ltdiver 3 #26 November 18, 2004 Quotehttp://www.cnn.com/2004/US/11/17/nude.newswoman.ap/index.html Here's another one the FCC will have a blast with. Naked ancorwoman. Got lots of ratings though Oh great! Now we're in another kind of race with the Russians! ltdiver Don't tell me the sky's the limit when there are footprints on the moon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #27 November 18, 2004 QuoteViagra ads -- ok No, actually they're not. Other gov't agencies are getting in the game. The FDA has ordered Pfizer to pull their Viagra advertising for being "too suggestive". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,150 #28 November 18, 2004 God forbid we see some nudity, we'll all go to hell. On my drive into work an American male was complaining about the incident. His biggest concern was that if his daughter had seen it she would have asked questions and he wouldn't have known how to answer them? Is that what this is really about, parents afraid that their kids will ask questions they are uncomfortable answering? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tigra 0 #29 November 18, 2004 How does he answer her questions about the Viagra ads? Or the twins ad? This whole thing is beyond stupid! Shouldn't we, as a nation be more concerned about other issues? War, hunger, poverty, education, cancer, aids- all just off the top of my head! A spot promoting the TV show that put ABC back on the map? Get over it! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,150 #30 November 18, 2004 QuoteHow does he answer her questions about the Viagra ads? Or the twins ad? This whole thing is beyond stupid! Shouldn't we, as a nation be more concerned about other issues? War, hunger, poverty, education, cancer, aids- all just off the top of my head! An spot promoting the TV show that put ABC back on the map? Get over it! I would tend to agree with you Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites peregrinerose 0 #31 November 18, 2004 QuoteNo, actually they're not. Other gov't agencies are getting in the game. The FDA has ordered Pfizer to pull their Viagra advertising for being "too suggestive". This is not remotely true. The FDA has nothing to do with how suggestive things are, for one thing, that is the FCC. The FDA is trying to have the ads pulled because they promise things that the drug does not do (increase sex drive) and does not mention the potential side effects of the drug. Jen Do or do not, there is no try -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites PhillyKev 0 #32 November 18, 2004 Front page, Wall Street Journal, 11/16/04 QuoteThe FDA told Pfizer to pull its tv ads for Viagra, indicating that they were too suggestive. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites tigra 0 #33 November 18, 2004 I'm in shock over how much attention this is getting, I really am. Although I shouldn't be. Look how much coverage American Idol got last year with their controversial "votes"! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites peregrinerose 0 #34 November 18, 2004 The wall street journal apparently can't read direct documentation from the FDA. Below is the letter from the FDA to Pfeizer... http://www.fda.gov/cder/warn/2004/12726.pdf The letter states only that the ads 'suggest' things that the drug does not do. Do or do not, there is no try -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites storm1977 0 #35 November 18, 2004 Quote http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=494&u=/ap/20041117/ap_en_tv/fcc_indecency_2&printer=1 So lemme get this straight . . . Viagra ads -- ok "And Twins!" -- ok Watching one of the most violent games ever conceived -- ok. But this is wrong because some kids may have seen a woman's naked back? Uh, I don't get it. What are we -- back in the 1960s? The Hypocracy of the NFL is disgusting..... Tagliabo was out there Crying foul when the ESPN show "Playmakers" showed NFL players in a bad light. Tagliabo succeeded in getting the show pulled from the air. Then they approve in an NFL lockeroom with an NFL player, this type of activety.... It is on the verge of being stupid. I have no respect for the NFL. And Don't for a minute pretend this was all ABC. The NFL knows exactly what is happening.... No cameras or players could be involved in this with out specific permission from the Commisioners office. ----------------------------------------------------- Sometimes it is more important to protect LIFE than Liberty Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites PhillyKev 0 #36 November 18, 2004 Ahhh...then it's actually my mis-interpretation. They meant suggestive in terms of it's effectiveness. I assumed they meant sexually suggestive. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,462 #37 November 18, 2004 I'm glad to see that we, as a nation, are finally starting to look past the distracting trivia (like the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, oil dependence, nuclear proliferation, civil rights etc) and focus on the real issues of the day, like how much of whose butt you can see in which commercial. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites storm1977 0 #38 November 18, 2004 QuoteI'm glad to see that we, as a nation, are finally starting to look past the distracting trivia (like the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, oil dependence, nuclear proliferation, civil rights etc) and focus on the real issues of the day, like how much of whose butt you can see in which commercial. I happen to think that issues about what is aired on tv is very important. I wouldn't want to have to explaine to my kid at 5yrs old what viagra is used for, or what an erection that lasts for 4 hrs is..... It isn't nessesary at that age. And yes, Viagra commercials air when 4 and 5yr olds are still awake!! ----------------------------------------------------- Sometimes it is more important to protect LIFE than Liberty Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites quade 3 #39 November 18, 2004 So, then anything that airs during the hours that children might be awake that you'd feel uncomfortable with explaining to a 5-year-old should be not be allowed? That's rediculous! Do you have any idea the scope of what that would include? Personally I'd like a bit more variety in my broadcast viewing choices than Barney and the Teletubbies.