Scarborough now guarded by a seven-second delay.

[Phred42]

WHAT ABOUT THE $500,000 FINE?!
:mad:


Scarborough now guarded by a seven-second delay.
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/11/11/scarborough-7/

Yesterday, MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough accidentally dropped the f-bomb while live on air. After apologizing, Scarborough said, “My wife is going to kill me when I get home.” (Watch the incident here.) The show will now have a seven-second delay to protect against future outbursts. An MSNBC spokesman said that no other shows on the network will have the delay, which was reportedly a “mutual decision.” Former MSNBC morning host Don Imus had a similar arrangement on his show.

[City Lights]

1. Guess his wife didn't off him, eh? nt

[DS1]

2. I'm not sure if the FCC can fine cable

[onenote]

16. the FCC cannot go after cable for "indecent" speech

[demnan]

3. This morning Mika brought up a school group that watched

the show with their teacher who used the show as a teaching tool. Mika said to Joe, "You taught them some new words the other day".

[geiger]

4. Tho't this would be the fastest DU fund drive ever, til saw his pix up on the header.....

it slowed down exponentially when his face got up there. That is his mug, isn't it?

[Crankie Avalon]

5. Yes, NO ONE ELSE on the network needs such a delay...

...just Joe Scarborough.

Maybe they should set up a delay for Pat Buchanan, too? After all, there's just no other way to be covered when these Republican pottymouths start pontificating about their values.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

6. Glad To See It Was Resolved Without Unnecessary Drama.

As much as a piece of shit he is, it was clear that the slip up was completely innocent, accidental and not worthy of outrage.

[DefenseLawyer]

7. Do you really advocate those massive FCC fines?

Just because I think Joe Scarborough is a putz, doesn't mean that I am on board with the morality police arbitrarily levying excessive fines for something that is essentially a harmless mistake. Maybe Janet Jackson scarred you for life, but I have recovered nicely, thank you.

[Phred42]

8. No. But don't you think they should be delt evenly until they are changed?

[DefenseLawyer]

10. Never really been a "two wrongs make a right" kinda guy

I'd rather they acknowledge that their policy was flawed and stop doing it than they keep doing something stupid in order to be "fair" to the people that were previously subject to the flawed policy. If I am not mistaken these fines are administrative not statutory (and as someone pointed out may not even be applicable here) and could be changed as a matter of policy not a matter of statutory law.

[Phred42]

11. I've never been much for kum by yah. It's been the law and they haven't changed it yet.

Just another Republican gets away with it. Rules and laws apply to everyone except republicans.

[DefenseLawyer]

15. FCC Regulations are administrative rules, not laws.

It has nothing to do with "Kumbaya" or "kum by yah", whatever that is. They can amend their policies and definitions and fine structure any time they choose. Now would be a good time. But hey, if you would feel better if we continued to stifle free speech on behalf of the puritan far right just because you despise Joe Scarborough, well hey, that seems reasonable. Knock yourself out.

[onenote]

18. the FCC can't go after indecent speech on cable because it would be unconstitutional

The courts have found a clear and constitutionally signficant distinction between subscription services and services available free over the air. Which is why XM and Sirius can have folks say things that couldn't be said on radio.

Unless of course, you think that regulating XM and Sirius would be a good idea.

[DefenseLawyer]

19. I noted further up in the discussion

that FCC fines are likely inapplicable here; but even if they were, I would like to see the zeal with which the FCC has imposed excessive fines come to an end.

[onenote]

17. except its not the law.

You might want to check the law before you rely on it. Cable networks are not subject to the indecency rules that apply to broadcast television.

[Ms. Toad]

9. I'm sorry, but our national obsession with swear words

is just silly. I don't swear, and I don't really enjoy being around people who do, but there are far worse things our kids are exposed to than the F bomb.

I didn't realize how bad it was until my daughter was old enough to start thinking about letting her watch a few R rated movies (14-15 age range). I had been letting her watch PG-13 movies pretty much without restriction, but the family rule for R rated movies was that I had to watch them first to decide whether they were appropriate for her viewing.

Then I ran into Billy Elliot - rated R because the F-bomb is used, and because it deals with homosexuality (and a few movies similarly rated R for either realistic portrayal of drug use (and the consequences), real violence and its consequences, and liberal use of the 7 "dirty" words).

Around the same time, I went with her to see Chicago - which has at least one gratuitous sex scene which shows everything but the genitals - and is rated PG-13. Don't get me wrong - I loved Chicago, but even as an adult I would have preferred the sex scene to leave more to the imagination. Certainly the extended and graphic nature was not necessary for the story line and was more intense than I thought appropriate for a (then) 13 year old.

I would far rather have had her see Billy Elliot at 13 than sex thrown in solely for the sake of titillation or depictions of violence as fun without showing any of the real consequences (both of which are likely to be given a PG or PG-13 rating).

So - even though he was only making an embarrassed joke, I agree with Scarborough when he said, "get over it."

(And if anyone is interested in an alternative to the movie rating system try kidsinmind.com. It provides a detailed description of what is actually in the movie so you can decide whether the content that earned (or didn't earn) a movie its rating is a concern to you with respect to your children's viewing. It does, occasionally, provide spoilers though.)

[rvablue]

12. And I'm sure you'd agree although you don't want your 14 year old

to be exposed to the F-bomb, she is certainly old enough and smart enough to know what is actually being said when it is bleeped out.

That is why I think the bleeping is so useless....you know what they said, I know what they said, probably every kid over the age of 8 knows what they said....what is the point??????????

[Ms. Toad]

20. Agreed, generally.

She's now an adult (as of this summer) - but she still asks if she is allowed to watch certain movies (I trained her well...).

As for being exposed to the F-bomb - although I hope it does not become a regular part of her vocabulary, even when she was 8 I was not particularly worried about her being exposed to it.

I'd have to think about when she would have known what was being bleeped out - certainly by 11-12, when I started letting her have some "parental discretion" CDs. She would play them on car rides with her finger on the volume button, since she knew if she let too many vulgarities (or women as whore/property/slut, etc. comments) slide by I'd make her either switch to earphones or another CD. Probably not too much before 11.

She was relatively sheltered because we don't have paid TV, didn't hang with a lot of people who used bleep-able language, and we did monitor what movies she watched. It was 11-12-ish when she started being interested in the style of music that was likely to contain vulgarities (which were bleeped on the radio), and when I started letting her watch some PG-13 movies. I'm one of those, "Nobody else's mom...." kind of moms.

[rhett o rick]

13. It should've been a 7 day delay. He is so repugnant. nm

[leftofthedial]

14. I wonder why his wife didn't "kill him" over the dead intern?

Big F-ing deal.