Jump to content

The new item all Libitards should have.


Recommended Posts

I'm having a great time listening to the local conservatives trying to justify this bull sh--.  Ever heard of the v-chip, retards?

268149[/snapback]

 

The V-Chip was crippled by media lobbyists and advertisers tossing cash to congressmen. The original intent was to provide a hard-wired method of blocking channels of one's choice. MTV, VH1, CBS, Fox, the Soap Channel, you name it. After the $$$ was passed around, it became a global filtering device:

 

"As of 1999, all new television sets (over 13 inches / 33 cm) sold in the United States have to contain a V-chip. The "V" stands for "violence," and the goal of the chip is to allow parents to choose the level of violent TV programming that will be allowed into the home.

 

The idea behind a V-chip is simple. TV shows have a signal embedded in them that gives the show a rating, and the chip can detect these ratings. The ratings that the FCC has settled on look like this:

 

* TV-Y - All children can watch; zero violence or sexual content

* TV-Y7 - For children 7 and over

* TV-G - For general audiences; no sex, violence or inappropriate language

* TV-PG - Parental guidance suggested

* TV-14 - Suitable only for people over 14; some sex or violence

* TV-MA - Suitable only for mature audiences; may contain graphic violence or sexual situations

 

A parent can program the TV with a rating, and the TV will block all shows above that rating. So if a parent programs in the TV-Y7 rating, the TV will allow shows rated at TV-Y and TV-Y7 but will block all other shows."

 

So if a parent wishes to watch a TV-14 show when the kiddies are asleep, they will have to change the global V-Chip settings, and then go back and re-institute them when the 'lil darlings are left to their own devices and able to click the remote.

 

Sufficiently kludgy that it is a largely unused thing... :o

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The V-Chip was crippled by media lobbyists and advertisers tossing cash to congressmen. The original intent was to provide a hard-wired method of blocking channels of one's choice. MTV, VH1, CBS, Fox, the Soap Channel, you name it. After the $$$ was passed around, it became a global filtering device:

 

"As of 1999, all new television sets (over 13 inches / 33 cm) sold in the United States have to contain a V-chip. The "V" stands for "violence," and the goal of the chip is to allow parents to choose the level of violent TV programming that will be allowed into the home.

 

The idea behind a V-chip is simple. TV shows have a signal embedded in them that gives the show a rating, and the chip can detect these ratings. The ratings that the FCC has settled on look like this:

 

    * TV-Y - All children can watch; zero violence or sexual content

    * TV-Y7 - For children 7 and over

    * TV-G - For general audiences; no sex, violence or inappropriate language

    * TV-PG - Parental guidance suggested

    * TV-14 - Suitable only for people over 14; some sex or violence

    * TV-MA - Suitable only for mature audiences; may contain graphic violence or sexual situations

 

A parent can program the TV with a rating, and the TV will block all shows above that rating. So if a parent programs in the TV-Y7 rating, the TV will allow shows rated at TV-Y and TV-Y7 but will block all other shows."

 

So if a parent wishes to watch a TV-14 show when the kiddies are asleep, they will have to change the global V-Chip settings, and then go back and re-institute them when the 'lil darlings are left to their own devices and able to click the remote.

 

Sufficiently kludgy that it is a largely unused thing... :devil:

269762[/snapback]

Thanks for taking that literally. Both my Tivo and Cable Box are easily set to filter out content that I don't want. I don't need the government - but of course I live in a stable 2 parent household and actually pay attention to my family. Crazy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I fundementally do not agree with the thing... Yet, it seems to have value only on the point that advertisers would get a count on who blocks the channel.

 

Anything that can empower somebody and sends a message to a controlling third party can't be all that bad?

 

Also, isn't it unlike the "ignore filter" here that people so valiantly taut?

 

Again, this dosen't mean I like the thing. From what I read, it does seem to do more than filter out the channel? For this reason it can't be taken lightly?

 

Any opinions? :devil:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...