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites peregrinerose 0 #40 November 18, 2004 Naaah, not your misinterpretation. When I read that I took it the same way as you did. Do or do not, there is no try -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites SkyDekker 1,150 #41 November 18, 2004 QuoteI wouldn't want to have to explaine to my kid at 5yrs old what viagra is used for, or what an erection that lasts for 4 hrs is..... Viagra shouldn't be that hard to explain to a child. I have never seen a viagra add that mentiones erection or durations of erections. since I doubt a 4 or 5 year old knows what an erection is, they would not even get any hint at that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites PhillyKev 0 #42 November 18, 2004 QuoteI wouldn't want to have to explaine to my kid at 5yrs old what viagra is used for, or what an erection that lasts for 4 hrs is..... It isn't nessesary at that age. Is it harmful to a 5 year old to know about sex? In other words, do you think having to have a discussion with your 5 year old about sex would be damaging to them? Or do you just want to censor it so that you aren't uncomfortable having to talk about it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites SkyDekker 1,150 #43 November 18, 2004 QuoteIs it harmful to a 5 year old to know about sex? In other words, do you think having to have a discussion with your 5 year old about sex would be damaging to them? Or do you just want to censor it so that you aren't uncomfortable having to talk about it. Now there is the million dollar question. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites peregrinerose 0 #44 November 18, 2004 Considering that a lot of 12 year olds are having sex, my kids are going to have it just part of life, normal conversation, not some taboo secret thing. They need to be aware of what is going on so they can make good choices for themselves. Talk about a thread hijack though. Do or do not, there is no try -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites storm1977 0 #45 November 18, 2004 QuoteQuoteI wouldn't want to have to explaine to my kid at 5yrs old what viagra is used for, or what an erection that lasts for 4 hrs is..... It isn't nessesary at that age. Is it harmful to a 5 year old to know about sex? In other words, do you think having to have a discussion with your 5 year old about sex would be damaging to them? Or do you just want to censor it so that you aren't uncomfortable having to talk about it. I don't think a child should have to deal with the mature subject of Sex. With sex comes responsability, and i don't feel that that is a burden a 5 yr old needs to bare.... And when does it stop. DO I then need to explain all aspects of sex? Blow jobs anal Sex Genital warts Rape ??????? Again, that is not a burden a 5yr old should be forced to understand or comprehend. ----------------------------------------------------- Sometimes it is more important to protect LIFE than Liberty Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites storm1977 0 #46 November 18, 2004 QuoteQuoteI wouldn't want to have to explaine to my kid at 5yrs old what viagra is used for, or what an erection that lasts for 4 hrs is..... Viagra shouldn't be that hard to explain to a child. I have never seen a viagra add that mentiones erection or durations of erections. since I doubt a 4 or 5 year old knows what an erection is, they would not even get any hint at that. Umm Cialis specifically says.. "If an erection last for more than 4 hours please seek medical attention..." I doubt a 4 or 5 yrs old knows what an erection is too, hence the problem. Now my 4 or 5yr old will say... Daddy.. What is an erection? ----------------------------------------------------- Sometimes it is more important to protect LIFE than Liberty Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites storm1977 0 #47 November 18, 2004 QuoteSo, then anything that airs during the hours that children might be awake that you'd feel uncomfortable with explaining to a 5-year-old should be not be allowed? That's rediculous! Do you have any idea the scope of what that would include? Personally I'd like a bit more variety in my broadcast viewing choices than Barney and the Teletubbies. Nope, not what I said... Good trying to put words in my mouth. The NFL has been complain over the years that its audience is too old... It has been trying to reach a younger crowd. As such, programming which is on in the middle of the day and is trying harder to reachout to families and a younger crowd should NOT be running advertisements which may be qustionable to the demographic. That's all. The MNF thing I thought was hypocritical of the NFL, but the stuff on Sunday afternoon i have a problem with. ----------------------------------------------------- Sometimes it is more important to protect LIFE than Liberty Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites SkyDekker 1,150 #48 November 18, 2004 QuoteI don't think a child should have to deal with the mature subject of Sex. With sex comes responsability, and i don't feel that that is a burden a 5 yr old needs to bare.... And when does it stop. DO I then need to explain all aspects of sex? Blow jobs anal Sex Genital warts Rape ??????? Or you could discuss it as an act between adults who really love eachother. Discussing sex does