"Sensationalized Cruelty": FCC Complaints Regarding Game of Thrones 197
v3rgEz writes: As a cable channel, the FCC has little to no jurisdiction over HBO's content. That doesn't stop people from complaining to them about them, however, and after a FOIA request, the FCC released numerous complaints regarding the network's Game of Thrones. While there were the usual and expected lamentations about 'open homosexual sex acts,' other users saw Game of Thrones as a flashpoint in the war of Net Neutrality.
Please (Score:4, Funny)
Theon Greyjoy deserved it.
Theon Greyjoy is for Reeek (Score:5, Funny)
You are all Reek. Reek says "Reek". REEEEEEEK Reeeeeek REEEEEEEEK! REEEEK! You Reeeeek!
Re: (Score:2)
So did Robert and Ned.
Re: (Score:2)
I have not read the novels so I can not comment on how much of this is George's work and how much is Benioff's and Weiss's idea, but GoT does get worse while the seasons progress and I have the id
Re: (Score:3)
The first series sticks quite close to the books, at least compared to the later ones. Theon suffers some pretty disturbing stuff in the books (having fingers flayed, and being left to suffer until the pain is so unbe
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That could take some time...
Glad they didn't read the books (Score:5, Informative)
Pedophilia, incest, multiple non-abrahamic religions, polytheism, zombies, ghouls, various fantasy figures, idol worship, paganism... I mean really I think GRRM went through the list of things that might get a nuns panties in a bunch, and found a way to write them down.
The TV show might in some ways be considered censored for good taste!
Re:Glad they didn't read the books (Score:5, Insightful)
Let's get pedophilia, incest, multiple non-abrahamic religions, polytheism, zombies, ghouls, various fantasy figures, idol worship and paganism off the TVs in America, and back into the White House, where it belongs!
Re:Glad they didn't read the books (Score:5, Insightful)
It's funny because most of those things are also in the Bible, and yet no one (to the best of my knowledge) has ever made a serious campaign to ban the Bible.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.christianpost.com/n... [christianpost.com]
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder if that also bans the Koran as the entire bible is contained in the Koran.
Re:Glad they didn't read the books (Score:5, Insightful)
It's funny because most of those things are also in the Bible, and yet no one (to the best of my knowledge) has ever made a serious campaign to ban the Bible.
Does Jesus count as a zombie?
I suppose the eating of body and blood in some churches is a bit of a giveaway...
Re: Glad they didn't read the books (Score:2)
Not to mention Lazarus.
Re:Glad they didn't read the books (Score:5, Informative)
If you're dead for 3 days and then come back to life, you're a zombie.
No. If you come back as a zombie you are a zombie.
For example, the turning of Vampires is usually accomplished by death, being dead, and then a return to undead. Vampires are not Zombies.
At least, nobody but a pedant brandishing a dictionary definition would try to call them zombies.
Similarly, in the Jesus resurrection story he is not a zombie. He was simply returned to life, as in properly restored to being "alive" as he was before death, not as in "undead", or transformed by his death into a new being.
Re:Glad they didn't read the books (Score:5, Funny)
Similarly, in the Jesus resurrection story he is not a zombie. He was simply returned to life, as in properly restored to being "alive" as he was before death, not as in "undead", or transformed by his death into a new being.
So did he get all his experience back?
Re: (Score:2)
So did he get all his experience back?
Maybe, I prefer the lichdom route myself. If you're going to be undead, better to be undead and have awesome magical powers.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Glad they didn't read the books (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
The New Testament is for casuals. You just have to run back from the graveyard. Took him 3 days, though. And he had to put up with Barrens chat.
Re: (Score:3)
So did he get all his experience back?
Yes, but he lost all the items in his inventory.
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, but if you're dead for 3 days and then come back to life, you're a zombie. That's what a fucking zombie is. Just like Jesus.
Re:Glad they didn't read the books (Score:4, Funny)
Jesus was the prophesied one and he came back to life after being killed by soldiers of the powers that be, after being betrayed by a trusted colleague.
He could heal people and cast out demons that invaded their minds.
He was, wait. Oh my god. He was just like Neo in The Matrix. They must have based him on Neo.
Re: (Score:2)
No, zombies are undead. Various things die and turn into something else, but are not the same thing as being alive. Zombie != vampire != lich != restored to life after dying.
