babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » current events   » international news and politics   » Venezuela cans the Simpsons

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Venezuela cans the Simpsons
leftyboy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14159

posted 08 April 2008 11:05 AM      Profile for leftyboy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Venezuela has said The Simpsons pushed “messages that go against the whole education of boys, girls and adolescents”.

In its 11:00am time slot the government has opted for a more "child appropriate" show. Baywatch. All hail the Hoff!
Article

[ 08 April 2008: Message edited by: leftyboy ]


From: Toronto | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
N.Beltov
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4140

posted 08 April 2008 11:48 AM      Profile for N.Beltov   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I can't help but notice that the Times Online Entertainment story was accompanied by a photograph of bikini-clad (female only) cast members of Baywatch. It was right beside a cleavage shot from "Dallas turns 30".

Presumably, therefore, the Times approves of the change and will be sending the Venezuelan National Telecommunications Commission a note indicating their complete agreement with the new policy of getting rid of The Simpsons and replacing it with the kind of material that the Times, itself, graces its web pages with.

Not.


From: Vancouver Island | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
leftyboy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14159

posted 08 April 2008 02:47 PM      Profile for leftyboy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I forgot that the Times was geared to children. Seriously are you saying that you're not slightly amused at Venezuela's contortions of logic to replace The Simpsons with Baywatch? Or can the dear leader do no wrong, food riots and political oppression aside.
From: Toronto | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
M. Spector
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8273

posted 08 April 2008 03:04 PM      Profile for M. Spector   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by leftyboy:
Seriously are you saying that you're not slightly amused at Venezuela's contortions of logic to replace The Simpsons with Baywatch? Or can the dear leader do no wrong, food riots and political oppression aside.
Food riots? Am I missing something? The last ones I heard of were in 1989!

Political oppression? Bullshit.

Is there a shred of evidence anywhere that Hugo Chávez had anything to do with this decision? All the reports I have seen indicate that the National Telecommunications Commission received complaints from viewers about the Simpsons, and the directive came from them. Do you seriously think Chávez doesn't have anything better to do than meddle in the programming schedules of television stations?

The objection was apparently to the 11 a.m. time slot. The Simpsons has not been banned, or taken off the air altogether.

And how come the business of the telecommunications regulators in Venezuela makes international news? Where was the snickering from the Times of London and the international blogosphere when the CBC decided last month to cancel Intelligence, after its plotline got a little too uncomfortable for the Harper government?


From: One millihelen: The amount of beauty required to launch one ship. | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
N.Beltov
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4140

posted 08 April 2008 03:30 PM      Profile for N.Beltov   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
leftyboy: I forgot that the Times was geared to children.

My point was that the Times was able to display bikini clad women and squawk about the apparently dumb decision of the Venezuelan NTC at the same time. The intended entertainment, in this case, is mocking the decision of the NTC while at the same time imitating it by showing the graphic for Baywatch, and not The Simpson's, alongside the cleavage shot from Dallas, etc..

The whole thing has been completely de-contextualized so that we don't even know the reasoning of the decision makers. The point, from the perspective of the Times, is to laugh at the stupidity of it while simultaneously oogling at the women's cleavage. The Times is as much mocking its readers as it is mocking the Venezuelan NTC. Yes, this means you, leftyboy.


From: Vancouver Island | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
leftyboy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14159

posted 08 April 2008 03:49 PM      Profile for leftyboy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Have a read

Guardian


From: Toronto | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
M. Spector
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8273

posted 08 April 2008 03:57 PM      Profile for M. Spector   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Yeah. I read that before. Since it has nothing to do with the topic of this thread, I assume it must have come up on your Google search for "Caracas food riots".

Only trouble is, there's a period after Caracas. The "food riots" part is in another sentence - one that doesn't refer to Venezuela.

In fact, the food riots they refer to are in nice, friendly pro-imperialist countries like Mexico, and in fact are caused by global climate change - not anything to do with the evil dictator who rules Venezuela with an iron fist and loves to see people starve.


From: One millihelen: The amount of beauty required to launch one ship. | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
leftyboy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14159

posted 08 April 2008 04:01 PM      Profile for leftyboy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I just love watching you and Fidel defending any action that comes out of The Generalissimo's mouth. From his UN speeches to his human rights abuses. He is a petty dictator, like Fidel, with images of grandeur. Just because he speaks out against US imperialism does not make him right or our friend.

There is no context in pulling the Simpson's under the guise of protecting the children only to replace it with the one of the most sexist and objectifying shows of all time. Let us not even dwell on the irony that they are both produced by FOX.

The Simpson's is a subversive show that makes people think and Baywatch are boobs bouncing on the beach. No wonder they pulled it


From: Toronto | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
M. Spector
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8273

posted 08 April 2008 04:10 PM      Profile for M. Spector   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Your ignorance is exceeded only by your capacity to distort. Chávez isn't even a general, let alone a generalissimo.

