Topic: Wal-Mart & Censorship (Read 8622 times)

bobo · « **Reply #25 on:** April 14, 2004, 04:26:54 PM »

So your saying that I don't have the right to censor what I watch? I have to watch or read everypart of something to get it? That's crap, what you get out of something depends on you. Some people may need to experience the whole thing, other may not. Filtering if done by somebody else is censorship. If I do it, too myself it's called choice and it something people to everyday

Demosthenes · « **Reply #26 on:** April 14, 2004, 04:30:19 PM »

Quote from: bobo

So your saying that I don't have the right to censor what I watch? I have to watch or read everypart of something to get it? That's crap, what you get out of something depends on you. Some people may need to experience the whole thing, other may not. Filtering if done by somebody else is censorship. If I do it, too myself it's called choice and it something people to everyday

I think what cat's saying is that it is far too dangerous a thing for even individuals to so easily, casually and seamlessly censor things in this way... it leads one to some conclusions that are quite chilling, when you think about it.

This is one case where "slippery slope" is a pretty valid concern.

Judgie, I think that was Spurt's. I didn't have that many alternative FARK logins.

pbsaurus · « **Reply #27 on:** April 14, 2004, 04:37:52 PM »

Sure someday I'd love to be a Judge, the powertrip and all that but today I'm played by Pbsaurus

hackess · « **Reply #28 on:** April 14, 2004, 04:58:54 PM »

Quote from: Demosthenes

I think what cat's saying is that it is far too dangerous a thing for even individuals to so easily, casually and seamlessly censor things in this way... it leads one to some conclusions that are quite chilling, when you think about it.

That's exactly what I'm saying.

bobo, deciding what you personally get out of a work of literature or movie is not censorship; it's interpretation. The problem with what you're suggesting is that one cannot make an accurate interpretation if one does not consider all the components available.

Let's put it this way; if you watch only half a movie, how do you know you're really "getting" it?

bobo · « **Reply #29 on:** April 14, 2004, 05:23:27 PM »

Well I would have to say depends on the movie, If it's something with some depth..then sure I would agree that there is little chance that you could "get" the movie. But most of today's movies,music, books lack that depth. Of course there are exceptions too that, but for your average movie or book, they are pretty simply.For those type of movies, books...etc, I don't believe you need to experience the whole thing to get it. I am not going to classify what I consider " depth" because what "depth" is open to interpretation. I mean, do you need to watch the whole Scooby Doo movies or any of the Rock's movies to get them? No, I am not saying ,I didn't enjoy these movies. I just citied these as movies I felt I could have not watch half of and still got

hackess · « **Reply #30 on:** April 14, 2004, 05:40:28 PM »

Why are you using as examples movies that wouldn't get much censored from them?

Try reading a book--any book, even the shallowest supermarket romance novel--by skipping every fourth chapter. Tell me how that goes.

bobo · « **Reply #31 on:** April 14, 2004, 06:34:40 PM »

okay read any Star Trek book, or a Terry Pratchett book. Even I Robot by good old Isaac, all of these books I just skimmed through, jumping past the boring parts and I still feel like got them. True the question is, did I really get them? or do I just feel like I got them? Well question of wether not I got them can only be answered by myself or maybe somebody else that reading the book and then discussing it with me. Without viewing or reading the same material you can't judge wether or not I would be able to get it by skipping past certain parts or not. I just feel your argument of that "you must experience the whole of anything to get it", is too much of a general statement that can't be applied to specific person. The question of getting it, depends on the person not the material presented or section of material presented. The reason I picked the movies i did is because we seem to have moved away from the censorship question and more into the what it takes to " get " something question

hackess · « **Reply #32 on:** April 14, 2004, 07:42:22 PM »

Quote from: bobo

okay read any Star Trek book, or a Terry Pratchett book.

Star Trek and Terry Pratchett fall in the sci-fi/fantasy realm, no? I'm sorry, but so many of those books follow a cookie-cutter plot structure. I want you to tell me you've read Crime & Punishment like you read Star Trek books--skimming through "the boring parts." You're really not showing me any depth here. Expand your genres and then we'll talk.

hackess · « **Reply #33 on:** April 14, 2004, 08:25:59 PM »

Quote from: catwritr

Quote from: bobo
okay read any Star Trek book, or a Terry Pratchett book.

Star Trek and Terry Pratchett fall in the sci-fi/fantasy realm, no? I'm sorry, but so many of those books, like romance novels, follow a cookie-cutter plot structure. I want you to tell me you've read Crime & Punishment like you read Star Trek books--skimming through "the boring parts." Yet you cannot tell me that skipping over sections of the book gives you the complete story. You're really not showing me any depth here. Expand your genres and then we'll talk.

Law · « **Reply #34 on:** April 14, 2004, 09:02:58 PM »

Quote from: catwritr

Quote from: catwritr
Quote from: bobo
okay read any Star Trek book, or a Terry Pratchett book.

Star Trek and Terry Pratchett fall in the sci-fi/fantasy realm, no? I'm sorry, but so many of those books, like romance novels, follow a cookie-cutter plot structure. I want you to tell me you've read Crime & Punishment like you read Star Trek books--skimming through "the boring parts." Yet you cannot tell me that skipping over sections of the book gives you the complete story. You're really not showing me any depth here. Expand your genres and then we'll talk.

hackess · « **Reply #35 on:** April 14, 2004, 09:18:37 PM »

Hmm. How'd I do that...

bobo · « **Reply #36 on:** April 14, 2004, 10:44:52 PM »

I already stated that yes I agreed with you that anything that has depth needs to be fully experience to "get" it. Such as the adventurues of Sherlock Holmes, league of red headed men, a personal fav of mine. I was simply providing examples of things that are failrly popular that are not all that deep where not experiencing the whole thing would be no great loss. More examples, any sitcom. But the orginal comment I believe that was made that Walmart is selling the dvd player with the ablity to skip over certain parts of movies and that is a form of censorship. censorship is defined as The act, process, or practice of censoring. How is Wal-mart by selling a product that once it leaves the store ,they have no control of, a form of censorship? No one has to use those functions. If they choose not too. Those that choose to have the right to.
People also have the right not by the DVD player.

Demosthenes · « **Reply #37 on:** April 15, 2004, 08:10:39 AM »

Quote from: pbsaurus

Sure someday I'd love to be a Judge, the powertrip and all that but today I'm played by Pbsaurus

D'oh!

Sorry, Pb.. I'm really out of it this week.

Law · « **Reply #38 on:** April 15, 2004, 08:21:47 AM »

Quote from: bobo

censorship is defined as The act, process, or practice of censoring. How is Wal-mart by selling a product that once it leaves the store ,they have no control of, a form of censorship? No one has to use those functions. If they choose not too. Those that choose to have the right to.
People also have the right not by the DVD player.

There you go, slick.

hackess · « **Reply #39 on:** April 15, 2004, 08:24:21 AM »

Quote from: bobo

How is Wal-mart by selling a product that once it leaves the store ,they have no control of, a form of censorship? No one has to use those functions.

Dude, I never said it was Wal-Mart that was doing the censoring.

From the original article:

Quote

Wal-Mart is selling the world's first DVD player that can seamlessly skip over violence, swearing, nudity and other potentially offensive movie content. The $79 unit features technology by ClearPlay and is manufactured by Thomson Inc. under its RCA brand.

Technically, ClearPlay and Thomson Inc. are responsible.

bobo · « **Reply #40 on:** April 15, 2004, 10:14:39 AM »

how are ClearPlay and Thomson Inc censoring anything? All they are doing is selling a DVD player with options that people may or may not use. ClearPlay and Thomson are not telling people what they can and can not watch. Some one telling me what I can say,do or watch that's censorship. Some one making a DVD player to sell is not censorship. Sometimes a cookie is just a cookie and DVD player is a DVD player

News:

Recent Forum Posts

Shout Box

Forum Stats

Members

Stats

Author Topic: Wal-Mart & Censorship (Read 8622 times)

bobo

Wal-Mart & Censorship

Demosthenes

Wal-Mart & Censorship

pbsaurus

Wal-Mart & Censorship

hackess

Wal-Mart & Censorship

bobo

Wal-Mart & Censorship

hackess

Wal-Mart & Censorship

bobo

Wal-Mart & Censorship

hackess

Wal-Mart & Censorship

hackess

Wal-Mart & Censorship

Law

Wal-Mart & Censorship

hackess

Wal-Mart & Censorship

bobo

Wal-Mart & Censorship

Demosthenes

Wal-Mart & Censorship

Law

Wal-Mart & Censorship

hackess

Wal-Mart & Censorship

bobo

Wal-Mart & Censorship