News: FOX TV DOES IT AGAIN!!!

My TV has both a channel selector and an OFF button. If enough people don't watch, the show won't make it. Simple economics...if it can't make money, it will be dropped.

 

Has there been a television show put out that was taken off the air or lost ratings due to a boycott? I'm just curious about the effectiveness of such a threat. If it's never worked in the past, I'd think that threatening it would be a bit pointless. If it has worked in the past then great, but I'm clueless as to the facts.
Gina

 

It makes no difference to them whether you watch it or not. If you are not a member of the Nielson Family you don't count. Advertisers do care and by letting them know that you won't be buying their product if they continue sponsering the program it will make a very small but real difference. If enough people do the same, then they will withdraw their support and THEN, it will be a matter of economics. Controversy just fans the fire and makes for bigger audiences (there are more lost than saved). The only thing they respond to is lowered profits for their decisions.

 

Sponsors do care, if you're their target market. "Banned in Boston" used to be a selling point.

Anyone know who are the sponsors of this sleaze? Somehow I'd expect them to be malt liquor companies, condom makers and such who wouldn't care much for the Christian demographic.

I'm not watching to find out

 

Yes, tobacco...they're not allowed to advertise that but they own so many food & fast food companies, I can't keep track.

Your list is impressive. I'd think that Alberto-Culver would certainly care.

 

OH That's pitiful that they can put such trash on the air! SICKENING! Thanks, Granny Sue for posting about this. I just signed the petition. Makes me feel good that we can do something, even if it is little.
~Miss Abby

 

Signed.

Thanks ------Bart

 

Unless there's serious action behind a boycott (Like when the SBC and many others boycotted Disney), corporations scoff at letters threatening a ban because you've given mental assent to the company and/or product.

 

Sometimes these petitions are counter-productive. The publicity causes more people to watch in order to protest the attempted censorship.

Just don't watch it. BTW, what day is it on and, time does it start?

 

Blessed16,

After reading your description of Paradise Hotel, I searched for other descriptions of it on the Internet. I didn't find anything as scandalous as you suggested. I suspect that you or whoever sent you the description exaggerated a bit. And by the way, since it is a reality type show, the actual events have not yet been determined. So you may be needlessly concerned. But let's suppose that it will turn out to be as luridly sexual as you suggest. Do you have the moral right to tell adults how they should behave on TV? Do you also have the right to censor what other adults see on TV? Maybe you do, but I think that the point is open to question. You can go to your neighborhood stores and see Playboy and other magazines that have similar themes. They are apparently still sold because the courts have found that they cannot be censored. By assuming the right to censor things that others see, you are assuming that you know better than they how they should live their lives. I am not sure that you should have that much power. I am not sure I want to surrender any of my rights to you, no matter how well intentioned you may be.

 

>>>>Question: If you are a Christian; why would you be so set on keeping a show like this on the air?<<<<<<

Because I think censorship is a greater evil than whatever might be in the show. I think that the owners of TVs are responsible enough to control what is seen in their own homes. I don't think you have any right to interfere just because the contents may not be to your liking. Besides, I think that Fox is a responsible organization and is perhaps as well qualified as you or any religious group to decide what the should have on TV.

 

Sue,

Just look at Peter's location and I think that will clear things up...he is from liberal California...

He is probably hoping to see the show and that is why he is upset that you are standing against it.

Peter,

Sue has no power to censor what you watch as a government authority. But, she does have the right to censor what is watched in her own home. She also has the right to speak her mind about filth and try to persuade the network and advertisers that this isn't the right way to go through her boycott. It is called freedom of speech. You know, that issue that liberals hold on to as the Holy Grail until a conservative excercises that right.

Joseph Botwinick

 

>>>>>>>>>I am not assuming anything. I am concerned about a filthy show on TV that many teens will be watching when left alone by themselves. I think we need better role models for them; don't you?<<<<<<

Firstly, you have not seen the show yourself, so you can't be sure it is actually objectionable. Maybe your source exaggerated the situation. And since it is reality type show, without a script, you cannot know what the future contents will be. Secondly, even if the contents are objectionable, the teens you mention have parents and they are the ones who properly should decide whether their children should watch or not. You should stick to your own knitting and stay out of the lives of others who may not want your interference.

 

Peter, I agree. Plus, most people don't use the V-Chip controls that are in every TV made these days to lock out programming that is rated for mature audiences. The tools are there to filter your kids' viewing. People would rather censor what other adults watch than to use the tools they possess.