Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

here! Pay Per View Launches on DIRECTV as First Destination Serving the Gay and Lesbian Market
Yahoo Finance/Press Release ^ | 7/7/03 | Direct TV Marcom

Posted on 07/07/2003 10:53:35 AM PDT by Pro-Bush

here! Pay Per View Launches on DIRECTV as Nation's First Television Destination Serving the Gay and Lesbian Market

Monday July 7, 1:43 pm ET
LOS ANGELES--(BUSINESS WIRE)--July 7, 2003--here! Pay Per View: Award-Winning Filmmakers Paul Colichman And Stephen P. Jarchow Launch First Television Service Specializing In Gay And Lesbian Appeal Movies And Specials here! Pay Per View To Premiere August 29, 2003 Exclusively On DIRECTV® Service Paul Colichman and Stephen P. Jarchow -- two of Hollywood's most recognized producers of gay and lesbian-themed theatrical motion pictures -- have launched here! Pay Per View, a precedent-setting pay per view destination dedicated to serving the country's gay and lesbian audience. here! Pay Per View will launch on DIRECTV, the nation's leading digital multichannel television service provider.

Set to debut August 29, 2003 on DIRECTV channel 170, here! Pay Per View will offer two to six pay per view premieres each month for $3.99 per movie. These premieres will include recent theatrical and video releases, direct to pay per view premieres and a wide range of programming targeting gay and lesbian viewers, whose estimated 8 to 12 percent of the U.S. population and $450 billion annual spending power makes it the most substantial yet underserved television audience in the country.

here! Pay Per View will launch with the television premiere of "Sordid Lives," the critically-acclaimed comedy, released theatrically by here! Films, emerged as the highest grossing independent gay & lesbian film of 2002. Starring Olivia Newton-John, Beau Bridges, Delta Burke, Bonnie Bedelia and Leslie Jordan, "Sordid Lives" puts a comedic twist on a story of unconditional love, acceptance and "coming out" in a Texas family as they converge for the matriarch's funeral.

Said Colichman: "It has been long recognized that the gay and lesbian niche market is dramatically underserved in the television world. Programming such as Showtime's 'Queer as Folk' and NBC's 'Will and Grace' have demonstrated that there is a strong and dedicated market for gay-themed programming. Additionally, these programs have attracted a wider demographic beyond their target markets. here! Pay Per View is an entertainment destination whose time has come. We are dedicated towards designing here! Pay Per View as a program service that will provide entertainment to all viewers, while it fosters understanding of the gay and lesbian community - the true mandate and promise of the television medium."

"As a nationwide digital television platform, we have the opportunity to satisfy the programming needs of a highly diverse viewership," said Michael Thornton, senior vice president of Programming Acquisitions for DIRECTV, Inc. " here! Pay Per View is quality programming that enables us to take advantage of that opportunity."

Founder-principals of independent feature film production-distribution company Regent Entertainment, Colichman and Jarchow are the producing team responsible for the Academy Award®-winning (Best Adapted Screenplay) "Gods and Monsters," starring Sir Ian McKellen, Lynn Redgrave and Brendan Fraser. The pair also produced the multi award-winning "Twilight of the Golds," starring Brendan Fraser and Faye Dunaway and "A Woman's A Helluva Thing," starring Penelope Ann Miller, Angus Macfadyen and Ann-Margret.

The launch of here! Pay Per View follows on Colichman and Jarchow's formation of here! Films, which the executives formally unveiled during the 2002 American Film Market. A fully-integrated company exclusively dedicated to the production, acquisition, distribution and international sales of gay content films. Following its successful release of "Sordid Lives," here! Films is now theatrically releasing "Friends and Family," a comedy starring Tony Lo Bianco, Tovah Feldshuh, Beth Fowler, Edward Hibbert, Meshach Taylor and Anna Maria Alberghetti. The company has also acquired worldwide distribution rights for "Showboy," the directorial and acting debut of "Six Feet Under's" Emmy Award-Winning writer Christian Taylor. "Showboy" follows Taylor's attempts to become a Vegas Showboy following dismissal from his duties as a writer for "Six Feet Under" and features cameos from Siegfried and Roy and Whoopi Goldberg. here! Films also operates a foreign distribution arm representing gay and lesbian films from the Regent Entertainment library, including "Sordid Lives," "Gods and Monsters," and "Speedway Junky," and has acquired foreign sales rights to "The Trip," a gay romantic comedy, set in 1970's America; "Urbania," a darkly humorous portrait of urban legends and one man's plunge into mania; and "Big Eden," a unique drama about home and family.