And the decision to run Baywatch was not made by Chávez, was not made by the National Telecommunications Commission, was not made by the "government" as you said in your ignorant opening post, but was made by the private TV station itself. Address your complaints to them.


From: One millihelen: The amount of beauty required to launch one ship. | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Doug
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 44

posted 08 April 2008 04:31 PM      Profile for Doug   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by leftyboy:
Venezuela has said The Simpsons pushed “messages that go against the whole education of boys, girls and adolescents”.

See if I say anything nice about Hugo Chavez now.
I like him, with the occasional caveat, but I love The Simpsons.

quote:
David Hasselhoff and his aerodynamic life-saving cohorts began their slow-motion jog across the nation’s screens on Friday morning, after a ruling that The Simpsons was in danger of breaching the Law of Social Responsibility in Radio and Television.

That is just really really odd...Baywatch is judged more socially responsible.

[ 08 April 2008: Message edited by: Doug ]


From: Toronto, Canada | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
N.Beltov
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4140

posted 08 April 2008 04:35 PM      Profile for N.Beltov   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Here's a detail that The Times overlooked:

quote:
Xinhuanet: Guillen said it is up to Televen's management whether "The Simpsons" may be shown at another time of day.

The school day in Venezuela is like bar hours in England. A few hours on, a break for a few hours, and then back again. So the ruling presumably is to "protect" kids who are home from school.

More comments ....

quote:
I think I can help you out a bit. I'm from Venezuela, even though I now live in Memphis. This whole "inappropriate" for the kids thing, refers to a law that now has place back there where shows have to be classified according in categories of health, sex, violence. And it is assumed that anything during the day can be watched by children....
Venezuelan tv is horrible anyway, it consist of badly translated, bad soap operas and maybe one or 2 semi-good national productions.

From: Vancouver Island | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
N.Beltov
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4140

posted 08 April 2008 04:39 PM      Profile for N.Beltov   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Doug: That is just really really odd...Baywatch is judged more socially responsible.

In our own country, children can watch the most horrific violence but the line is much more firmly drawn at nudity. That's just as stupid, maybe more so, than the Venezuelan regulatory ruling.


From: Vancouver Island | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
M. Spector
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8273

posted 09 April 2008 06:58 AM      Profile for M. Spector   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
News the BBC and London Times forgot to cover
From: One millihelen: The amount of beauty required to launch one ship. | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
scooter
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5548

posted 09 April 2008 07:23 AM      Profile for scooter     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by M. Spector:
And how come the business of the telecommunications regulators in Venezuela makes international news?

My thoughts exactly. Shouldn't this be in the
the media forum? I mean seriously, this is right up there with the CBC shutting down the last media run orchestra.

From: High River | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
M. Spector
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8273

posted 09 April 2008 07:29 AM      Profile for M. Spector   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
How about in the Youth Issues forum?

I think the reason it's in the International News and Politics Forum is that this is the one where mindless parroting of MSM distortions and lies about unfashionable countries normally get a full airing.

The following is a case in point.

[ 09 April 2008: Message edited by: M. Spector ]


From: One millihelen: The amount of beauty required to launch one ship. | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Ibelongtonoone
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14539

posted 09 April 2008 07:44 AM      Profile for Ibelongtonoone        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
yes thank goodness they stopped children from seeing an erudite, subversive, hillarious, satrical show and replaced it with an updated version of Lassie - with the role of the hero dog played by half naked life guards, the female ones with huge breasts of course - the better to swim with.

If Chavez banned toilet paper, I suspect the usual suspects would appear to defend the ban and accuse any critics of working for the CIA.


From: Canada | Registered: Sep 2007  |  IP: Logged
N.Beltov
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4140

posted 09 April 2008 07:49 AM      Profile for N.Beltov   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Actually, if you'd read some of the contributions here, you might have noticed that The Simpson's wasn't banned at all. The regulatory body only insisted that it be shown at a different time from when kids would likely be exposed to it.

What were you saying about the usual suspects again?


From: Vancouver Island | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
N.Beltov
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4140

posted 09 April 2008 08:05 AM      Profile for N.Beltov   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Ibelongtonoone has been gored. Round up the usual suspects.
From: Vancouver Island | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Ibelongtonoone
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14539

posted 09 April 2008 10:12 AM      Profile for Ibelongtonoone        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
after thought - I withdraw my provocation - Beltov

This non story is amusing only in the sense that those who likely mocked or feigned indignation when George Bush the 1st said almost the exact same thing about the Simpsons ten years ago - now defend the view for Venezuela -

in the US the tv networks told Bush to change the channel luckily.

But I guess i can see how Baywatch would be considered children's programming - it suit's a child's IQ and it awakes fond memories of nestling in a mother's bosom.


From: Canada | Registered: Sep 2007  |  IP: Logged
N.Beltov
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4140

posted 09 April 2008 10:21 AM      Profile for N.Beltov   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Well, that's big of you. I hope I can conduct myself in the same manner when my own ox is gored.

