Please Help Support Free Speech

[Greenguy]

I posted this on my main page today & thought I'd throw it up here as well.

Freedom Of Speech also means that we have the freedom to offend. Lately, this concept has been abused by many special interest groups that seem to be on some sort of witch hunt for radio personalities. It started with Imus, then JV & Elvis and now, it's Opie & Anthony. How fucked is our society that people are this offended by words? It may be a children's song, but "sticks & stone may break my bones, but names will never hurt me" keeps ringing in my ear. Do your part to fight for your rights - click here and register at PeopleAgainstCensorship.com so that you can to help fight for our freedom.

[MrMaryLou]

Support Free Speech

[spookyx]

good idea

[T Pat]

It took less than 30 seconds

[virgohippy]

Makes me feel like dancing.

[Useless]

Do you ever wonder if the Jerky Boys ever saw this coming when they wrote their "He hurt me with his words" skit?

I hate these silly uber-sensitive cunts who don't get jokes. I get jokes. I like jokes. I'm a big fan of the funny.

[Bobc01]

I registered, I get sick of political correctness which is a huge problem here in the UK.

People trying to force their "i'm a good citizen and i want everyone to know" fucked up attitudes on to everyone else.

I believe people should have the freedom to choose their own ways and means as long as it's legal.

If people get offended by things, their option is not to listen or view whatever they find offensive.

[bluemoney]

I'm In

[spacemanspiff]

I signed up, although I don't really see what Dom Imus' or O&A's employers did as censorship. They were just business decisions. Kind of sucks, but that's the way it is.

[docholly]

Where are my phat brothers and sisters?? Why are we not protesting the daily insults that all forms of media deal out to us!! Phatties Unite!! PU demands all media stop with the persecution of thunder thighs and love handles.

Anyway I joined.. i mean really why not just throw out the constitution.. there is a broad difference between "fuck you" and "if i don't fuck you, you're fired" ..

[Useless]

Originally Posted by spacemanspiff

I signed up, although I don't really see what Dom Imus' or O&A's employers did as censorship. They were just business decisions. Kind of sucks, but that's the way it is.

Do you see how shutting us down violates anyone's free speech? It's just business, right?

[SheepGuy]

I just joined.
"If you can't say "Fuck" you can't say "Fuck the government!"

[stuveltje]

even i dont have much time, but free speech is important for me, in holland we have free speech, so yeah we can say whatever we want, its realy important that people in other countries can do the same, so i am going over that link and will support the "free speech"

[spacemanspiff]

"Shutting us down" would be a governmental thing. The government had nothing to do with this. It's an advertising thing. P&G, Sony, Nike, etc said "We don't want to advertise on your show if you let shock jocks say things that are going to upset our customers and MAKE THEM STOP GIVING US THEIR MONEY. If you continue to do it were going to STOP GIVING YOU MONEY."

What if MML decided to write "Don't visit this site, it's a piece of shit" on every free site description he wrote. If GG said "Cut that out, MML or no more boob hats for you", would that be censorship? No. GG has every right to run his site the way he sees fit, as does CBS.

CBS didn't say "you can't say that". They said "you can't say that using our broadcast equipment, and we're not going to pay you to say that". I think it's kind of chickenshit to hire a bunch of shock jocks for their controversy, then head for the hills the moment they cause a little, but the bottom line is their purpose in life is to make money, plain and simple.

[stuveltje]

What if MML decided to write "Don't visit this site, it's a piece of shit" on every free site description he wrote. .

well here in holland we can say that shit, as long you have an reason to write that and tell it, thats "freedom of speech"

If GG said "Cut that out, MML or no more boob hats for you", would that be censorship? No. GG has every right to run his site the way he sees fit, as does CBS

yea thats censorship for me, you forche someone to shut down if not a respond will come, "no boobs hat" . "freedom of speech" is for me, you have something to say, but you also say why you think that way. and forching a person to shut down is censorship for me.

[stuveltje]

i hope i say this the right way, in ducth i can tell it all, but this is what i mean: probably not all know what "freedom of speech" is, freedom of speech is you have something to say about some topic, but you dont just say it, you build your statement with facts , facts you believe in, and facts you think are right..thats "freedom of speech" and that will end in responds from others who think diffrently, if you are not allowed to tell your thing, then you are censored.

[Maj. Stress]

I'm in this one all the way.
I have lots more to say about the subject but will wait for later on today while I collect my thoughts.

[Jim]

Originally Posted by spacemanspiff

I signed up, although I don't really see what Dom Imus' or O&A's employers did as censorship. They were just business decisions. Kind of sucks, but that's the way it is.

