Gay TV

[Double Trouble]

<<It's called free speech people, and it happens to be a principle on which this country was founded.>>

Ummm... nobody questioned their legal 'right' to be able to start a gay channel - there's no doubt they have the right to do so. But as a consumer I also have the right to say &quot;Yech, I don't want that crap on my TV, I'm switching to another satellite provider&quot;......

Furthermore, commercial speech is not equally protected as private speech or expression by the law. For example, cigarette companies can not legally advertise in certain places and mediums, while any individual has the right to say anything they want about cigarettes.

 

[luv2chill]

tagej,

I don't want to start a war or anything, but cancelling your dish subscription because the network offers a channel that doesn't interest you seems a little extreme to me. Personally, I don't watch &quot;crap&quot; like Trinity Broadcast Network, but that doesn't mean I'm going to switch to satellite. In fact, I deleted it from my channel line-up just so I don't have to accidentally flip past any corrupt, contemptuous televangelists.

But that's fine... of course you're permitted to do whatever you want with your money--it won't bother me. All I care about is that no one's views are suppressed simply because others don't agree with them. I'm sure there are a lot of gay people out there who would like a special-interest channel. Who am I to try to deny them that?

And your cigarette analogy doesn't really compare to this situation. You're talking about advertising (and highly unethical advertising at that). I'm talking about people being given an opportunity to have their voices heard.

l2c

 

[Tiger]

<< I'm talking about people being given an opportunity to have their voices heard. >>



That's just plain ridiculous. They aren't putting that thing on the air for anybody's &quot;voices to be heard&quot;. It's the satellite company hoping against hope that there are enough corn holers out there to bring in the advertising buck. The only people they will be talking to are those of their particular lifestyle. It'll be one big satellite broadcast support group.

 

[nickdakick]

When will it be on air ? *drool*
















j/k

 

[Mean MrMustard]

I think what Jugernot means is that we don't actually have White TV. We have BET, Black Entertainment Television! Can you imagine if we had a channel thats actually called &quot;White Entertainment Television?&quot; ...that being the actual name.

 

[luv2chill]

<< That's just plain ridiculous. They aren't putting that thing on the air for anybody's &quot;voices to be heard&quot;. It's the satellite company hoping against hope that there are enough corn holers out there to bring in the advertising buck. The only people they will be talking to are those of their particular lifestyle. It'll be one big satellite broadcast support group. >>



First, your derogatory name-calling is counter-productive at the least.

Of course it will come down to money--that's the driving force of every other TV channel, and every other THING in America. But that doesn't mean it can't also serve a secondary purpose. It's another channel. If it doesn't bring in enough viewers it won't last (and with show titles like that it doesn't sound too original). But that's not the issue here. What's important is that it's given a chance without the bigots and hate-mongrels in this country getting their panties in a bunch about it.

l2c

 

[Fearlss1]

OMG NO!!! NOT ON AT!!!!!!!!! PLZ PLZ PLZ PLZ

 

[vi edit]

My opinion about this is that it's going to corrupt people's mind and make being gay more acceptable in this country

what's wrong with being more acceptable of gay people?

 

[KingHam]

It doesn't seem profitable. Gays are a relatively small portion of the population and when you cross sample that with those that own satellite dishes the number is even smaller. Plus, not everyone who actually receives the channel will actually watch it. IMO this is doomed to failure unless large amounts of heterosexuals watch it.

KingHam

 

[fir3wir3]

Has anyone ever known a gay person?

The 3 that I've know personally and either spent time w/ either working or just known them as friends of a friend of a fread,

The 3 that I've known seem to have to tell people they're gay...all the time

Now , I'm not a homophobe, I could care less...but don't remind me...believe me...I didnt forget.

 

[Triumph]

i don't think that this should be allowed. we need to set some limits of decency on our society, either by our own choice or by law.

