[man_friday]

As far as the GIMP putting restrictions on tv and film content, I actually do think it makes some sense. Those of you who have read my other posts know that I am all for freedom of expression . However, the problem with Television in particular is that it is nearly impossible to prevent children from watching it. And television and film do tend to create stereotypes that can have a very strong influence on people.

I remember when the GIMP banned movie makers from showing people smoking on screen. People were enraged and the GIMP did do a pretty useless job of defending their position. However I did see some logic behind the decision. Movies create stereotypes of so called 'cool people' and 'bad boys'. These people are invariably depicted as smokers. I am humble enough to admit that movies and television were both major reasons behind the start of my own nicotine addiction. Now, I might be a gullible fool, but I do think that wanting to fit in with the 'in crowd' is what leads a lot of young kids into starting habits which are detrimental to their health and safety. There is no doubt that television plays a very influential role in this regard.

As far as the ban on AXN and FTV, kids watching racy material are likely to take it as an indication that underage sex and having multiple partners is cool.

Some argue that if it is alright to show rape, murder etc. on tv and in film, it should be alright to show smoking and sex as well. The flaw in this argument lies here. Things like rape, murder etc. are far more inaccessible to children. For eg. If some teenage college kid wants to act like a 'Don' or a 'Munnabhai', he is unlikely to start a gang and go around robbing or shooting pople. However a cigarette is available to him right outside his college for 3 rupees. He therefore uses the cigarette to make him feel like 'Don'.

I think the real answer to the whole argument of censorship on content is technology. With the introduction of CAS, pay-per-view etc., it will be easier to control who is watching what. So long as the syatem is not manipulated it will become possible to show kids only content that is suited for them, but at the some time allow pervert like myself to watch people smoking during sex .

[the.bombardier]

Originally Posted by man_friday

As far as the GIMP putting restrictions on tv and film content, I actually do think it makes some sense. Those of you who have read my other posts know that I am all for freedom of expression . However, the problem with Television in particular is that it is nearly impossible to prevent children from watching it. And television and film do tend to create stereotypes that can have a very strong influence on people.


I think the real answer to the whole argument of censorship on content is technology. With the introduction of CAS, pay-per-view etc., it will be easier to control who is watching what. So long as the syatem is not manipulated it will become possible to show kids only content that is suited for them, but at the some time allow pervert like myself to watch people smoking during sex .

i disagree with banning the channels for two reasons:
1.in the process of saving kids,u go too far n stop adults from watching wat they want.that should not be allowed at all.and even talking bout children,they r not the government's children :-? . i would rather c the government spend my money on better jobs than giving me parenting tips.

2.secondly,this just exposes their hypocrisy..wat do u do bout the internet?how does the government ensure that all the kids in this country dont access porn?in my opinion,its just a normal growing path for kids.shocking as it may sound,i havent met a single person who hasnt seen porn before at least 17..

most importantly i would rather take care of the kids on the streets than worrying bout wats up on TV.
the most important thing to remember is that the more inaccessible u try to make stuff from kids,the more they would want to watch it..n thats just making the situation worse...

the best solution would be to ensure that ppl can choose wat channels they want.in that way a family with kids can choose to not take 'offensive' channels like FTV and AXN(oh gimme a break,i could have understood if FTV was banned for being boring,but too sexy??),and the single ppl can take watever raunchy stuff they want..

p.s:i got turned out of TGIF today for being underaged(22) wat bullshoot i hate these GIMPish tactics to deny me a drink..

[1_akhil]

Originally Posted by Plumber

1)Do you think that the act is immoral/obscene?
2)Does it deserve as much attention as media seems to have given it?
3)Are political parties justified in making a fuss over this issue?
4)Who should have the right to decide what’s moral and what’s immoral?
5)Is it justified to file a legal case against Gere and Shilpa?
6)Should politicians be playing the role of “moral-police”?
7) Can we have clear-cut distinction between what's moral and immoral? If yes, how?

Q1
1)Do you think that the act is immoral/obscene?
NO.. Kissing is a sign of affection.. it can never be immoral

Q2
2)Does it deserve as much attention as media seems to have given it?
It deserves no attention watsoever
dude come on..
so many ppl kiss so many ppl all over the world every other day..
if this type of shit starts coming on the front pages of leading newspapers...
then i think i ll hav to start using these papers as tissues to wipe my a** the next time i shit

3)Are political parties justified in making a fuss over this issue?

NO.. i believe they hav lots of other better things to do..
like attending celebrity weddings, being a part of cricket boards,


4)Who should have the right to decide what’s moral and what’s immoral?

