You’re right, we should erase history every ten years or so.
When I first caught sight of the thread title, I thought, “What’s Bio-censorship and what did Kennedy have to do with its history?”
Damn. Now there’s no way to find out what happened in the Kennedy White House except reading the hundreds of books written about it, reading any of the public documents, or watching any of the other movies about that time. Do you feel this qualifies as the Kennedys “causing the channel to drop it?”
The producers didn’t want to end up like Glenn Stensel. Stensel was a bit-part actor who had dreams of becoming a producer, his first attempt being about the the Chappaquiddick incident. . . and then it all came crashing down. Not only did the movie not get made, but Stensel DIED not long after. Coincidence?
By that reasoning, why would anyone in the U.S. be interested in it, either? It’s not like those events are any newer in the U.S. than they are in Canada.
I really hate this. Every time somebody so much as uses the word “censorship” we get somebody else bringing up this old saw. The problem these posts is not just that they are pedantic, they are just plain wrong.
Censorship is “suppression of speech or other communication which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or inconvenient to the general body of people as determined by a government, media outlet, or other controlling body”. If a channel decides to edit some of its shows or not air them at all it is censorship by definition.
Almost everything ever shown on television has been edited.
Well, half of the other shows on History Television are the same Nostradamus/Mayan calendar junk that they show on the History Channel in the U.S. I’m more baffled why anyone would watch that type of thing. (“Anyone” includes my wife.)
Maybe they learned something from the hatchet job that ABC did with “The Path to 9/11”.
It IS odd that they spent all that money on, and then dropped it once it was finished. I know they’re reportedly shopping around for a place to air it, but I agree that something is rotten in the state of Denmark…
It looks like it will be airing on ReelzChannel in April.
And when it is edited on grounds of someone finding it distasteful, especially when the artist considers it vital to the work, it is called censorship by a majority of people. From the artists’ perspective, there just really is not a big difference in which large organization prevents you from saying what you want to say.
If you want to champion the idea that only the government can censor, then you need to come up with a word that means what artists believe the word means. Maybe you can get the language to change back to the way you want it, rather the way it actually is. But don’t pretend like it’s that way already. As the armed monkey says, it is annoyingly incorrect.
If artists don’t know what the word means, they’re stupid. Censorship is what the government does. When a network does it, it’s business. Nobody is going to jail, and no private network has an obligation to air anything.
BigT:
Only the government can censor. If you don’t understand that, I don’t know how to address your comment.
I don’t get Reelz anymore, since I changed my DirecTV plan. But I was wondering if anyone here was watching.
Also, the Daily Show did a pretty good bit on this last night, that also briefly touched on the pseudo-science crap the History Channel shows these days.