JDG wrote:
I don't think that's quite accurate outside of San Francisco. TO is the #1 selling jersey in the NFL, IIRC.
Of course. He's the resident bad boy of sports - the kind rebellious kids admire the most. Besides we don't hate T.O. here nearly as much as they hate him in Texas.
I think that it is a red herring to bring alcohol into this. I am no fan of alcohol, and have my occasional sympathies with the temperance movement, but I don't require that all those who share my views on other morals and
standards share my views on alcohol.
So why is it a red herring?
I think the key thing is that broadcast TV inherently involves a community compromise on standards. While some would prefer a much stricter standard on the images shown, language used, and topics discussied, and while others prefer a much looser (or no) standard - the standards that are used do
represent a de facto compromise by our community/civilization. I see no
problem with people being outraged at a sudden change in that compromise
and de facto generally accepted standards.
Personally, I think that standards should be looser in some respects and tighter in others. I think that the depiction of violence, especially when its done in an unrealistic manner such that it seems fun or romantic, is a hell of a lot more harmfull than nudity or pillow talk.
Well, I firmly disagree. As it is, this charge smacks of Dan M.'s usual
analysis that Republican Party is basically full of closet and tacit racists.
Wether you want to believe it or not there are alot of racists, closet and otherwise, Republican and otherwise, in the world and the thing that pisses them off the most is the sight of a beautiful white woman in the arms of a black man.
-- Doug _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