About here! Pay Per View

Launching Friday, August 29, 2003 on DIRECTV, here! Pay Per View is a national pay-per-view programming service offering quality gay and lesbian-themed recent motion pictures, direct to pay-per-view premieres and a wide range of specials. here! Pay Per View is a venture of Stephen Jarchow and Paul Colichman, founders and principals of Los Angeles-based film production company Regent Entertainment.

About DIRECTV

DIRECTV is the nation's leading digital multichannel television service provider with more than 11.4 million customers. DIRECTV and the Cyclone Design logo are registered trademarks of DIRECTV, Inc., a unit of Hughes Electronics Corporation. Hughes Electronics Corporation, a unit of General Motors Corporation, is a world-leading provider of digital television entertainment, broadband satellite networks and services, and global video and data broadcasting. The earnings of HUGHES are used to calculate the earnings attributable to the General Motors Class H common stock (NYSE:GMH - News).

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Contact: SSA Public Relations Los Angeles: Steve Syatt, Dominic Friesen, 818/501-0700 New York: Mike Rudnick, Robin Lawson, 212/679-4750


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Extended News
KEYWORDS: culturewar; downourthroats; gayppv; hollyweird; homosexualagenda; samesexdisorder
Another Gay article...They seem to be popular on FR!
1 posted on 07/07/2003 10:53:36 AM PDT by Pro-Bush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Pro-Bush
Targeted for my channel block.
2 posted on 07/07/2003 10:54:59 AM PDT by Semper Paratus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Semper Paratus
Targeted for my channel block.

Seriesously, I don't want my daughter to see this crap...I thought MTV was bad, Geez!
3 posted on 07/07/2003 10:57:47 AM PDT by Pro-Bush (The war on Iraq was never declared "over"!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Pro-Bush
Just damn.

Well, it's PPV. Which means I ain't gotta pay for it. I guess that could be called a good thing...I guess...
4 posted on 07/07/2003 10:58:33 AM PDT by mhking
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pro-Bush
the gays are definately NOT Pro-Bush (/sarcasm)
5 posted on 07/07/2003 10:58:34 AM PDT by bedolido (please let my post be on an even number... small even/odd phobia here)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pro-Bush
I have DISH Satelite. I hope they don't add the Gay channel to their lineup.
6 posted on 07/07/2003 10:59:50 AM PDT by bedolido (please let my post be on an even number... small even/odd phobia here)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bedolido
So far Dish hasn't added that. I am already mad at TNN for thier switch in format!
7 posted on 07/07/2003 11:01:41 AM PDT by Zavien Doombringer (Ain't nothing worse than feeling obsolete....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Zavien Doombringer
I am already mad at TNN for thier switch in format!

You mean the "Manly-Man" format? I used to watch it when they had country music and country shows.

8 posted on 07/07/2003 11:03:36 AM PDT by bedolido (please let my post be on an even number... small even/odd phobia here)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Pro-Bush
With all the news about gays,you would think they're the majority! It's sad to see our kids subjected to all this "queer" B.S. GOD help us all!
9 posted on 07/07/2003 11:04:25 AM PDT by ohiobushman (HEY CLINTON'S,DON'T GO AWAY MAD,JUST F'N GO AWAY!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bedolido
Hehe, yeah...

Entertainment doesn't have to go to that kind of low.

I have children. I know those shows will not come on till later in the evening, but..I my wife and I go to bed early, and the kids are out of school. As soon as I find the instructions on how to block this channel during those times, I am staying up!

10 posted on 07/07/2003 11:11:30 AM PDT by Zavien Doombringer (Ain't nothing worse than feeling obsolete....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Pro-Bush
Capitalism at work.
If only 10% of the country is homosexual, how many of these PPVs will they sell?
It has always struck me as being funny that Directv has sooo many things from the mormons on Freeview on the grid next to the adult channels.
They do not carry EWTN either. I was looking for a kids show about a little angel. Cherub's Wings, I think. My kids watched it at a neighbor's house and she said to tune to EWTN. Directv does not carry it. How strange that they carry tons of stations no one else does ie Discovery Wings and Noggin but not for Catholics.
11 posted on 07/07/2003 11:11:48 AM PDT by netmilsmom (God Bless our President, those with him & our troops)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pro-Bush
Charter Cable's premium channels include serveral who cater to the homosexual agenda. If you wish to subscribe to the other channels in that group, you're stuck.

Even as an adult it is distrubing to be channel hopping and land on a channel with two guys embracing on the screen. Not much in life is more disgusting to me than this subject matter.

The problem is, that they also salt the other channels with guy on guy infatuation. On occassion I have scanned our channels to find four or five channels with this type of programming on at the same time. This is unusual, but each evening there are generally at least two.