not equal going out and doing it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites storm1977 0 #49 November 18, 2004 You are correct, but like I said, with sex and the topic of sex come a sense of responsibility and maturity which I do NOT feel 5yr olds should be subjected to. This is how I feel. Do you want the Public Schools teaching SEX ED in Kindergarden? I don't want the tv forcing me to discuss with my family what I don't think they are ready for. It is bad enough that kids now have to be explained what terrorists are, what beheadings are, what war is.... It is a lot for a kid, and 5 IMO is too young. Let the kid have childhood before they live the stressful lives we all do. ----------------------------------------------------- Sometimes it is more important to protect LIFE than Liberty Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites PhillyKev 0 #50 November 18, 2004 Do you want the Public Schools teaching SEX ED in Kindergarden? Sure Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 Next Page 2 of 3 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
peregrinerose 0 #31 November 18, 2004 QuoteNo, actually they're not. Other gov't agencies are getting in the game. The FDA has ordered Pfizer to pull their Viagra advertising for being "too suggestive". This is not remotely true. The FDA has nothing to do with how suggestive things are, for one thing, that is the FCC. The FDA is trying to have the ads pulled because they promise things that the drug does not do (increase sex drive) and does not mention the potential side effects of the drug. Jen Do or do not, there is no try -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #32 November 18, 2004 Front page, Wall Street Journal, 11/16/04 QuoteThe FDA told Pfizer to pull its tv ads for Viagra, indicating that they were too suggestive. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tigra 0 #33 November 18, 2004 I'm in shock over how much attention this is getting, I really am. Although I shouldn't be. Look how much coverage American Idol got last year with their controversial "votes"! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
peregrinerose 0 #34 November 18, 2004 The wall street journal apparently can't read direct documentation from the FDA. Below is the letter from the FDA to Pfeizer... http://www.fda.gov/cder/warn/2004/12726.pdf The letter states only that the ads 'suggest' things that the drug does not do. Do or do not, there is no try -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
storm1977 0 #35 November 18, 2004 Quote http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=494&u=/ap/20041117/ap_en_tv/fcc_indecency_2&printer=1 So lemme get this straight . . . Viagra ads -- ok "And Twins!" -- ok Watching one of the most violent games ever conceived -- ok. But this is wrong because some kids may have seen a woman's naked back? Uh, I don't get it. What are we -- back in the 1960s? The Hypocracy of the NFL is disgusting..... Tagliabo was out there Crying foul when the ESPN show "Playmakers" showed NFL players in a bad light. Tagliabo succeeded in getting the show pulled from the air. Then they approve in an NFL lockeroom with an NFL player, this type of activety.... It is on the verge of being stupid. I have no respect for the NFL. And Don't for a minute pretend this was all ABC. The NFL knows exactly what is happening.... No cameras or players could be involved in this with out specific permission from the Commisioners office. ----------------------------------------------------- Sometimes it is more important to protect LIFE than Liberty Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #36 November 18, 2004 Ahhh...then it's actually my mis-interpretation. They meant suggestive in terms of it's effectiveness. I assumed they meant sexually suggestive. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,462 #37 November 18, 2004 I'm glad to see that we, as a nation, are finally starting to look past the distracting trivia (like the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, oil dependence, nuclear proliferation, civil rights etc) and focus on the real issues of the day, like how much of whose butt you can see in which commercial. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
storm1977 0 #38 November 18, 2004 QuoteI'm glad to see that we, as a nation, are finally starting to look past the distracting trivia (like the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, oil dependence, nuclear proliferation, civil rights etc) and focus on the real issues of the day, like how much of whose butt you can see in which commercial. I happen to think that issues about what is aired on tv is very important. I wouldn't want to have to explaine to my kid at 5yrs old what viagra is used for, or what an erection that lasts for 4 hrs is..... It isn't nessesary at that age. And yes, Viagra commercials air when 4 and 5yr olds are still awake!! ----------------------------------------------------- Sometimes it is more important to protect LIFE than Liberty Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #39 November 18, 2004 So, then anything that airs during the hours that children might be awake that you'd feel uncomfortable with explaining to a 5-year-old should be not be allowed? That's rediculous! Do you have any idea the scope of what that would include? Personally I'd like a bit more variety in my broadcast viewing choices than Barney and the Teletubbies.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