 

[Raspewtin]

KingHam: When I was in college, gays claimed to be 10 percent of the population (they even had a college newspaper called 10%). That's a sizable chunk if a good portion of them get Dish and watch that channel. However, I personally doubt the 10% is accurate.


What really offends is channels like the Nashville Network, Trinity Broadcasting Network, and Country Music Television. This stuff corrupt people's minds and make being a redneck more acceptable in this country. After all, we need to set some limits of decency on our society.

 

[Napalm381]

<< i don't think that this should be allowed. we need to set some limits of decency on our society, either by our own choice or by law. >>

Feel free to live in Afghanistan or Iran. The rest of us will continue to live in a free society.

 

[Shuxclams]

<< i don't think that this should be allowed. we need to set some limits of decency on our society, either by our own choice or by law. >>



Wonder if the new Atty. General will make sure that this filth never airs, how disgusting.









SHUX

 

[Triumph]

darn, only two responses? i'll have to troll harder next time.

 

[Dameon]

Add it to the list of channels that will be blocked in my household when I have children.
But seriously, I'm thinking that E amish hit it on the head... the only way they are going to be able to generate enough revenue is with porn.

 

[konichiwa]

<< My opinion about this is that it's going to corrupt people's mind and make being gay more acceptable in this country >>

What's wrong with making people more accepting towards others? I'd rather watch Gay TV and be more open to gays than watch Trinity Network and think that gays are the scum of the earth.

 

[snut]

i think it was chinmax or show time whatever is channel 14 here in the bay area, i was flipping through the channels and they were showing gay sex :X

 

[MadCowMax]

From a marketers stand point this is the next best thing to having brain washed customers (ok we do have a few of those). An entire network devoted to a segment is like money in the bank. And the best thing is that I don't have to agree with what they're doing, I just have to sell them stuff they really don't need.

 

[fallenoncrack]

HOLY

 

[Double Trouble]

l2c,

<<cancelling your dish subscription because the network offers a channel that doesn't interest you seems a little extreme to me.>>

It's not just a channel that doesn't interest me (that would be something like cspan), it's a channel who's content I find objectionable. If my satellite provider decides to add &quot;the KKK channel&quot; to their lineup, I would also cancel my subscription -- I will not contribute my money to a company that adds content that I find revolting. They certainly have every right to do so, and I have a right to not contribute my money to a company that does something I don't agree with.

 

[SUOrangeman]

What's with this &quot;Queer as Folk&quot; craze?

Oh, and please don't comment on networks like BET, Univision, etc., UNLESS you actually watch them.

-SUO

 

[luv2chill]

tagej,

So then if every dish and cable network starts carrying the Gay channel what will you do? Revert to antenna? I doubt it.

Your monetary contribution to this network via the satellite provider would probably not amount to more than a drop in the bucket anyway (a few pennies? a few dollars?). The majority of a channel's income will come from advertising $$. And that advertising income will be generated by people who actually WATCH the channel. The fact that you're a subscriber to a dish network that carries the channel doesn't really mean anything.

Your comparison with the KKK is a nice attempt, but I would hope that you'd see the difference between an agenda based on hate and one based on love (even if that love is between two people of the same sex).

Just curious... why don't you &quot;agree with&quot; people being gay? Why do you find what they do &quot;revolting&quot; and &quot;objectionable&quot;?

l2c

 

[ManSnake]

Now I truely understand what &quot;variety on TV&quot; really means!

 

[KameLeon]

Because there's no such thing and should never be as love between two people of same sex (although lesbian porn is quite pleasing to watch ). That's just wrong. The comparison between KKK and GayTV is legitimate based on the fact that they both present material offensive and objectionable to majority of the people in our society, regardless if it's hatred or love. Anyways I don't want to get into that debate again. Everyone has their own opinion, and no one should have to 'agree' to something against their beliefs, as you mentioned, l2c. I would just remove that chan from my guide, no problem...they have their rights. If they want gaytv, so be it..