Now thts a tuff one..
lets just say tht theres no particular person or party who shud hav such a right
its a subjective issue
but it must definitely be backed by a lot of rationality..

5)Is it justified to file a legal case against Gere and Shilpa?

Why not? As Subodh has rightly pointed out... of course
ours is a democratic country..

But maybe poor subodh is not aware of the mess our judicial system is in
by the time the case actually comes up to be fought.....
richards grandson would have kissed shilpas granddaughter

6)Should politicians be playing the role of “moral-police”?

Again no.. they r better off attending weddings n parties


7) Can we have clear-cut distinction between what's moral and immoral? If yes, how?

Well thts tuff again
its tuff to put down in words wats moral n wats not
but a rational person can look at an incident n say if its moral or not....
N kissing is really not immoral....

[Shrijit_s]

Originally Posted by iimaaspirant

Puys,
I would like to bring 'bot another controversial topic here.....

SHOULD THE CENSOR BOARD BAN CHANNELS LIKE AXN AND FTV......??: Where is the question of obscenity and indecency?.........

A chap(for that matter a person guy/gal) enjoying the daily programs watching the adult stuff in the night after 11.00 pm is his/her own personal thingy:neutral: . No body has control on others...it is up to them as far as there are no hard feelings..... It is not a crime watching a porn movie in the privacy...............
INVITATIONS UNLIMITED...........:neutral:

Cheers Shravan.............

I am 23 yrs old. If I have the right to vote and if I also have the right to destroy a girl's life by marrying her cant I decide which channels I can watch or not? Who is the government or who the hell is Prathiba Naitthani to tell me wht programmes I should watch? She feels that the adult content will harm the innocent minds of our children.

Well my mom hates cricket. She feels that cricket is the reason that students perform terribly in their exams. So it harms their future. But you dont see her filing a PIL to stop broadcasting of cricket matches. Why? Becoz its upto the parents who will decide wht their child will watch.

Why cant this same logic apply to adult content? If all adult content is aired frm say 11 pm can't the parents restrict the children from watching the TV during this time? It should be as simple as that. Why do you stop adults from watching adult content? Just coz Prathiba Naitthani wants it ??:

Its sad that she teaches in my old college:(

[1_akhil]

Write-up by Vir Sanghvi - very relevant to this thread and worth a read
Two incidents over the last fortnight have provoked widespread outrage. The first is the attack on the Star News office in Bombay. The channel had offered shelter to a Hindu-Muslim couple and a hitherto unheard of Hindu extremist organisation had taken offence. Between 40 to 50 goons armed with crowbars arrived at Star News’ Bombay office and proceeded to destroy cars. They then attempted to enter the building, but were foiled by the arrival of the police.
The second incident is the Richard Gere-Shilpa Shetty controversy. I am probably the only person in India who has not seen the footage but from what I can tell Gere kissed Shilpa on stage at some AIDS function and then twirled her around in the manner of some of his recent movies (Chicago, for instance). This was enough to provoke anger among various organisations that claimed Gere and Shilpa had acted in a manner that offended Indian sensibilities and was out of tune with the standards of our society.
Both incidents have evoked similar reactions. In the case of the Star News attack, the condemnation has been swift and all-encompassing. Even the Shiv Sena has come out in favour of Star News as has the BJP. The Gere-Shilpa kiss is more complicated but it is fair to say that the protestors represent only a tiny, isolated minority. Most sensible people have taken the line that there was nothing obscene about the kiss and that the protests are silly.
I agree with the general response. Of course, the Star News attack deserves to be condemned and the Bombay Police must find the men who organised it and make them accountable. Similarly, the people who blew the Gere-Shilpa case out of all proportion must not be encouraged and society should not be subject to the prejudices of the moral police.
But here’s where I disagree. I do not believe that you can treat either incident in isolation. I do not think that mainstream political parties can pretend that either controversy has nothing to do with them. And I do not consider it either fair or accurate to blame both incidents on tiny minorities or fringe elements.
I believe that India’s politicians have created an environment in which such attacks and such protests have been legitimised.
Only two things get Indians very agitated: religion and sex. The Star News incident was about religious intolerance. The subtext to the Gere-Shilpa controversy was sexual: a man and a woman should not behave like this in public.
Let’s take the religious intolerance aspect first. It’s all very well for political parties to condemn the fringe group behind the Star News attack. But the truth is that such attacks have taken place before. And they have been carried out by mainstream political parties. Over a decade ago, the offices of Mahanagar, a Marathi paper in Bombay, were vandalised by goons owing allegiance to the Shiv Sena. As far as I know, Bal Thackeray has never condemned that attack. Instead, he takes the line that his followers get very angry if the Shiv Sena is criticised and journalists should bear this in mind.
The Mahanagar incident may not have been about religion. But what about the attack on the Husain guffa in Ahmedabad by sangh parivar activists? The provocation then was some alleged insult to Hinduism contained within Husain’s paintings.
Since then, almost every time there is a Husain exhibition anywhere in India, the organisers live with the fear of an attack from some fringe organisation associated with the sangh parivar. So it is with movies. The attack on cinema halls showing Fire was said to be an attempt to protect Hinduism — one of the characters was called Sita — and it was carried out by sangh parivar activists. The disruption of the filming of Water in Benaras was also the work of the sangh parivar which believed that a movie about widows would show Hindu society in a bad light.
Is it possible to de-link the Star News incident from these attacks? I would argue that it is exactly the same sort of thing. It is all very well for political parties to now make self-righteous noises about respecting the freedom of the press and opposing any kind of violence. But they started it; they created the trend; and I don’t think they can now pretend that it has nothing to do with them.
The sex stuff follows the same pattern. Years ago, when Sushma Swaraj was Minister for Information and Broadcasting, she had complained about the danger to Indian cultural values represented by Fashion TV (FTV). At the time I lampooned her and her government arguing that they might as well set up a nipple police if they believed that Hindu society was so flimsy that it’s very foundation would collapse at the merest glimpse of a bosom.
In retrospect, Sushma was a liberal. You could say in her defence that she had always claimed to represent the values of a conservative middle class and so, her objections stemmed from her stated political position.
But that defence is simply not available to the Congress. Under this government, the Information and Broadcasting Ministry has been even stricter than it was in Sushma’s day. There was, first of all, the completely unjustified ban on AXN because — and this is now becoming sadly predictable — of a sexual agenda. Apparently, a programme on the world’s sexiest advertisements had offended the babus of Shastri Bhavan. That ban was withdrawn eventually. But the ministry has now outdone Sushma. It has actually banned FTV — something that the BJP government never did — on the same sort of nipple police grounds. Some of the fashion shows on the channel were deemed too risqué for Indian society. And so, we are to be denied the opportunity to make up our own minds.
Once a government — and the political establishment — creates an environment where any bureaucrat can function as a moral policeman, it sets the tone for the rest of society. It is nobody’s case that the government does not have the legal authority to ban channels (the Cable Act gives them the power). Nor am I arguing that there should be no restriction on obscenity — the Censor Board (under Sharmila Tagore) does an excellent job of deciding what is acceptable enough for our society.
My point is that all censorship should be conducted by an independent regulatory authority that makes the rules clear to
begin with. Once you let politicians and bureaucrats decide what you and I can watch, you usher in a climate of intolerance in which freedom of expression is subject to the whims and prejudices of individuals. And in such a climate it becomes entirely legitimate for any self-righteous busybody to start taking moral stands and deciding what is obscene and what is not.
So, while I welcome the political establishment’s condemnation of the attack on Star News, and while I am pleased that nobody in a position of authority has echoed the silly objections to the Gere-Shilpa case, I think that the issue goes beyond these two incidents.
It strikes at the heart of our political system. All intolerance stems from the top. As long as political parties sanction attacks on newspapers, art exhibitions or cinema halls, they have only themselves to blame if others follow their lead. And if the government decides to become a moral policeman, then who can blame citizens for following its example?

[shubhankar85]

Originally Posted by iimaaspirant

Puys,
I would like to bring 'bot another controversial topic here.....

SHOULD THE CENSOR BOARD BAN CHANNELS LIKE AXN AND FTV......??: Where is the question of obscenity and indecency?.........

A chap(for that matter a person guy/gal) enjoying the daily programs watching the adult stuff in the night after 11.00 pm is his/her own personal thingy:neutral: . No body has control on others...it is up to them as far as there are no hard feelings..... It is not a crime watching a porn movie in the privacy...............
INVITATIONS UNLIMITED...........:neutral:

Cheers Shravan.............

Dude...when we were newbies as First years in coll...& the guys hadn't yet got comps in their rooms and when we had not yet learnt enough about the new city to know where to go hunt for p***y CDs...those friday/saturday specials on Zee MGM & AXN were our only source for u-know-what..!!!!

