real crimes. In a democracy, which this USED to be, the majority is supposed to have the last word, not the loudest bunch of fanatics. Or the richest.

What I find most interesting of all is that these "good Christians" are almost always the ones to use violence. THEY are the ones who judge others, and their ill-raised children are often the cruelest.

And they call US "un-American."

Ian MacLeod

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Fox vs. Conservative Christian backed FCC?
Posted by: rileycase on Dec 21, 2006 3:36 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I don't know of very many Christians, conservative or liberal, that want to be identified either with the FCC or with much that on the TV networks. The few standards imposed by the FCC do very little to restraint the continued barrage of violence, irresponsible sex, and general decadence that is daily fare on TV. It is that TV view of America that is exported around the world and which forms the basis for the negative view that others have of us (especially in Islamic countries). Fox is no different from any of the other channels. It is all about money.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]