Re:Glad they didn't read the books (Score:4, Insightful)
Since Jesus never actually existed, this is a moot point.
As odd as it may seem, there is no mention of Jesus at all by any of his pagan contemporaries. There are no birth records, no trial transcripts, no death certificates; there are no expressions of interest, no heated slanders, no passing references – nothing.
There's not a single verse, poem, story, carving, sculpture, painting or drawing of him from the time period in which he supposedly lived. Absolutely nothing. Pretty strange considering all of the amazing miracles he was supposed to have performed. You'd think someone would have made even just a passing mention of all this stuff, but nope, not a word.
In fact, if we broaden our field of concern to the years after his death – even if we include the entire first century of the Common Era – there is not so much as a solitary reference to Jesus in any non-Christian, non-Jewish source of any kind.
We do have a large number of documents from the time – the writings of poets, philosophers, historians, scientists, and government officials, for example, not to mention the large collection of surviving inscriptions on stone and private letters and legal documents on papyrus. In none of this vast array of surviving writings is Jesus’ name ever so much as mentioned, not once.
Oblig. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, come on .. use your imagination .. in the modern parlance ... Zombpirenado!!!
As to the ritualistic cannibalism in Christianity and the resurrection bit .. meh, don't care, don't believe it, whatever.
Re: (Score:2)
Does Jesus count as a zombie?
If you're dead for 3 days and then come back to life, you're a zombie. Jesus is the very definition of a zombie.
That is not accurate. Zombies are not alive. They are undead. If you come back to life, you are not undead, you are alive.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Hey, at least Jesus didn't come back with a brain stolen from Abby Normal.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
My favorite part of the Noah story in the Bible was all the rock monsters.
Related: Super Boat! [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
There's a rather large gap between writing "a rape occurred" and graphically depicting it. If the events were related by characters secondhand, I'm willing to bet no one would care. GoT does deserves 1st amendment protections, of course, but I can sympathize with people who find it troubling that extended depictions of torture and rape are considered entertaining.
Re: (Score:2)
Martin is, essentially, writing historical fiction. The themes borrow very heavily from the War of the Roses, with some high fantasy elements thrown in.
Now, I don't know if you've ever taken a look at how people have historically treated each other, but what happens in the books and whats shown on TV is pretty lightweight compared to some historical shit. From crucifixion, to the auto da fe, to the rack, humans have been doing nasty shit to each other all throughout history. I don't think they're really goi
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
/sarcasm Wait, you mean we're not talking about the bible? :-)
Re: (Score:2)
That sarcasm tag belongs at the end of the sentence, otherwise, the / shouldn't be there.
Re: (Score:3)
The TV show might in some ways be considered censored for good taste!
Perhaps in terms of content, but not in terms of being explicit and graphic. Whenever others have showed violence or sexual assault by or on young people usually it's far more implied or indirectly shown. They show the burned carcass that's supposed to be Bran and Rickon, Geoffrey very painfully dying of poison, Arya cutting a man's throat, Sansa getting raped, princess Shireen burned at the stake, Olly stabbing John Snow and the list just goes on. I almost expected them to film Meryn Trant having his way w
Re:Glad they didn't read the books (Score:5, Insightful)
Pedophilia, incest, multiple non-abrahamic religions, polytheism, zombies, ghouls, various fantasy figures, idol worship, paganism...
All of those things are found throughout the Old Testament. While Jahweh seems to get his knickers in a twist over idol worship, paganism and the like, He seems to be down with pedophilia, incest, rape, pillage, slavery, torture, genocide, etc. In addition there are many spectral figures, angels, demons and the like. Other than the religion, there's nothing in GOT that the average Solomonic Era soldier wouldn't recognize. It looks even more like the Middle Ages of the Crusaders and the Teutonic Knights. I don't see a lot of difference between the Red God and the Auto da Fe of the Inquisition.
If we're going to start banning things for bad taste and hate speech, can we start with CBN and the 700 Club?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
In other words, competition.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Auto da Fe? What's the Auto de Fe?
It's what you oughtn't to do but you do anyway
Re:Glad they didn't read the books (Score:5, Insightful)
Pedophilia, incest, multiple non-abrahamic religions, polytheism, zombies, ghouls, various fantasy figures, idol worship, paganism...
I'm pretty sure most of that can be found in the bible.