Why does the frikkin govt./Censor board have to act like moral police banning channels outright..?!?! If some junta have a problem watching all the "wonderful" stuff on TV...why do they have to squirm about so much about it..?? For heavens' sake...U have a remote...Just switch to a "decent" channel...or if something even "better" is going on the other channel too...just shut the damn TV off... why do u have to crib on endlessly about how it is polluting the minds of impressionable youngsters ( who of course are NOT perverts already )..???

I mean...who the hell is being hurt and/or offended if I, or anyone else exercises his right to indulge in "self-pleasure" in private..???(Perhaps I am being too indiscreet, maybe the govt. decides on what can be defined as "self-pleasure" too..!!!)

Cheers..!!!!

[ringsofsaturn]

Warrant issued against Richard gere By the High court in jaipur for kissing Shetty
the same day...a 15 yr old girl who went to the police to lodge a complaint against rape...was taken to a hotel and raped again by the Policemen...one of whom is an ACP.....
Now these people are moving scot free...having cared nothing about the Poor girl....who is of the age of their daughter....and still no action is taken....

But a person who just kisses and helps to raise funds for AIDS is given an arrest warrant....
Why cant the courts show such alacrity in RAPE cases? Is a kiss between two consenting adults a greater offence than outraging a woman's Modesty?

[shubhankar85]

Originally Posted by ringsofsaturn

Warrant issued against Richard gere By the High court in jaipur for kissing Shetty
the same day...a 15 yr old girl who went to the police to lodge a complaint against rape...was taken to a hotel and raped again by the Policemen...one of whom is an ACP.....
Now these people are moving scot free...having cared nothing about the Poor girl....who is of the age of their daughter....and still no action is taken....

But a person who just kisses and helps to raise funds for AIDS is given an arrest warrant....
Why cant the courts show such alacrity in RAPE cases? Is a kiss between two consenting adults a greater offence than outraging a woman's Modesty?

The frust b*****ds are probably taking out their frustration coz they didn't get to get their hands up Shilpa...aur unke saamne ek firangi aake unke sapne thod gaya...
Jai ho humare legal & police uncle logon ki..!!!

[the.bombardier]

ok now there is a new case,which will make u feel that richard gere arrest warrant is justified.
hrithik roshan n aishwarya rai have been summoned to the muzzafarabad court for having offended the sensibilities of the person who lodged the case.if u didnt get it,its a reference to the kiss scene from dhoom 2.now tell me,if they can be summoned for a film scene,then doesnt richard gere deserve an arrest warrant,as that was in public ?
wat i dont understand is,this guy knws that the movie has this scene,he watches it still,thinking that he may fulfil his fantasies (a decent way of putting u knw wat ),n then he claims his sensibilities have been hurt?
ROFLMAO
most probably he was disappointed by the scene,thats y he lodged the case..

[shubhankar85]

Originally Posted by the.bombardier

ok now there is a new case,which will make u feel that richard gere arrest warrant is justified.
hrithik roshan n aishwarya rai have been summoned to the muzzafarabad court for having offended the sensibilities of the person who lodged the case.if u didnt get it,its a reference to the kiss scene from dhoom 2.now tell me,if they can be summoned for a film scene,then doesnt richard gere deserve an arrest warrant,as that was in public ?
wat i dont understand is,this guy knws that the movie has this scene,he watches it still,thinking that he may fulfil his fantasies (a decent way of putting u knw wat ),n then he claims his sensibilities have been hurt?
ROFLMAO
most probably he was disappointed by the scene,thats y he lodged the case..

Heard the Fox & the Sour grapes story..??
Our "decent" uncle reads in the page 3 stories & hears from the local rowdy boys that Ash looks really "Hot" & sensuous in Dhoom 2 & that there is a really amazing kissing scene in Dhoom 2 between Aish & Hrithik

So uncle decides to go check out the hot stuff himself...but he finds that all that our teens are jacking off to is just a smooch & aish doesn't even look half as good as she did when she was dancing in "Ishq kamina". Uncle is thoroughly disappointed...& he decides that since he didn't enjoy the movie(scene) its his duty to make sure that noone else does too

So our "decent" uncle goes to the local police uncle & lodges a complaint for "obscenity"... Don't get the drift... Our uncle jacks off to those great mallu(& its many dubbed versions) soft porn stuff as well as those with all the white chicks...never even thought of filing a complaint against those in his favourite videos...??

Moral : To keep our uncles quiet (or happy) show them the full thing, a mere smooch or minor exposure will leave them unsatisfied resulting in complaints & more cases in our adalat