Yesterday, there was a 're-union' of an old TV show from the 70s which was set in the 50s.

During the show, they made reference to some community behavior change based on the on screen behavior of a major character.

I won't mention which character or show at this point, but will later.

The bottom line is...

"When key characters who have a large public following are seen to endorse certain behavior, there is a significant change in community behavior as shown in the character"

Now.. there are a number of aspects to this issue which must be considered.

1/ If the character makes a behavioral choice which parents can support, then it is more likely to receive support and encouragement at the family level. An example might be 'study harder'

2/ If the character is seen to be successful after having made a 'rebellious' or 'evil' choice.. it also stands to reason that a significant element in the community will be encouraged in that direction irrespective of family or parental support. It might even be in spite of it.

DEVIANT BEHAVIOR. Let's say there is a behavior which at the time of airing a show is considered 'deviant'

For example full mouth kissing of someone you have just met of the opposite sex in front of their partner, rather than (perhaps) a kiss on the cheek or a handshake.

Imagine if a highly respected character from a popular show with a long standing following did this, and the scene shows all the other characters with a little 'huh' surprise at first but then..they just laugh it off as "Oh well.. I guess it's ok" and the show goes on..with this kind of behavior becoming part of the norm. (at least for the character who initiated it)

I contend...that such things not only can, but do influence community values and behavior.

Thus.. it is up to all of us to ensure that our media maintains high moral standards in all productions and does not play fast and loose with community standards in the interests of 'ratings'.

Channel 10 Sydney is about the grossest of the commercial television channels.
If we look back, and recall, theres been a large number of deviant sex related programmes starting off just after foundation of Channel.

In fact I think I remember the openning promo of the new Channel Ten in Sydney and they had a young girl dancer, dancing in a loose very skimpy dress...and lo and behold... out popped her breast half way through the dance.
I reckoned that was a planned event.
Ever since then, the spirit realm has had a sexual/deviant hold on that TV station...the worst show being the Queer Eye for the Straight Guy.
No wonder the kids got corrupted into 'deviant', porn and decay.

You haven't got that on video have you Gibo?
Sorry could not resist a switch exists on every set if you look you will find you can turn it of.
Not sure any of us should impose our standards on others.
Are you blokes aware how awful I find those yank Evangelist shows?
But I have located the on and off switch.

Hi Belly.
Sorry cant help with a clip of the event.

What we forget, with the immorality on TV/the Net these days, is that it has social consequences.

The young mind is like a fresh sponge.

If we feed it sexual immorality its going to want sex immorality and when the sin is full blown, it leads to death (Bible).
The lust grows and can in certain cases can lead the victim into sex crime.

Theres no doubt that the television media corrupted a generation (at least two generations) from the early days of 'No.96'...to today.

I watched it happen over four decades...and we shouldnt play it down.
Along with the sexual immorality in the media, and the growth of porn, civilisation slid backwards into the dark hole its now in.

Brutal censorship might reverse the 'media-created' sex crime, but I doubt anyone has the courage.

Hi Belly.
Sorry can't help with a clip of the event.

What we forget, with the proposed censorship on the TV/Net these days, is that it has social consequences.

The desire for control is like a sponge.

If we feed it permission to dictate our lives, it's going to want control over us. When it is full blown, it leads to megalomania and idiotic internet filtering schemes. In certain cases, it can lead to dictatorship.

There's no doubt censorship enslaved a generation (from the early days, the 1950s, McCarthyism) to today.

I watched people try to do this again - we shouldn't play it down.

Along with fundamentalist extreme Christian wowserism, civilisation might slide backwards into the ignorance it's trying to outgrow.

Brutal censorship might satisfy some Christian activists, but I hope none of them have that power.

---

On a side note, for your definitions here to be in any way logical, you need to believe that all of us folk who oppose censorship are corrupted and incapable of making judgements for themselves. Essentially, your argument hinges on the idea that people can't make decisions for themselves.

Well, screw that. How about you give up your freedom to make such commentary? How would that kind of censorshop feel?

TRTL
Your apathy, and Bellys, is part of the problem...the danger to society.

You waifs want your freedoms at all costs...even the death of a civilisation.

In a true sense the inclinations of todays waif/porn youngsters is the destroyer of what was once not perfect... but better than 2008.