peregrinerose 0 #40 November 18, 2004 Naaah, not your misinterpretation. When I read that I took it the same way as you did. Do or do not, there is no try -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,150 #41 November 18, 2004 QuoteI wouldn't want to have to explaine to my kid at 5yrs old what viagra is used for, or what an erection that lasts for 4 hrs is..... Viagra shouldn't be that hard to explain to a child. I have never seen a viagra add that mentiones erection or durations of erections. since I doubt a 4 or 5 year old knows what an erection is, they would not even get any hint at that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #42 November 18, 2004 QuoteI wouldn't want to have to explaine to my kid at 5yrs old what viagra is used for, or what an erection that lasts for 4 hrs is..... It isn't nessesary at that age. Is it harmful to a 5 year old to know about sex? In other words, do you think having to have a discussion with your 5 year old about sex would be damaging to them? Or do you just want to censor it so that you aren't uncomfortable having to talk about it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,150 #43 November 18, 2004 QuoteIs it harmful to a 5 year old to know about sex? In other words, do you think having to have a discussion with your 5 year old about sex would be damaging to them? Or do you just want to censor it so that you aren't uncomfortable having to talk about it. Now there is the million dollar question. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
peregrinerose 0 #44 November 18, 2004 Considering that a lot of 12 year olds are having sex, my kids are going to have it just part of life, normal conversation, not some taboo secret thing. They need to be aware of what is going on so they can make good choices for themselves. Talk about a thread hijack though. Do or do not, there is no try -Yoda Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
storm1977 0 #45 November 18, 2004 QuoteQuoteI wouldn't want to have to explaine to my kid at 5yrs old what viagra is used for, or what an erection that lasts for 4 hrs is..... It isn't nessesary at that age. Is it harmful to a 5 year old to know about sex? In other words, do you think having to have a discussion with your 5 year old about sex would be damaging to them? Or do you just want to censor it so that you aren't uncomfortable having to talk about it. I don't think a child should have to deal with the mature subject of Sex. With sex comes responsability, and i don't feel that that is a burden a 5 yr old needs to bare.... And when does it stop. DO I then need to explain all aspects of sex? Blow jobs anal Sex Genital warts Rape ??????? Again, that is not a burden a 5yr old should be forced to understand or comprehend. ----------------------------------------------------- Sometimes it is more important to protect LIFE than Liberty Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
storm1977 0 #46 November 18, 2004 QuoteQuoteI wouldn't want to have to explaine to my kid at 5yrs old what viagra is used for, or what an erection that lasts for 4 hrs is..... Viagra shouldn't be that hard to explain to a child. I have never seen a viagra add that mentiones erection or durations of erections. since I doubt a 4 or 5 year old knows what an erection is, they would not even get any hint at that. Umm Cialis specifically says.. "If an erection last for more than 4 hours please seek medical attention..." I doubt a 4 or 5 yrs old knows what an erection is too, hence the problem. Now my 4 or 5yr old will say... Daddy.. What is an erection? ----------------------------------------------------- Sometimes it is more important to protect LIFE than Liberty Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
storm1977 0 #47 November 18, 2004 QuoteSo, then anything that airs during the hours that children might be awake that you'd feel uncomfortable with explaining to a 5-year-old should be not be allowed? That's rediculous! Do you have any idea the scope of what that would include? Personally I'd like a bit more variety in my broadcast viewing choices than Barney and the Teletubbies. Nope, not what I said... Good trying to put words in my mouth. The NFL has been complain over the years that its audience is too old... It has been trying to reach a younger crowd. As such, programming which is on in the middle of the day and is trying harder to reachout to families and a younger crowd should NOT be running advertisements which may be qustionable to the demographic. That's all. The MNF thing I thought was hypocritical of the NFL, but the stuff on Sunday afternoon i have a problem with. ----------------------------------------------------- Sometimes it is more important to protect LIFE than Liberty Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,150 #48 November 18, 2004 QuoteI don't think a child should have to deal with the mature subject of Sex. With sex comes responsability, and i don't feel that that is a burden a 5 yr old needs to bare.... And when does it stop. DO I then need to explain all aspects of sex? Blow jobs anal Sex Genital warts Rape ??????? Or you could discuss it as an act between adults who really love eachother. Discussing sex does not equal going out and doing it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
storm1977 0 #49 November 18, 2004 You are correct, but like I said, with sex and the topic of sex come a sense of responsibility and maturity which I do NOT feel 5yr olds should be subjected to. This is how I feel. Do you want the Public Schools teaching SEX ED in Kindergarden? I don't want the tv forcing me to discuss with my family what I don't think they are ready for. It is bad enough that kids now have to be explained what terrorists are, what beheadings are, what war is.... It is a lot for a kid, and 5 IMO is too young. Let the kid have childhood before they live the stressful lives we all do. ----------------------------------------------------- Sometimes it is more important to protect LIFE than Liberty Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #50 November 18, 2004 Do you want the Public Schools teaching SEX ED in Kindergarden? Sure Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
