Bush administration has cut off closed-captioning for nearly 200 TV shows.

[Fausto]

I'm pretty much rendered speechless by this one.

The Bush administration has cut off its closed captioning for nearly 200 TV shows, prompting charges of secret censorship to promote an ideological agenda.

This is not the first time the Bush administration has been accused of furthering agendas through censorship.

An internal memo in 2002 instructed federal government Web sites to eliminate content that "does not reflect the priorities, philosophies or goals of the present administration."

This included the disappearance from the Centers for Disease Control Web site of instructions on how to properly use a condom to avoid sexually transmitted diseases.

 

[Eli]

WTF??????? :|

My girlfriends mom is an interpreter for the deaf and deaf/blind. I'm sure her & her clients will find this extremely upsetting.

How can they just do something like that?....

 

[Nitemare]

Originally posted by: Fausto
I'm pretty much rendered speechless by this one.

The Bush administration has cut off its closed captioning for nearly 200 TV shows, prompting charges of secret censorship to promote an ideological agenda.

This is not the first time the Bush administration has been accused of furthering agendas through censorship.

An internal memo in 2002 instructed federal government Web sites to eliminate content that "does not reflect the priorities, philosophies or goals of the present administration."

This included the disappearance from the Centers for Disease Control Web site of instructions on how to properly use a condom to avoid sexually transmitted diseases.

Everything in the world that is bad is Bush's fault...surely you got the memo

 

[Ogg]

Whats the agenda behind this?

This cant save enough money to even give a crap about.........



edit:guess I could read the article next time.....


Not the XMen :Q

 

[Fausto]

Originally posted by: Nitemare

Originally posted by: Fausto
I'm pretty much rendered speechless by this one.

The Bush administration has cut off its closed captioning for nearly 200 TV shows, prompting charges of secret censorship to promote an ideological agenda.

This is not the first time the Bush administration has been accused of furthering agendas through censorship.

An internal memo in 2002 instructed federal government Web sites to eliminate content that "does not reflect the priorities, philosophies or goals of the present administration."

This included the disappearance from the Centers for Disease Control Web site of instructions on how to properly use a condom to avoid sexually transmitted diseases.

Everything in the world that is bad is Bush's fault...surely you got the memo

I take them on a case by case basis, and this one gets a big fat "thumbs down" from me. :|

 

[JDub02]

Why should taxpayers have to fund close captioning? Let the networks do it.

I'm tired of all this publically funded crap. If there's a market for it, the private sector will handle it.

 

[Yossarian]

that is extremely disturbing. what's next, will businesses that are deemed "unsavory" no longer have to allow handicapped access?

 

[Fausto]

Originally posted by: JDub02
Why should taxpayers have to fund close captioning? Let the networks do it.

I'm tired of all this publically funded crap. If there's a market for it, the private sector will handle it.

The big picture called, it misses you.

 

[Amused]

Why should the government pay for closed captioning anyhow?

 

[Nitemare]

Originally posted by: Fausto

Originally posted by: Nitemare

Originally posted by: Fausto
I'm pretty much rendered speechless by this one.

The Bush administration has cut off its closed captioning for nearly 200 TV shows, prompting charges of secret censorship to promote an ideological agenda.

This is not the first time the Bush administration has been accused of furthering agendas through censorship.

An internal memo in 2002 instructed federal government Web sites to eliminate content that "does not reflect the priorities, philosophies or goals of the present administration."

This included the disappearance from the Centers for Disease Control Web site of instructions on how to properly use a condom to avoid sexually transmitted diseases.

Everything in the world that is bad is Bush's fault...surely you got the memo

I take them on a case by case basis, and this one gets a big fat "thumbs down" from me. :|

How does it fall under the Bush administration to say yay or nay to what gets clear captioned? I did not know he chaired the local networks that do the captioning

"An internal memo in 2002 instructed federal government Web sites to eliminate content that "does not reflect the priorities, philosophies or goals of the present administration."

I like how it refers to things back has no proof whatsoever. I take this article with the same conclusion as reading about Jacko and Ahnuld's wild sex romp with Batboy in the Daily Sun

 

[Fausto]

Originally posted by: Amused
Why should the government pay for closed captioning anyhow?

Dunno, but they said flat-out in the article that it wasn't a cost-cutting measure so WTF are they up to?

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Fausto

Originally posted by: JDub02
Why should taxpayers have to fund close captioning? Let the networks do it.

I'm tired of all this publically funded crap. If there's a market for it, the private sector will handle it.

The big picture called, it misses you.

No, you missed it. While you quibble over what should and should not be captioned using public funds, I debate the larger point of whether or not captioning should be publicly funded at all.

