Nants Foley: “The FCC should not continue its censorship. The American people can do that themselves with their remote controls!”
Steve Staloch: “Yes. Continued FCC oversight ensures the conventional and minimum program standards prohibiting expletives and nudity are upheld and enforced. Although extreme violence is likely far more harmful, parents can at least trust that the generally accepted and traditional standards of network programming are maintained.”
Marty Richman: “Let’s get the government out of the TV censorship business. For more than 10 years every TV made for the U.S. market has had a V-chip installed. The combination of V-chip and thinking parents/guardians should be enough. Besides, the violence is a lot worse than the profanity or sex and parents should be teaching their children how to deal with all three.”
Ruth Erickson: “There needs to be some censorship, so there’s a choice of TV viewing for those who would prefer to have no nudity or profanity, for whatever their own, personal reasons.”
Bill Mifsud: “Profane content is prevalent in video games, music, movies and cable TV. I would hope there would be one place still sacred but it appears those days will be gone forever. Society is changing and I guess if you can’t beat them join. Not happy the U.S. Supreme Court is weighing dropping censorship standards but not surprised.”
Jim West: “No. Placing responsibility for media censorship on the government (FCC) only acts to excuse parents from their intrinsic responsibility for controlling what their children see, hear and by extension do. Government should mandate clear content labeling — as they do with cigarettes and alcohol — but not prohibit content.”
Louise Ledesma: “Yes, it is very important to keep censorship for the network channels. For example, on Sunday for the Golden Globes there were parts cut out. This was on TV early in the evening and I wouldn’t want my grandkids to hear all of the foul language. We should be teaching our children higher moral standards.”