One of the commentators from the US noted that the FCC in his country, or our own CRTC for that matter, has made some equally (apparently) dumb decisions.

Thing is, The Simpson's is an adult cartoon. But is that reason enough to push it off a time slot for kids? It's not South Park, mind you, and the language isn't nearly so trooper-like, but it's nevertheless difficult to figure out what the reasoning of the Venezuelan NTC might have been.


From: Vancouver Island | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Ibelongtonoone
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14539

posted 09 April 2008 10:38 AM      Profile for Ibelongtonoone        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
When ever Big Brother from whatever country says " Won't somebody please think of the children" I get suspicious.

February 1913. Bluffton, S.C. Oyster shuckers at Lowden Canning. "Ten-year old Frank. Shucks four pots a day."

10 yr olds more mature in 1913 than 20 yr olds today

Why I Let My 9-Year-Old Ride the Subway Alone

[ 09 April 2008: Message edited by: Ibelongtonoone ]


From: Canada | Registered: Sep 2007  |  IP: Logged
kropotkin1951
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2732

posted 09 April 2008 10:49 AM      Profile for kropotkin1951   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
When my son was growing up the Simpson's came on just after he came home from school. As a parent I told him I didn't care what his friends were watching he couldn't watch the Simpson's because it was an adult cartoon. When he got older I didn't care and in fact as a teenager I liked him watching it because it has good social commentary.

I like the Simpson's (although I think they are now on their third rotation of the same story lines)but I would still turn it off if my grandchildren who are in grade one and younger were in the house. I'd also turn of Baywatch but that is for political reasons i.e. I hate the objectification of women and I think it sends a bad message to children about women and their worth.

So does anyone know whose decision it was too replace the Simpson's with Baywatch. I know the regulator said remove Simpson's from that time slot but I doubt id they said what to replace it with. Gee isn't the TV station smart to shove this in the regulators face, it certainly has the attention of the American media.


From: North of Manifest Destiny | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
RosaL
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13921

posted 09 April 2008 10:51 AM      Profile for RosaL     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by kropotkin1951:
I know the regulator said remove Simpson's from that time slot but I doubt id they said what to replace it with. Gee isn't the TV station smart to shove this in the regulators face, it certainly has the attention of the American media.

I suspect you're right.


From: the underclass | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged
M. Spector
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8273

posted 09 April 2008 10:53 AM      Profile for M. Spector   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by kropotkin1951:
So does anyone know whose decision it was too replace the Simpson's with Baywatch.
As I indicated above, it was the decision of the private TV station in question.

From: One millihelen: The amount of beauty required to launch one ship. | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
jeff house
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 518

posted 09 April 2008 01:42 PM      Profile for jeff house     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
“It had to be taken off,” said Elba Guillen, a spokeswoman for Televen TV station (referring to The Simpsons). “The GOVERNMENT considers it to be a series that isn’t appropriate for that time because it isn’t appropriate for children.”

(Emphasis added).

A pro-Chavez site includes the official CONATEL announcement:

quote:
En el día de hoy 2/4/2008, CONATEL, en ejercicio de las competencias atribuidas por la Ley de Responsabilidad Social en Radio y Televisión y, en atención a denuncias recibidas por parte de los usuarios, inició un procedimiento administrativo sancionatorio a la operadora de televisión abierta TELEVEN por la difusión en horario “todo usuario” de la serie de televisión “los Simpsons”, específicamente a las 11:00 a.m., el cual presuntamente podría infringir las prohibiciones de difusión en dicho horario de mensajes que atentan contra la formación integral de niños, niñas y adolescentes, de conformidad con lo previsto en el artículo 7 de la Ley de Responsabilidad Social en Radio y Televisión.


In other words, the official TV oversight board initiated an "administrative sanctionary procedure" against the station.

The actual law, which they cite, was a law passed by Chavez et al. in 2005. It sets up THREE types of TV regimes:

1. 7AM to 7PM Time during which all programming must be appropriate for children of all ages.

2. 5-7 AM and 7-11 pm time during which programming is to be with parental guidance.

3. 11 PM to 5: AM Adult programming (restrictions apply re: explicit sex and violence).

The Simpsons is supposed to have been inappropriate because it contains "mensajes que atenten contra la formación integral de los niños".

"Messages which act against the appropriate formation of children".

ley de responsabilidad social


From: toronto | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Le Téléspectateur
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7126

posted 09 April 2008 02:49 PM      Profile for Le Téléspectateur     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
jeff (or anyone) - does formación mean formation? Or is it something more like training or teaching?
From: More here than there | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
anchovy breather
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14223

posted 09 April 2008 04:10 PM      Profile for anchovy breather     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Whose decision was it to replace it with Baywatch:Hawaii, and then alert the international media?
From: rotating, random | Registered: Jun 2007  |  IP: Logged
scooter
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5548

posted 17 April 2008 02:30 PM      Profile for scooter     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
It's back. The Simpson's return to an evening slot.
From: High River | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca