<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Indecency Endures Transcontinentally</title>
	<atom:link href="http://boxoffice.thepodcastnetwork.com/2007/06/06/indecency-endures-transcontinentally/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://boxoffice.thepodcastnetwork.com/2007/06/06/indecency-endures-transcontinentally/</link>
	<description>Covering weekly box office grosses in the US and TV ratings.</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2009 05:12:12 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Daniel</title>
		<link>http://boxoffice.thepodcastnetwork.com/2007/06/06/indecency-endures-transcontinentally/#comment-84744</link>
		<dc:creator>Daniel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Jun 2007 21:05:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://boxoffice.thepodcastnetwork.com/2007/06/06/indecency-endures-transcontinentally/#comment-84744</guid>
		<description>The things the FCC defines as indecent are absurd on their face. Janet Jackson's nipple? Certain words? Both these things would not cause trouble on European television, and yet European civilization is still standing. Meanwhile the things that really might cause trauma to young people, such as mangled body imagery on CSI or people screaming at each other on roundtable news shows, are not even questioned. 

It's complicated. The FCC can only pursue a case if a viewer complains about it, but how they decide what complaints are valid is, well, let's just say mysterious. They've yet to address my complaints about Sanjaya on American Idol, for example.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The things the FCC defines as indecent are absurd on their face. Janet Jackson&#8217;s nipple? Certain words? Both these things would not cause trouble on European television, and yet European civilization is still standing. Meanwhile the things that really might cause trauma to young people, such as mangled body imagery on CSI or people screaming at each other on roundtable news shows, are not even questioned. </p>
<p>It&#8217;s complicated. The FCC can only pursue a case if a viewer complains about it, but how they decide what complaints are valid is, well, let&#8217;s just say mysterious. They&#8217;ve yet to address my complaints about Sanjaya on American Idol, for example.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: TV Watch</title>
		<link>http://boxoffice.thepodcastnetwork.com/2007/06/06/indecency-endures-transcontinentally/#comment-84733</link>
		<dc:creator>TV Watch</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Jun 2007 19:32:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://boxoffice.thepodcastnetwork.com/2007/06/06/indecency-endures-transcontinentally/#comment-84733</guid>
		<description>You raise some good points in your post.  Here are some facts that you might find interesting. An overwhelming majority of Americans (91%) object to government deciding what they are able to watch on television. When activists talk about protecting children instead of parentsâ€”hereâ€™s what theyâ€™re talking about: sixty-eight percent of the countryâ€™s 110 million television-viewing households do not include children under age 18 and households with children have different challenges to face due to the varying ages of kids within each family. Currently, there are 11 million households with children age 6-11, 15 million households with children age 0-5 and 9 million households with children 12-17. 

TV has come a long way from the days of three channels and rabbit ears antennas.  Todayâ€™s TV audiences are putting to use broadband, DVRs, TV video on demand, iPods and cell phones to greatly expand their choices about what, when, where and how to watch TV.  New technology means consumers have more selection than ever and more control than ever over what they see on TV.  We all have more choices and parents have more tools to ensure their kids only see whatâ€™s right for them. Letâ€™s let parents decideâ€”not government, for all of us.  

There is more information to be found at www.TelevisionWatch.org</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You raise some good points in your post.  Here are some facts that you might find interesting. An overwhelming majority of Americans (91%) object to government deciding what they are able to watch on television. When activists talk about protecting children instead of parentsâ€”hereâ€™s what theyâ€™re talking about: sixty-eight percent of the countryâ€™s 110 million television-viewing households do not include children under age 18 and households with children have different challenges to face due to the varying ages of kids within each family. Currently, there are 11 million households with children age 6-11, 15 million households with children age 0-5 and 9 million households with children 12-17. </p>
<p>TV has come a long way from the days of three channels and rabbit ears antennas.  Todayâ€™s TV audiences are putting to use broadband, DVRs, TV video on demand, iPods and cell phones to greatly expand their choices about what, when, where and how to watch TV.  New technology means consumers have more selection than ever and more control than ever over what they see on TV.  We all have more choices and parents have more tools to ensure their kids only see whatâ€™s right for them. Letâ€™s let parents decideâ€”not government, for all of us.  </p>
<p>There is more information to be found at <a href="http://www.TelevisionWatch.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.TelevisionWatch.org</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
