Lol fail

Oh PULEEASE! It's deemed offense for PUBLIC AIRPLAY. No one is out confiscating fucking CDs. The use of the word IS pejorative, by the way. He's using it as a demeaning term.

This makes me howl. Down in the States, the clean versions used for YEARS. You want to know what I think is ridiculous censorship? Getting rid of "Nigger Jim" out of Huckleberry Finn. Discuss THAT, not this non-issue.

>> ^Payback:

Oh PULEEASE! It's deemed offense for PUBLIC AIRPLAY. No one is out confiscating fucking CDs. The use of the word IS pejorative, by the way. He's using it as a demeaning term.
This makes me howl. Down in the States, the clean versions used for YEARS. You want to know what I think is ridiculous censorship? Getting rid of "Nigger Jim" out of Huckleberry Finn. Discuss THAT, not this non-issue.


Yes, well when you can tell me how to fit all that into the title I'll change it.

As far as the use of the word in the song being demeaning in this context, I'm sorry but your 100% WRONG! He's quoting something he overheard two appliance delivery men said about musicians. NOT directing the statements to anyone in particular. Wow you're just as quick to judge as they are. I bet you didn't even listen to the song or read the lyrics to see exactly in which context the word was used before passing judgment either. Jewel's "Pieces of Me" uses the term faggot as well. I suppose they'll have to ban that song too huh? The one thing you are right about is it is a non-issue, hence why I posted it.

Here's a few more they missed. http://blogs.westword.com/backbeat/2011/01/canada_bans_money_for_nothing_but_still_missed_a_few_offensive_songs.php

[Edit] The title is fixed your highness.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'dire straits, censored, censorship, canada, antigay, money for nothing' to 'dire straits, censored, censorship, canada, antigay, money for nothing, faggot' - edited by calvados

Haha, way to go statist censorists.

I thought we were supposed to get more free as our society evolved. Shows what I know.

I'm not sure if the article that you cited mentioned it but the reason they are taking the words out of Huckleberry Finn is so that the SCHOOLS that are currently not allowing the book to be read will allow it on their reading lists. In a weird way the publisher is not censoring the book so much as trying to get around the censoring school districts/parents.
>> ^Payback:
You want to know what I think is ridiculous censorship? Getting rid of "Nigger Jim" out of Huckleberry Finn. Discuss THAT, not this non-issue.

>> ^gwiz665:

I thought we were supposed to get more free as our society evolved. Shows what I know.


Not while a majority can vote away a minority's liberties.

*news

Adding video to channels (News) - requested by ant.

Just so we're clear on this: THE CANADIAN BROADCAST STANDARDS COUNCIL IS NOT A GOVERNMENT AGENCY!!! It is an industry-run watchdog organization, much like the MPAA in the US, and they're just as full of shit as the MPAA.

Since when did MS text-2-speech engines report the news?

>> ^blankfist:

>> ^gwiz665:
I thought we were supposed to get more free as our society evolved. Shows what I know.

Not while a majority can vote away a minority's liberties.


What part of non-governmental did you not understand?

I hear someone three pages over called Obama a war criminal. I bet they could really use your kind of hall monitor nerdom over there.
>> ^NetRunner:

What part of non-governmental did you not understand?

Huh. My first thought was that they were going to single out "banging on the bongos like a chimpanzee". I guess the notion that African instruments are played by APES is subtle enough for them.

One jerk ruins it for the rest of the country.

See the original video on the sift:
http://videosift.com/video/Dire-Straits-Money-for-Nothing-classic

This is sort of being blown out of proportion, yes. Lots of places use "radio edits" where words people crap their pants over are just silenced. It's not a new phenomenon, but I guess it's new in Canada, eh?

Now, I don't mean to say that this is a good idea, just that it's been around for a while.

"Standards and Practices" is all bullshit.
>> ^Payback:

Oh PULEEASE! It's deemed offense for PUBLIC AIRPLAY. No one is out confiscating fucking CDs. The use of the word IS pejorative, by the way. He's using it as a demeaning term.
This makes me howl. Down in the States, the clean versions used for YEARS. You want to know what I think is ridiculous censorship? Getting rid of "Nigger Jim" out of Huckleberry Finn. Discuss THAT, not this non-issue.

Young people often don't have the cognitive ability necessary to understand the intended artistic nuance underlying usage of slurs.

Humans tend to be soft, particularly when young, and there are significant costs to making them feel society is hostile toward them, whereas there are seemingly no detectable gains in making slurs part of the culture.

However, the above cost-benefit analysis could be undermined if we can point out measurable gains from broadcasting slurs.

It sounds like membership in the CBSC is entirely voluntary and I can't find any benefit to being a member. The CBSC sets standards for broadcasting and members adhere to them. Or, if they don't want to, they become non-members and everything is hunky-dory. What's the issue?

*nochannel *canada *music *news *controversy *rocknroll

Also, there's a few extra letters in "Canadadian".

This video has been removed from all channels (Wtf, Terrible, Canada, Music, Fear, News, Controversy, Fail) due to invalid channel assignment - nochannel invoked by xxovercastxx. Please review the FAQ to learn about appropriate channel assignments.

Adding video to channels (Canada, Controversy, Music, News, Rocknroll) - requested by xxovercastxx.

I'm glad they're finally getting this filth off the air. Additionally, it's about time we got the lyrics changed to:

We got to install microwave ovens
Custom kitchen deliveries
We got to move these refrigerators
We got to move these TVs of color

>> ^blankfist:

I hear someone three pages over called Obama a war criminal. I bet they could really use your kind of hall monitor nerdom over there.
>> ^NetRunner:
What part of non-governmental did you not understand?


How childish of you.

>> ^Matthu:
>> ^blankfist:
I hear someone three pages over called Obama a war criminal. I bet they could really use your kind of hall monitor nerdom over there.
>> ^NetRunner:
What part of non-governmental did you not understand?

How childish of you.


Just back away man, they just do this. It's become part of the Sift, not unlike Westy's spelling and QuantumMushroom finding a rightist slant that blames leftist forces for everything.

When will the world finally be made completely safe and controlled and unoffensive....

"I-want-my-emmteeevee"

Someone being offended is never an acceptable cause or excuse for government intervention [okay, so upon further reading, this isn't the government being a cunt in this particular instance]. Offended by something? Grow up and FUCKING DEAL WITH IT, ASSHOLE!

Wait, how is this a story? Were people under the impression that commercial radio stations choose songs based on artistic merit or social commentary?

No, they're businesses trying to maximize their profits, nothing more or less. They reached the conclusion that the intentionally racist and homophobic lyrics of the song turn off too many listeners. It's unfortunate those listeners don't know that the character singing those lyrics is the one being mocked. But that doesn't matter. The stations are making a business decision, not an ethical decision. Ethical decisions are not their territory.

There must be some way we can blame this on the government...

Let's see . . . Money for Nothing is released in 1985. Canadians dealing with it in 2011. That's par for the course. Upvote for *being late to your own funeral.

It's become part of the Sift, not unlike Westy's spelling and QuantumMushroom finding a rightist slant that blames leftist forces for everything.


Oh, not EVERYTHING. After all, 98% isn't a 100%.

Liberals' 50 years of dreadful domestic policy
Posted: December 23, 2010

by Larry Elder

For the past 50 years, the Democrats – and many Republicans who should know better – have been wrong about virtually every major domestic policy issue. Let's review some of them:

Taxes

The bipartisan extension of the Bush tax cuts represents the latest triumph over the "soak the rich because trickledown doesn't work" leftists.

President Ronald Reagan sharply reduced the top marginal tax rates from 70 percent to 28 percent, doubling the Treasury's tax revenue. President George H.W. Bush raised the income tax rate, as did his successor. But President George W. Bush lowered them to the current 35 percent.

President Barack Obama repeatedly called the current rate unfair, harmful to the country and a reward to those who "didn't need" the cuts and "didn't ask for" them. If true, he and his party ditched their moral obligation to oppose the extension. But they didn't, because none of it is true. Democratic icon John F. Kennedy, who reduced the top marginal rate from more than 90 percent to 70 percent, said, "A rising tide lifts all the boats." He was right – and most of the Democratic Party knows it.


Welfare for the "underclass"

When President Lyndon Johnson launched his "War on Poverty," the poverty rate was trending down. When he offered money and benefits to unmarried women, the rate started flat-lining. Women married the government, allowing men to abandon their moral and financial responsibilities.

The percentage of children born outside of marriage – to young, disproportionately uneducated and disproportionately brown and black women – exploded. In 1996, over the objections of many on the left, welfare was reformed. Time limits were imposed, and women no longer received additional benefits if they had more children. The welfare rolls declined. Ten years later, the New York Times wrote: "When the 1996 law was passed ... liberal advocacy groups ... predicted that it would increase child poverty, hunger and homelessness. The predictions were not fulfilled."

Education

The federal government's increasing involvement with education – what is properly a state and local function – has been costly and ineffective at best, and counterproductive at worst. Title I, a program begun 45 years ago to close the performance gap between urban and suburban schools, burns through more than $15 billion a year, and the performance gap has widened. The feds spend $80 billion a year on K-12 education, as if money is the answer. States like Utah and Iowa spend much less money per student compared with districts like those in New York City and Washington, D.C., with much better results.

Where parents have choices – where the money follows the student rather than the other way around – the students perform better, with higher parental satisfaction. But the teachers' unions and the Democratic Party continue to resist true competition among public, private and parochial schools.

Gun control

Violent crime occurs disproportionately in urban areas – where Democrats in charge impose the most draconian gun-control laws.

Over the objection of those who warn of a "return to the Wild West," 34 states passed laws allowing citizens to carry concealed weapons. Not one state has repealed its law. Professor John Lott, author of "More Guns, Less Crime," says: "There is a strong negative relationship between the number of law-abiding citizens with permits and the crime rate: As more people obtain permits, there is a greater decline in violent crime rates. For each additional year that a concealed handgun law is in effect, the murder rate declines by 3 percent, rape by 2 percent and robberies by over 2 percent."


"Affirmative action"

Race-based preferences have been a disaster for college admissions. Students admitted with lesser credentials are more likely to drop out. Had their credentials matched their schools, they would have been far more likely to graduate and thus enter the job market at a more productive level.

Preferences in government hiring and contracting have led to widespread, costly and morale-draining "reverse discrimination" lawsuits. Where preferences have been put to the ballot, voters – even in liberal states like California – have voted against them.

Minimum-wage hikes

Almost all economists agree that minimum-wage laws contribute to unemployment among the low-skilled – the very group the "compassionate party" claims to care about.

Economist Walter E. Williams, 74, in his new autobiography, "Up from the Projects," describes the many low-skilled jobs he took as a teenager. "By today's standards," he wrote, "my youthful employment opportunities might be seen as extraordinary. That was not the case in the 1940s and 1950s. In fact, as I've reported in some of my research, teenage unemployment among blacks was slightly lower than among whites, and black teens were more active in the labor force as well. All of my classmates, friends, and acquaintances who wanted to work found jobs of one sort or another."

Obamacare

This ghastly government-directed scheme will inevitably lead to rationing and lower-quality care – all without "bending the cost curve" down as Obama promised.

Any party can have a bad half-century. Merry Christmas Solstice.

UPDATE: The CRTC (The actual GOVERNMENT regulator) has asked the CBSC to reconsider their ban. Mostly, because the CRTC has been getting angry complaints about it.