Things I've seen in Game Of Thrones is on the same level or more tame than things I've read in books. So why aren't the "moral majority" up in arms about about that?
Well because books dont get the same media coverage and more likely, these people dont read.
Re: (Score:2)
Pedophilia, incest, multiple non-abrahamic religions, polytheism, zombies, ghouls, various fantasy figures, idol worship, paganism... I mean really I think GRRM went through the list of things that might get a nuns panties in a bunch, and found a way to write them down.
He just cribbed from the bible.
Re: (Score:2)
nuns panties in a bunch
Not to mention the nun rape - assuming silent sisters are nuns.
Re: (Score:2)
the immorality of Kevin Bacon (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If you don't like it, don't watch it. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Since it's HBO, the better answer is "If you don't like it, don't buy it."
Re:If you don't like it, don't watch it. (Score:5, Funny)
How cute. You actually believe that the majority of people who watch GoT pay for it.
I believe that the majority of people who steal it don't have the balls to call the FCC and complain about it.
Re: If you don't like it, don't watch it. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Fun fact: HBO's budget for an episode of GoT is way higher than a typical TV show, and it doesn't have ads to subsidize it. All those people not paying for HBO brought in 4.9 billion dollars for HBO in 2014.
Re: If you don't like it, don't watch it. (Score:2)
Yes and no. HBO also sell content to other broadcasters - like Sky in the UK - which are funded by advertising.
For example, BSkyB have a 275 million GBP deal with HBO over 5 years, and I doubt they're the only ones. Similarly, the BBC supplements their funding by selling their shows.
http://www.theguardian.com/med... [theguardian.com]
Re:If you don't like it, don't watch it. (Score:5, Insightful)
If you don't like what other people watch, get over it, you're not the thought police.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
that works well for other things, too. if you don't like guns: don't buy one. if you don't like global warming: don't contribute to it. and let everyone else alone.
No, it really doesn't.
Did I miss the BDSM? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You should update your parser to support CSV.
I just got bored of the bloody thing (Score:4, Interesting)
The explicit violence just doesn't seem necessary. It detracts from the story more than anything - what's the point of it? Are the producer simply just trying to shock people? They could just cut the content by 75% and focus on the character development and the plots (i.e. The story), and they would have a way better show.
Re:I just got bored of the bloody thing (Score:5, Interesting)
as one who has thoroughly enjoyed reading the books, and generally enjoys the show, i'm hardly unbiased. i'm also not going to argue for historical accuracy or realism, since, obviously, it's a work of fiction. but in the sense of depicting a time/place where people were generally assholes, and sometimes did terrible things to each other, i find the sometimes-very-graphic depictions of those things perfectly acceptable.
i also acknowledge that it's HBO, and there's a fair bit of pandering to people's baser demands for entertainment (T&A, blood&guts). that point means some of it is gratuitous, sure, but it's not in strict conflict with the artistic desire to "accurately" depict a very brutal world.
YMMV
Re: (Score:2)
as one who has thoroughly enjoyed reading the books, and generally enjoys the show, i'm hardly unbiased. i'm also not going to argue for historical accuracy or realism, since, obviously, it's a work of fiction. but in the sense of depicting a time/place where people were generally assholes, and sometimes did terrible things to each other, i find the sometimes-very-graphic depictions of those things perfectly acceptable.
For some reason, I was very strongly reminded of work.
Re: (Score:2)
Ha. If I want to think of work in my off-hours, I'll just re-watch "Brazil".
Re:I just got bored of the bloody thing (Score:5, Informative)
Maybe I'm just silly but it's probably because it's in the fucking book. If you want to watch a soap opera that "focuses on character development and plot" they are on in the afternoon.
Re:I just got bored of the bloody thing (Score:5, Interesting)
*Sunglasses*
... it's titillating.
YEAAHH!!!
Re: (Score:2)
So a written medium that relies on imagination translated to the moving image should forgo the very substance of the book because you can't imagine it like you did in the book? Are you serious?
If you want to imagine the book you read it. If you want to see a representation of one persons interpretation of the book you watch the movie/tv show. There are a lot of people that would argue that by sticking to the actual plot of the books instead of changing it, the directors and producers of GOT are doing the r
Re: (Score:2)
Are you serious?
Perhaps you missed the CIS:Miami meme/joke at the end of my post. The serious tone was a necessary counterpoint.