When discussing this topic, it's only reasonable to mention that there are some absolutely disgusting movies out there depicting heterosexual relationships as well.

Why is it that the story lines, acting and beauty of the people involved in soft porn so often drops to "B" or even "C" grade quality?

Landing on a channel with two really gross looking people using sixth grade level communication skills, and engaging in really ugly contortionist sex is only a little less objectionable than hitting the "love that dare not speak it's name" channel.
12 posted on 07/07/2003 11:11:50 AM PDT by DoughtyOne (Brother, has your faith lapsed. Renew your conservatism today!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pro-Bush
I hope all have seen the commercials for the BRAVO program about three gay guys going around and doing make overs on straight guys. I forget what it is called but it is premiering very soon, and BRAVO is not a PPV. It is cable for all to see. At least with the majority of the current gay-based mainstream shows, they have not been quite as blatant about the gay lifestyle. This program, or what I've seen of the trailers, is an attempt to see a straight guy fail as a person and the gay guys riding in and saving him from himself like the cavalry. All they need is a big red "Q" on their chest as the word queer, if I remember right, is in the title of the program.
13 posted on 07/07/2003 11:13:01 AM PDT by Redwood71
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
Even as an adult it is distrubing to be channel hopping and land on a channel with two guys embracing on the screen.

Nothing pisses me off more!
14 posted on 07/07/2003 11:15:34 AM PDT by Pro-Bush (The war on Iraq was never declared "over"!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: bedolido
Having the screen name Pro-Bush has it's pros and cons. Especially when President Bush does things to piss off gun owners like me!
15 posted on 07/07/2003 11:16:39 AM PDT by Pro-Bush (The war on Iraq was never declared "over"!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Pro-Bush
Well I'm Pro-Bush and pro-bush... (*sarcasm*). Great label. Wish I'd thought of it.
16 posted on 07/07/2003 11:18:32 AM PDT by bedolido (please let my post be on an even number... small even/odd phobia here)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Pro-Bush

17 posted on 07/07/2003 11:20:39 AM PDT by Zavien Doombringer (Ain't nothing worse than feeling obsolete....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pro-Bush
Why is it called "here! Pay-Per-View"?
I assume that's the hip abbreviated version of "We're here! We're queer! ..."?
18 posted on 07/07/2003 11:21:03 AM PDT by PBRSTREETGANG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
One answer to your problem with those channels, if you're on Charter and have digital cable, is to exercize your option to block channels. You just won't see them, and won't be able to access them without reprogramming.

If there's content frequently on a channel that you don't like, and if you never watch any other content on that channel, why not block it? Seems pretty simple to me.
19 posted on 07/07/2003 11:22:05 AM PDT by MineralMan (godless atheist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Pro-Bush
BUMP
20 posted on 07/07/2003 11:23:50 AM PDT by GrandMoM ("Vengeance is Mine , I will repay," says the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Redwood71
"All they need is a big red "Q" on their chest as the word queer, if I remember right, is in the title of the program.

"

If I'm not mistaken, the name of the program is "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy." It's another personal makeover program, of which there are so many these days. If I'm seeing the trailers correctly, what happens is that four (or is it five) gay men restyle some straight guy's wardrobe and living space, making him more appealing to women.

Could be pretty funny, but I don't watch that much TV, so I'll never see it. But, then, that's my choice, as a television viewer, isn't it? I'll just tune in some other station.
21 posted on 07/07/2003 11:24:40 AM PDT by MineralMan (godless atheist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan
It would be rather simple, except that for about 18 hours a day they seem to have regular movies on them.
22 posted on 07/07/2003 11:24:48 AM PDT by DoughtyOne (Brother, has your faith lapsed. Renew your conservatism today!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
"It would be rather simple, except that for about 18 hours a day they seem to have regular movies on them."

Do you watch those movies on that channel? If not, then block it. If you do, then you'll just have to skip the channel at the other times.

Or, are you advocating forcing those companies not to show any homosexual-content movies?
23 posted on 07/07/2003 11:26:54 AM PDT by MineralMan (godless atheist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: bedolido
he-he...I like bush as well!
24 posted on 07/07/2003 11:28:02 AM PDT by Pro-Bush (The war on Iraq was never declared "over"!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Pro-Bush
I guess Barbra Streisand needs the work
25 posted on 07/07/2003 11:33:57 AM PDT by talleyman (I calls 'em like I sees 'em!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan
I believe my posts stated my stance on the programming rather well. I don't need to add to it.
26 posted on 07/07/2003 11:38:26 AM PDT by DoughtyOne (Brother, has your faith lapsed. Renew your conservatism today!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Pro-Bush
...estimated 8 to 12 percent of the U.S. population...

