saving private ryan

[mattyboy]

i work for a young station and they mad the decision to not run saving private ryan on veteran's day. i have been in tv for close to ten years, and i have never seen the phones light up like this. it is amazing the amount of calls that we have received. the viewers...especially veterans are mad. Not a little mad, but really really mad. anyone else feeling the heat?

[RichVid]

Why aren't they running it? Who would be offended? I think the Germans are pretty much over it...

[Todd Rogenthien]

Yeah, we've been getting that in Austin as well. It hasn't been limited to phone calls to our station, but local talk radio went four straight hours about it. The 40+ "F"-bombs and the FCC's reaction to any viewer complaints are a big reason for not running it. Nobody wants to be sued.

[Shootblue]

If they dont like it, turn the channel or turn it off. Reality tv or whatever runs in its place isnt much better than a black picture tube.

[ewink]

Here's my issue with this.

A lot of the same people (not necessarly you folks here, but the talk radio pundits) that are yelling and screaming about it not being aired are the same one whos yelled and screamed about Janet's 10 frame boob flash.

Now, I'm not calling them all hypocrits <yesiam>, but why is swearing and violence okay, but a boobie and Stern talking about ejaculation a sin against nature?

It it because as a society we've accepted violence but reject sexuality? (Even though I am sure many would agree that there was nothing sexual about Janet's nappy boob.)

I listen to Lars Larson regularly. I think he's on the harmless end of the right wing kook shows, but he was saying what a travisty it is that these stations are 'censoring' SPR when in fact the FCC is censoring them using indirect prior restraint.

You can air it if you want but if you do and we get a complaint we're going to fine the f-bomb out of you.

It will be hard to find someone on this board who hates the FCC more than I. I believe we should have them tarred and feathered for allowing stations to ignore one of the base phrases in their license - in the public intrest.

In summary: The stations aren't at fault here, the FCC is, regardless of if they want to admit that or not.

[Grip]

And if they liked the movie so much, they should of bought the DVD and watched it in 5.1 like I did tonight

[<Mr. Happiness>]

Is it just me, or does this smell of censorship of anything that may be considered as anti-war or showing the reality of war albeit a fictional account.

This has nothing to do with the "F-bomb", and everything to do with the sanitization of the obsenity which is the Iraq war.

[Long Shot]

My station actually did a story on the local ABC for not running it. Its wierd doing a story on fellow News folks.

[ November 12, 2004, 05:38 PM: Message edited by: Long Shot ]

[addixicon]

Originally posted by &lt;Mr. Happiness&gt;:
Is it just me, or does this smell of censorship of anything that may be considered as anti-war or showing the reality of war albeit a fictional account.

This has nothing to do with the "F-bomb", and everything to do with the sanitization of the obsenity which is the Iraq war. Really Mr. Happiness?, or does it have to do with what the FCC has written is and is not legal to broadcast? (BTW, this is why Young decided not to air it, because the law is not defined, and leaves them open to a lot) Our GM described it as being pulled over for a speeding ticket, given a ticket, and being told to get the hell out of here...speed if you want.

[ewink]

^^ Exactly right.

No other 'law' would be allowed to be so selectivly enforced they way FCC law is.

This will happen till there more definition than 'community standards'.

Then of course the "**** is okay when it's said like that, but **** isn't okay when it's said another way, and boobs are okay when they are displayed artfully, but no okay when they are glimpsed for 10 frames, and Oprah can talk about anal sex because she's educational but Howard can't because he's trying to entertain. And **** is bad in Hicksville but okay in San Fransisco."

[ November 12, 2004, 09:29 PM: Message edited by: ewink ]

[MadMax]

Ok, the parent company of our station decided it was in our viewers "best interest" not to show the movie. Yes, we had many many upset viewers complaining about it.

I guess its a good thing that our station's phone system is so antiquated that we don't even have voice mail 'cause i'm sure it would have crashed.

Personal opionions aside, what did the stations that didn't air the movie air instead?

We aired Father of the Bride 2 and 1 random episode of America's Next Top Model (which is normally seen on the Fox station, owned by the same company)

[Brian Z]

Isn't it ultimately up to the viewer what is in his or hers own best interest? The major difference between this and janet's jugs is this: YOU ARE FOREWARNED ABOUT THE F-BOMBS when it comes to Saving Private Ryan. It has an M rating, you are told up front what may or may not be. In the case of Janet, except for her and that fruity boy toy who, sidebar: just attacked a still photog the other day (thoguh never did liek the paparazzi morons)...anyway, in Janet's case one does not expect to see mamagraphy whilst tunign into the superbowl. Why can't people see this difference?

[<scripps statement>]

I think this sums it up from our company standpoint.

“The E.W. Scripps Company has decided to preempt the primetime broadcast of “Saving Private Ryan” this Thursday evening on its ABC-affiliated television stations. While it is not a documentary, Director Steven Spielberg has created a powerful tribute to the men and women who fought the Second World War and prevailed. Veterans Day is an appropriate day for Americans to view such a tribute.

“The movie contains profanity to help depict the confusion, violence and horror of combat in the Normandy Invasion. Due to graphic violence and intense adult language, the movie is rated “TVMA”.

“While it has been broadcast twice before, recent federal regulatory decisions on profanity appear to make it clear the Federal Communications Commission prohibits the broadcast of the type of profanity used in the movie. Clear unequivocal warnings to viewers about the mature language and violent content do not appear to mitigate a TV station’s obligation to prohibit the broadcast of profane language prior to 10 p.m.

“We do not believe we have the contractual right to edit the movie to remove the profanity and ABC has mandated that the movie be broadcast as scheduled. If the profanity cannot be edited and the profanity cannot be broadcast, then the movie will not be cleared for broadcast on our TV stations in this current regulatory environment.”

[Land Rover]

Since ABC's Thursday night line-up is consistently behind the other networks, some companies might have taken the viewpoint that they could write off that Thursday night from the books and make money from local advertising at the same time.

[El Guapo]

We ran it. We got one call of someone pissed that it was on.