I agree 100%. These people could have said anything they wanted if they owned the broadcasting source. But since they didn't, the "owners" decided they didn't want what these people were saying going out on their equipment. We are protected from the government against violations of free speech. Free speech doesn't force broadcasters to broadcast things they don't want to.

Now that opie and anthony gave the fcc enough ammunition to start regulating satellite radio, it will most likely become a free speech issue. Right now it's just an employer saying, "Fuck you...we don't like what you did with our equipment, get out". And so far, the government hasn't had a damn thing to do with it.

[sue-fl]

Originally Posted by spacemanspiff

"Shutting us down" would be a governmental thing. The government had nothing to do with this. It's an advertising thing. P&G, Sony, Nike, etc said "We don't want to advertise on your show if you let shock jocks say things that are going to upset our customers and MAKE THEM STOP GIVING US THEIR MONEY. If you continue to do it were going to STOP GIVING YOU MONEY."

What if MML decided to write "Don't visit this site, it's a piece of shit" on every free site description he wrote. If GG said "Cut that out, MML or no more boob hats for you", would that be censorship? No. GG has every right to run his site the way he sees fit, as does CBS.

CBS didn't say "you can't say that". They said "you can't say that using our broadcast equipment, and we're not going to pay you to say that". I think it's kind of chickenshit to hire a bunch of shock jocks for their controversy, then head for the hills the moment they cause a little, but the bottom line is their purpose in life is to make money, plain and simple.

Very well said and I agree

I don't think it's a freedom of speech issue either but they are making it one.

[Maj. Stress]

Originally Posted by Jim

I agree 100%. These people could have said anything they wanted if they owned the broadcasting source. But since they didn't, the "owners" decided they didn't want what these people were saying going out on their equipment. We are protected from the government against violations of free speech. Free speech doesn't force broadcasters to broadcast things they don't want to.

Now that opie and anthony gave the fcc enough ammunition to start regulating satellite radio, it will most likely become a free speech issue. Right now it's just an employer saying, "Fuck you...we don't like what you did with our equipment, get out". And so far, the government hasn't had a damn thing to do with it.

So far the government isn't involved and I don't see anything like that in the near future due to other political issues. But what does bother me about all this is the fact that special interest groups have figured out this is an easy way for free publicity (as Greenie pointed out in his first post). What I see is advertisers and broadcasters cratering to these groups and they are the minority.

While it may be true that these can be classified as business decisions, are they wise ones?

I remember a guy named Steve Dahl from back in the late 70's in Chicago. He has been fired from more than a few radio stations for controversy. (I didn't know this until today but Howard Stern actually replaced him at one of the jobs he was fired from in Detroit.) What I don't remember about Steve Dahl is why he was fired or who his advertisers were at the time. I do know that he is still on the air in Chicago and considered a broadcast legend in that area.

I think CBS, other broadcasting companies and their advertisers could learn something from this. They will be the ones losing listeners and in the long run advertising dollars from many sources.

[SheepGuy]

To my mind self-censorship or pre-emptive censorship is possibly the worst kind. "Well, he said this and it might piss off this group so we'll fire his ass"

To me that kind of thinking just contributes to the banality of media. Why shouldn't we hear opinions or jokes that piss us off and give others a laugh? Howard Stern came to Toronto and immediately pissed me off, I didn't stop listening because of anything he said though, I left mostly because my morning station wasn't playing music anymore. The guy's opinions didn't mean jack shit to me, the stations ratings went up, they did lose some sponsors, and I'm sure picked up new ones.
I just don't like being told who or what I can listen to, whether it's by the government, business or special interest groups.

[Jim]

I don't think anyone disagrees that censorship hurts everyone. My only problem is semantics. A violation of Freedom of Speech is always censorship but censorship is not often a violation of Freedom of Speech. If the discussion is about fighting censorship, I am with you. But interchanging the two terms, makes real free speech issues weaker.

[SykkBoy]

Originally Posted by Maj. Stress

What I see is advertisers and broadcasters cratering to these groups and they are the minority.

The problem is those groups write letters and take action. That's why advertisers listen. If the fans of the shows would take the same approach and write in their own letters, they might get listened to a little more often.

[docholly]

well it looks like XM has buckled in their quest for more $$ .. they suspended O&A for 30 days immediately. Even tho they aren't regulated for content..they still need the approval of the FCC (our gov't) before merging with Sirius.

Un-fucking-believable!! ok i guess really it's not..

[MrMaryLou]

Originally Posted by docholly

well it looks like XM has buckled in their quest for more $$ .. they suspended O&A for 30 days immediately. Even tho they aren't regulated for content..they still need the approval of the FCC (our gov't) before merging with Sirius.

Un-fucking-believable!! ok i guess really it's not..

It is Un-fucking-beliebable