Bogus. The real answer is less than 1%. The homosexuals are so in-your-face about their perversion that it seems like 8-12%.

27 posted on 07/07/2003 11:44:30 AM PDT by quark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: quark
...estimated 8 to 12 percent of the U.S. population

I agree...100% Barbara Streisand!
28 posted on 07/07/2003 11:46:04 AM PDT by Pro-Bush (The war on Iraq was never declared "over"!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan
Seems to me you have to Block the Phone the Front Door The Television, hmmmmmmmmmmm I guess this is the only way to rid the annoying nuiscane of telemarketers and Gay junk T.V.

29 posted on 07/07/2003 12:24:15 PM PDT by missyme
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: quark
Someone once said, "The whole world is queer but me and thee, and sometimes I'm not sure about thee."
30 posted on 07/07/2003 12:49:20 PM PDT by Old Professer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan
"Could be pretty funny, but I don't watch that much TV, so I'll never see it."
______________________________________-

Like I said in my entry, it had the appearance of making the straight guy a loser, and the gay guys the big heroes for changing the straight guy until he was now a big man about town. To heroize someone because they are gay, which is part of the inference, is a falacy. More programming of the young minds. And this is not PPV, it can be viewed by anyone with cable.
31 posted on 07/07/2003 2:22:30 PM PDT by Redwood71
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: mhking
apparently you have not been exposed to a program called "Queer As Folk" on Showtime? I had to cancel my subscription when I discovered I was paying for gay pornography.
32 posted on 07/07/2003 2:27:06 PM PDT by presidio9 (RUN AL, RUN!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Redwood71
"And this is not PPV, it can be viewed by anyone with cable."

Or not viewed, as you choose. Myself, I won't view it, because it sounds like a stupid program. Others may feel differently, and choose to view it.

Isn't our country wonderful? You get to choose what you watch on television.
33 posted on 07/07/2003 2:54:15 PM PDT by MineralMan (godless atheist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan
"Isn't our country wonderful? You get to choose what you watch on television.



And unfortunatly you are forced to explain to your kids why they can't watch a program open to the public on cable about the mis-information it expells. I believe in freedom of expression, but there is a limit to what should be uncontrolled. If you want PPV, that's fine. But don't put it where children are placed in the position of trying to comprehend the questionability of it's motives.
34 posted on 07/07/2003 4:35:27 PM PDT by Redwood71
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Pro-Bush
I was just thinking that were it not for Minnesota's CCW laws and queer articles, FR would be a dead forum.
35 posted on 07/07/2003 4:46:53 PM PDT by gcruse (There is no such thing as society: there are individual men and women[.] --Margaret Thatcher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gcruse
I was just thinking that were it not for Minnesota's CCW laws and queer articles, FR would be a dead forum.

Please be fair, Gary. Keep in mind that there is also the occasional Civil War replay thread. ;-)

36 posted on 07/07/2003 4:51:18 PM PDT by Scenic Sounds (Summertime!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
I used to have Cinemax a few years ago, they played one too many gay movies and I canned them. I refused to get any movie channels ever since.
37 posted on 07/07/2003 4:55:34 PM PDT by Brett66
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Scenic Sounds
Which side of the Civil War was Minnesota on?
38 posted on 07/07/2003 5:02:27 PM PDT by gcruse (There is no such thing as society: there are individual men and women[.] --Margaret Thatcher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: gcruse
Which side of the Civil War was Minnesota on?

Well, that's a queer question, don't you think? ;-)

39 posted on 07/07/2003 5:08:23 PM PDT by Scenic Sounds (Summertime!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Scenic Sounds
Well, that's a queer question, don't you think? ;-)

Way to stay on topic! : )

40 posted on 07/07/2003 5:11:48 PM PDT by DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet (WILL TAG FOR FOOD.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Scenic Sounds
LOL
41 posted on 07/07/2003 5:15:34 PM PDT by gcruse (There is no such thing as society: there are individual men and women[.] --Margaret Thatcher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Redwood71
"And unfortunatly you are forced to explain to your kids why they can't watch a program open to the public on cable about the mis-information it expells. I believe in freedom of expression, but there is a limit to what should be uncontrolled. "

Oh, I don't know. It seems to me that if you're not ready to explain to children why they can't view television programming, then perhaps you're not ready to have children.

There are lots of adult things on TV that are inappropriate for children, and for a lot of reasons. If you're looking for a white-washed television environment, you're not going to find it.

