←back to thread

1444 points feross | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.239s | source
Show context
TazeTSchnitzel ◴[] No.32641381[source]
It's really interesting that such a bland, un-subversive show whose only mentions of sensitive topics are in bad throwaway jokes is so heavily censored. I guess a more interesting show would just not get aired at all.
replies(11): >>32641593 #>>32641959 #>>32641967 #>>32642113 #>>32642265 #>>32642275 #>>32642430 #>>32642432 #>>32642533 #>>32642820 #>>32643185 #
commandlinefan ◴[] No.32642265[source]
> such a bland, un-subversive show ... is so heavily censored

American censorship is honestly no better, it's just that the show was written with the specifics of American censorship in mind.

replies(1): >>32642424 #
function_seven ◴[] No.32642424[source]
Bullshit.

Sorry, this "we're the same" retort is exhausting. The United States government does not employ censors to remove portions of shows before allowing them to air (or stream, whatever). The closest thing I can think of is DoD not giving access to a movie unless it paints Navy pilots in a certain light. Okay, fine. Not nearly the same as what this site is showing us.

Yes, we have cultural taboos, like any culture. Studios have more trouble presenting some viewpoints over others. Chappelle gets protested, that one episode of Community was memory-holed on Hulu (but not on Amazon!). We ban pornography on public airwaves (but not on streaming or cable or satellite, or Blueray).

If you compare and contrast the pervasiveness of censorship between China and the United States, the difference is huge.

When it comes to artistic freedom, the US is way better than China. Maybe you can say we can improve even more, sure. But that's a long way off from our censorship being "honestly no better".

replies(4): >>32642551 #>>32642611 #>>32642906 #>>32651164 #
some-human ◴[] No.32642906[source]
Say the word "Bullshit" and then show a erect penis on Wheel of Fortune and see how that 'we don't censor things' goes for you.
replies(1): >>32642972 #
function_seven ◴[] No.32642972[source]
I guarantee you that the footage would be a viral sensation online. King World productions would decline to air it, okay. But if it leaked, it would be viewed by millions.

Are you saying that a production company not airing craziness is the same as being arrested for calling your leader a cartoon bear? Is that the equivalency I'm supposed to be drawing? (https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/tweets-01232020164342...)

replies(1): >>32643408 #
some-human ◴[] No.32643408[source]
Not only would they "decline to air it" they are prohibited from airing it.

> Broadcasting obscene content is prohibited by law at all times of the day. Indecent and profane content are prohibited on broadcast TV and radio between 6 a.m. and 10 p.m., when there is a reasonable risk that children may be in the audience.

> Obscene content does not have protection by the First Amendment. For content to be ruled obscene, it must meet a three-pronged test established by the Supreme Court: It must appeal to an average person's prurient interest; depict or describe sexual conduct in a "patently offensive" way; and, taken as a whole, lack serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value.

via [https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/obscene-indecent-and-pr....]

Christ in the Original Star Trek run CBS had a censor employed on set for an episode where a character wore a risky outfit to make sure no nipples popped out. That isn't different to this Chinese company making sure their shows meet the restrictions of the Chinese authority.

Your weird puritan country will air a show where a character shoots someone with a gun in the street, in your copaganda shows, but god forbid one of them gets a tit out whilst they do it.

replies(1): >>32643546 #
function_seven ◴[] No.32643546[source]
My argument is against the statement that the US is “honestly no better”

You’re raising a point about RF broadcast of obscene content. That’s a tiny slice of available media. What China is censoring is being done as completely as they can muster. What the FCC censors is narrowed down to airwave broadcasts.

Surely you can see that there’s a difference here, right?

Tank Man is prohibited completely. Not just over a certain delivery method, during certain times of day.

replies(1): >>32643701 #
some-human ◴[] No.32643701[source]
Yes, I see that. My retort was to "The United States government does not employ censors to remove portions of shows before allowing them to air (or stream, whatever)." which it effectively does.

The scale isn't black and white with China being terrible and USA being great here, it's a sliding scale of shitness, with one being a 4/10 and the other 9/10, but the 4/10 pretends to be a 0/10 and proports "free speech for all. Home of the Free world. The government can't tell you what you can say and do." and the other doesn't pretend it is.

replies(1): >>32643915 #
1. function_seven ◴[] No.32643915[source]
Then you’re arguing with someone else. I’ve never claimed the US is “0/10” or any such silliness. I made sure to acknowledge what censorship does exist here. I referenced FCC authority in that first comment.

“Honestly no better”

That’s what set me off, because it so obviously not true. It’s better in the US. Not perfect. But definitely better.