 

[OutHouse]

Originally posted by: Amused
Why should the government pay for closed captioning anyhow?

Good question. I think it should be funded by the networks. not the taxpayers.

 

[Fausto]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Fausto

Originally posted by: JDub02
Why should taxpayers have to fund close captioning? Let the networks do it.

I'm tired of all this publically funded crap. If there's a market for it, the private sector will handle it.

The big picture called, it misses you.

No, you missed it. While you quibble over what should and should not be captioned using public funds, I debate the larger point of whether or not captioning should be publicly funded at all.

As above, they stated it's not a cost-cutting measure, so the issue is how/why certain shows "make the cut" while others do not.

 

[Fausto]

Originally posted by: Citrix

Originally posted by: Amused
Why should the government pay for closed captioning anyhow?

Good question. I think it should be funded by the networks. not the taxpayers.

Well, maybe they'll pick up the slack and do their own captioning. They're going to lose a lot of viewership from the (according to the article) 28 million people this affects otherwise.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Nitemare

Originally posted by: Fausto

Originally posted by: Nitemare

Originally posted by: Fausto
I'm pretty much rendered speechless by this one.

The Bush administration has cut off its closed captioning for nearly 200 TV shows, prompting charges of secret censorship to promote an ideological agenda.

This is not the first time the Bush administration has been accused of furthering agendas through censorship.

An internal memo in 2002 instructed federal government Web sites to eliminate content that "does not reflect the priorities, philosophies or goals of the present administration."

This included the disappearance from the Centers for Disease Control Web site of instructions on how to properly use a condom to avoid sexually transmitted diseases.

Everything in the world that is bad is Bush's fault...surely you got the memo

I take them on a case by case basis, and this one gets a big fat "thumbs down" from me. :|

How does it fall under the Bush administration to say yay or nay to what gets clear captioned? I did not know he chaired the local networks that do the captioning

Because the government funds it. Folks, this is why socialism is anathema to freedom. If the government funds it, it gets to tell you how it will be done.

The networks should drop all public funding and fund this themselves through donations or advertising.

BTW, why do I keep hearing, "CC provided by (insert sponsor)" clips?

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Fausto

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Fausto

Originally posted by: JDub02
Why should taxpayers have to fund close captioning? Let the networks do it.

I'm tired of all this publically funded crap. If there's a market for it, the private sector will handle it.

The big picture called, it misses you.

No, you missed it. While you quibble over what should and should not be captioned using public funds, I debate the larger point of whether or not captioning should be publicly funded at all.

As above, they stated it's not a cost-cutting measure, so the issue is how/why certain shows "make the cut" while others do not.

As I already stated, this is why socialism is anathema to freedom.

 

[Gyrene]

If it's not a cost-cutting matter, then the Bush Administration needs a slap in the face. They're pushing me farther and farther to vote Democrat this time around.

 

[Fausto]

BTW, why do I keep hearing, "CC provided by (insert sponsor)" clips?

I don't know. I also wasn't aware that the Bush admin even had any sway over this matter.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Fausto

BTW, why do I keep hearing, "CC provided by (insert sponsor)" clips?

I don't know. I also wasn't aware that the Bush admin even had any sway over this matter.

The executive branch has sway over all federal agencies.

 

[Ameesh]

read: bush hates deaf people
read: bush hates safe sex

 

[Fausto]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Fausto

BTW, why do I keep hearing, "CC provided by (insert sponsor)" clips?

I don't know. I also wasn't aware that the Bush admin even had any sway over this matter.

The executive branch has sway over all federal agencies.

ABC and Lifetime weren't federal agencies last I checked.

 

[Gyrene]

Originally posted by: Ameesh
read: bush hates people
read: bush hates sex

Fixed it for you.

 

[Viper GTS]

If you look at the list of what they kept & cut, they cut a lot of the useless crap. They're still covering a TON of stuff, including (of all things) BETNews.

I think you guys that are screaming rape need to review the list.

Viper GTS

 

[WinkOsmosis]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Fausto

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Fausto

Originally posted by: JDub02
Why should taxpayers have to fund close captioning? Let the networks do it.

I'm tired of all this publically funded crap. If there's a market for it, the private sector will handle it.

The big picture called, it misses you.

No, you missed it. While you quibble over what should and should not be captioned using public funds, I debate the larger point of whether or not captioning should be publicly funded at all.

As above, they stated it's not a cost-cutting measure, so the issue is how/why certain shows "make the cut" while others do not.

As I already stated, this is why socialism is anathema to freedom.

You have no idea what you are talking about. If socialism is the anathema to freedom, what is capitalism? Maybe you should ask the child laborers of 19th century America, or the child laborers of 21st century Korea.