Seems to me that it's time to start figuring out how to explain these things to your children. They're going to encounter lots of adult subjects out there. Or, shut down your television or block all the channels that might have such content.

Your children do not coopt my rights to view programming not suitable for children. It is your responsibility to filter your own children's access to all the media.
42 posted on 07/07/2003 7:16:29 PM PDT by MineralMan (godless atheist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: MineralMan
"Your children do not coopt my rights to view programming not suitable for children. It is your responsibility to filter your own children's access to all the media."
_______________________________________________________

My point is that television is continuing to reach down into the depths of many things that are not suitable for family viewing. I watch very little TV because of the lack of programming suitable for myself, let alone my kids. As the prime time shows move from sex and race to violence and blood, under the guise of drama, where does the small tube entertainment stop short of violating obsenity.

Each year the big screen puts out movies, with rating systems, that are taking the choice out of the showing. And my problem there is that they are not putting out enough "G" movies for the family. Those that are put out, always do well. There must be a market, and organizations have been profitable with them. Disney made a bundle over the years and "his" masters sell like crazy every time they are reissued. Tell you something?

But, the main reason I do not like the idea of this show being aired in prime time, is what the context of the show has displayed. It heroizes a deviate learned behavior and tries to make it seem natural and that the people that are in this lifestyle are exceptionable. And it tries to make the straight subject appear a loser that was lucky enough to be "saved" by the Queer people (their words, not mine).

What would happen if a black man was saved every week by the white group? Or women were saved by the men group? The NAACP and Now would be in the offices of the studio heads screaming discrimination indicating that the ideology of the show was inconsistent with reality and demeaning to the subject being portrayed the loser. It is happening every day. Look at the work of Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton just for two.

If a loser guy is saved by another group of people because he can't get girls, that's bad enough already to try to sell because it has nothing to offer an adult. But to use homosexuality as a premise to sell the program to the 15 year old which is what it's aimed at, then it needs to go because at some point you have to question the "lesson learned" of the program. It was said that "A Team" was a violent show when they never killed, or even wounded with more than a small cut, anyone on the program. That had gone to the limit. So now the viewers are expected to watch the mainstreaming of a sexual lifestyle. Put it on PPV. Isn't that where shows that are not suitable for primetime are put? And this one is not.

As for your rights to watch a program, I have no problem with you watching it. But your rights do not overstep those of the rights of the children and adults that do not like taboo busting television.

A person's sexual choice should be left in the bedroom, not publically displayed. It's your choice to be subjected to a particular type of sexual orientation, not mine. Keep it in the bedroom. I have gay people working for me, and know many others. They do not flaunt it, or openly display it any more than I do mine. That is the acceptable normal. Not what they are portraying in this show. The openness of sex on television put it into the Jack Hanna catagory, gay or straight. I'd like to think we had progressed past the animals. If you want porn, put it on PPV. The flaunting of any human sexual lifestyle is not for entertainment unless it is for pornographic purposes.
43 posted on 07/08/2003 7:41:58 AM PDT by Redwood71
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Redwood71
"But, the main reason I do not like the idea of this show being aired in prime time, is what the context of the show has displayed. It heroizes a deviate learned behavior and tries to make it seem natural and that the people that are in this lifestyle are exceptionable. And it tries to make the straight subject appear a loser that was lucky enough to be "saved" by the Queer people (their words, not mine).
"

Since even basic cable offers dozens of channels which are on all the time, it seems clear to me that choice lies in the hands of the consumer. At the same time this show you find objectionable is on, there are dozens of other programs to view, ranging from nature documentaries and religious programming, to children's programming and classic films.

I won't be watching this particular show. I have no interest in the gay lifestyle, and such shows would bore me to tears.

The point here is that television is a commercial enterprise. Broadcasters put out what they believe will find an audience. You are free to choose from the enormous variety of programming available, and you are responsible for the programming viewed by your children.

What you are not free to do is to dictate to the businesses which produce, pay for, and broadcast television programming. You may choose not to view their offerings, since every television receiver allows you to change channels at will.

During prime time, especially, you or another parent should be present to control what programming your children watch. Quite frankly, if I had young children, I would not allow them to view television at all except when I or my spouse was present to monitor their viewing. I would limit television viewing for any children of mine to a short period daily, and would offer them a selection of programming I thought suitable for them.

It sounds to me as if you wish to remove all programming except for that which you, personally, find suitable for viewing. That's not being conservative; that's a liberal tactic.

If you don't like some programming, simply do not watch it. If you don't wish your children to view some programming, do not allow them to watch it. It's that simple.
44 posted on 07/08/2003 8:23:38 AM PDT by MineralMan (godless atheist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson