2 ms·
Probably they are made to comply with some laws or regulations (or to avoid being regulated by laws), so the government has a say here anyway.
by codedokode 3y ago
Probably they are made to comply with some laws or regulations (or to avoid being regulated by laws), so the government has a say here anyway.
- polski-g 3y agoIt would be unconstitutional for the government to regulate film content. So no.
- johnnyanmac 3y agoAgreed. It's really only based on a focus group of various audiences and surveys on what parents (dis)agree regarding certain content and how old you should be to view it. The closest thing to government intervention is the FCC, since the govt. does have some regulations on how TV and Radio can run (since the govt. infrastructure is used to broadcast). e.g.: >Broadcasting obscene content is prohibited by law at all times of the day. Indecent and profane content are prohibited on broadcast TV and radio between 6 a.m. and 10 p.m., when there is a reasonable risk that children may be in the audience. So the only things really controlled are profanity (i.e. a relatively tiny list of words you must not say or bleep out) and "obscenity" (feel free to look up that govt. definition. Enjoy the rabbit hole). As for "indecency" >Indecent content portrays sexual or excretory organs or activities in a way that is patently offensive but does not meet the three-prong test for obscenity. so, not really much for radio. Mostly prevents non-artistic/educational genitalia for TV's sake. ----- but all that was a tangent. The internet is not under FCC protocol and the FCC only endorses certain advertising, spam, and malware related issues, not content.