Re: I just got bored of the bloody thing (Score:2)
BDSM and "good story" are not mutually exclusive. GOT has managed to combine them exceptionally well.
Re: (Score:2)
they would have a way better show.
You really should get your ass to Hollywood. They're having a hard time coming up with hits, and you already know how to make a hit show WAY BETTER!
Re: (Score:2)
The explicit violence just doesn't seem necessary. It detracts from the story more than anything - what's the point of it? Are the producer simply just trying to shock people? They could just cut the content by 75% and focus on the character development and the plots (i.e. The story), and they would have a way better show.
Some people like the fantasy themes, over the top violence, sex and nudity and political and literal backstabbing, etc. They like it enough to keep paying for it and watching it.
Fortunately, that's all we need, the show will continue as it has an audience.
It doesn't matter how many people dislike it or have a problem with it - they don't need to like it or watch it or pay for it or have any involvement in it, as there's enough others who do like it pay for it and watch it.
Sure if it was public access,
Re: (Score:3)
The explicit violence just doesn't seem necessary.
Have you seen The Pacific? It's way gorier than Game of Thrones, and from what I have heard, not anywhere near as cruel or gory as the actual events depicted. Toning it down would be a lie.
Re: (Score:2)
Given that the show is based on a series of books, I don't see how they could trim 75% of the content and also maintain the story.
I think the violence is integral to the character development, especially when it comes to the villains. The "sensationalized cruelty" is a clever plot device by the author. He's taken characters that most readers would be inclined to hate and then put them in circumstances where it's easy to feel sympathy for them. That's also an essential element of the story and the develop
Re: (Score:2)
I agree that the violence is essential to the story, but there's different ways to portray it. From what I've heard, it's far too graphic for me (I'm not going to verify this for myself), whereas there could be a version that presented the violence less explicitly.
Keep your regulations off my non-broadcast shows (Score:4, Insightful)
Get over it! If you don't like it, don't watch it. And if you have children, it is YOUR OWN FAULT if you allow them access. And if you didn't KNOW it was going to offend you- get a life and read reviews first.
Yeesh
Re: (Score:2)
I think the complaint isn't, "This shouldn't be on the air!" but a "I should have some idea of what is going to be shown!"
Not necessarily unreasonable.
Pretty much everything on HBO has a Content Rating. [wikipedia.org] Note that they mention "Strong Sexual Content" and I'm sure Game of Thrones triggers that.
The complaint, I suppose, is that they don't have a category for "Depravity."
Re: (Score:2)
The complaint, I suppose, is that they don't have a category for "Depravity."
Sure they do: CSPAN
Tough titties (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Dangling participle error in title (Score:5, Informative)
Today's grammar lesson: dangling participle [wikipedia.org]
As a cable channel, the FCC has little to no jurisdiction...
Oops... the FCC is not a cable channel. Suggested rewrites:
As a cable channel, HBO is pretty much not under the jurisdiction of the FCC.
As HBO is a cable channel, the FCC has little to no jurisdiction over it.
P.S. I really enjoy a good dangling participle. "Landing at the airport, our car was visible in the parking lot."
Re:Dangling participle error in title (Score:5, Insightful)
You beat me to it. Actually it's dangling participle twice over, as "HBO's content" is also not "a cable channel". So maybe I'd rewrite it as:
"As HBO is a cable channel, the FCC has little to no jurisdiction over its content."
Of course, if you have jurisdiction over a cable channel then you also have jurisdiction over its sensationalized content.
Re: (Score:3)
Today's grammar lesson: dangling participle
As a cable channel, the FCC has little to no jurisdiction...
I really hate to interrupt a good pedantic grammar rant, but a "dangling participle" needs... well... a participle [wikipedia.org], i.e., a verb form that modifies another word.
The phrase "As a cable channel" has no verb and no participle. If it instead said "Being a cable channel,..." then you might be more justified in your complaint about a dangling participle.
But "As a cable channel" is a misplaced modifier or a dangling modifier, specifically a prepositional phrase. No participles were harmed in the creation of
If I hadn't watched it, I would now. (Score:2)
Sensationalized Cruelty?
I was born a Lannister of Casterly Rock. Things are expected of me.
Oh no! I am clutching my pearls! (Score:2)
Spartacus: Blood And Sand (Score:2)
Re: the aforementioned, how many complaints were received by the FCC regarding the open pansexual acts performed on this show?
Too much like the real world? (Score:5, Insightful)
In fact, Game of Thrones is arguably even less depraved that what is going on right now in the real world in any number of places. South Sudan, Syria and North Korea just off the top of my head. Compared to the perps running amok in those places, the horrible people depicted in Game of Thrones are just a bunch of lovable kittens.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
The difference is game of thrones shows people doing those things. Nobody cares when the dark competition does it.
Touché (Score:2)
Its ways nicer than current evemts (Score:2)
Current worldwide events and history is full of way worse stuff. Our various human cultures have all sorts of weird taboos. On US TV it is okay to show multiple people getting killed, but verboten to show 2 people making love.
We need more exposure to the pain and suffering of the world, just ignoring it and thinking it is not there is wrong.
Wouldn't it be better... (Score:2)
Of course, it's also possible that this is a plot by the show's creators to inflate its own popularity by creating controversy.
Just sayin'....
It is depraved, that's true (Score:4, Interesting)
GOT celebrates all the ugly things people can do to each other. I watched it for a little less than a season, until I understood that the point was to just be as horrible as possible.
I don't need to seek out ugliness in my life, the real world is full enough of it as it is.
So... (Score:2)
George Carlin said it best (Score:3)
I may have paraphrased that a bit. And I'm aware that your TV likely has no knobs. So if you were going to whine about that you can definitely F off.
The Theon scenes were disturbing, and they were meant to be. Nothing about torture should be appealing. Nothing from those scenes was simply made up or sensationalized, those were all torture or psychological warfare that people have done in the past. History is filled with cruel things that people have done to each other. History also shows redeeming factors that can restore faith in humanity.
Nothing in GoT should make anyone say to themselves "Hey, let's go rape/torture/poison/etc someone today." If you're claiming that a show is sensationalizing something, you would think that the show was making it seem OK or at least less bad. I don't think GoT is doing that at all.
I notice they're not complaining about GoT's depiction of homosexuality as buggery and bad.
As the AC said above YOU DO NOT HAVE A RIGHT TO NOT BE OFFENDED!
Re: (Score:2)
The HBO VP of Boob Display thanks you
Re: (Score:2)
What is Game of Thrones?
Its one of those phenomena that almost everyone in the civilized world knows about. Like Baseball, Star Wars, Justin Bieber, Coca-Cola, Donald Trump, and Lord of the Rings.
If you don't like it, that's fine. But if you don't know what it is... its because you've failed to be part of society, and aware of the world around. That's on you. Go look it up yourself. We have an Internet now.
And why should I care?
Caring is up to you. Or do you expect strangers on the internet to make all your decisions for you? Would you like me to make
Re: (Score:2)
I have heard of people skipping ads, but asking to have them repeated? Must be the Superbowl.
No government fans here? (Score:2)
Come on. Answer the question. Why shouldn't the FCC regulate this?
I know the answer can't be "free speech rights", because the government fans told me corporations like Time Warner aren't people and therefore don't have free speech rights.
Citizens seek regulation of this corporation. Are government fans taking this corporation's side against the people?
Re: (Score:2)
Most Slashdot readers are of a libertarian bent, so they don't like regulations.
Those who do are generally smart, and they know there is no basis for regulation here.
But, indeed, many of us don't think Time Warner has free speech rights, just like it can't vote. I've seen no consensus on exactly how that would work, though.
Re: (Score:2)
If they "know" there's no basis for regulation, they should be able to explain why these citizens' complaints don't matter while they're sure other citizens' complaints do.
Unless they base their opinions on their day-to-day feelings -- and thoughtful people should all be able to agree that day-to-day feelings aren't a wise or just basis for government to regulate and police (and hence bully and punish) anyone.
Re: (Score:2)
Almost all people who vote want their own personal idea's and beliefs to be put into government. That's why we should all vote, so the super crazy hopefully doesn't bubble to the top.
That's two wolves and a lamb voting on what's for dinner.
Rather than government hurting whichever group has the minority of votes every year, government power should be decreased so they don't hurt people when it's not absolutely, critically necessary -- and then only with due process, with an absolute commitment to do the least harm. But that idea won't be popular with a certain sort of people who want to use government to get stuff and to stick it to people who aren't like them.