|
Post by bernard on Nov 27, 2011 23:59:43 GMT
Canada's largest TV network CTV will broadcast during prime time a Russell Peters Christmas Special where the Virgin Mary will be played by porn queen Pamela Anderson. Anderson appeared in hijacked honeymoon (porn film) with Tommy Lee and the film sold 600,000 copies. (I get arguments that she is not a porn actress) Ctv has promoted the show as an "irreverent twist unlike anything viewers have seen before" leaving little doubt that they intend the show to be offensive (irreverent). Myself and a few others have engaged in an online campaign to protest the program, several blogs have picked it up and this past Saturday the National Post ran a special commentary condemning the program. Although the program is still likely to air the effects of our efforts show that Catholics are still a significant segment of the public and if our numbers were more organized we would have considerably more influence. I post this here because we know it's only a matter of time before they start pulling this crap in Ireland. DON"T STAND FOR IT! Here is one of the blogs fratres.wordpress.com/And the commentary from Saturday's National Post life.nationalpost.com/2011/11/26/rex-murphy-what-the-tolerant-must-tolerate/
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2011 0:20:01 GMT
Ok I got grumpy with the Canadian Broadcasting complaints people by email. I'll let you know if/when they reply. I didn't bother with the tv station or that man himself, it's just more meat for them to chew on. Pamela Anderson, no matter what she's wearing, or not wearing, still has a look that'll have a lot of men turning on the telly. Hopefully dressed as the Blessed Virgin she'll manage to weird them out, for it's very odd indeed to think if her in those terms. Good to see you back Bernard.
|
|
|
Post by bernard on Nov 29, 2011 5:46:29 GMT
This is the letter I and a few other people got.
The Canadian Broadcast Standards Council (CBSC) has received your correspondence concerning A Russell Peters Christmas.
Broadcasters are responsible for all that is aired on their station and it is they who must make the determination on a day-to-day basis whether what they broadcast is in compliance with the Codes they have agreed to abide by. Accordingly, the CBSC never reviews programming and creative decisions; indeed, it cannot because that would be censorship, which is in violation of Canada’s Broadcast Act. It rather assesses, after the fact, whether the broadcaster’s choices conformed to the standards set out in the Codes.
This being said, the CBSC can only deal with complaints from individuals who have seen the program themselves. Since you have not seen the program yourself because it will only air December 1, the CBSC is not in a position to pursue your complaint. This does not, of course, mean that the expression of your views should not have been filed, but only that, in the circumstances, the CBSC Secretariat could not consider your complaint within the CBSC’s complaints resolution process. We have nevertheless forwarded your correspondence to the broadcaster so that they may be aware of your concerns.
I regret not being able to be more directly helpful this time. If in the future you should have any further concerns regarding content that you saw or heard on private Canadian television or radio, please contact us as soon as possible after the broadcast with the date, time and station and we will be glad to deal with your complaint right away.
Sincerely,
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 30, 2011 11:10:29 GMT
It's tough Bernard, unfortunately there is no such thing as bad publicity. If there is a huge outcry from Christians then it will just alert anti-Christians/busty blonde fans to the existence of the programme and more will tune in. I bet if they get great ratings they'd repeat it. Mediocre ratings will guarantee a 2am repeat in March instead of a Christmas Eve repeat. I know it is difficult and it is right to be outraged but I think the pragmatic approach is to leave it be now and complain afterwards with the hope of a censure that will stop such a screening next year. That would be the pragmatic approach, Matthew 10:16 and all that.
|
|
|
Post by bernard on Dec 1, 2011 0:00:11 GMT
That's good advice, thanks. Came across this article from India where film makers face prosecution of for denigrating Christ. It's nice to know there are some places where we have some social influence. Somewhere to relocate if need be. www.cathnewsindia.com/2011/11/16/film-makers-face-legal-action-for-denigrating-jesus/A Christian organization says it will file a criminal complaints against the makers of a Hindi movie, which depicts Jesus Christ in an insulting and derogatory manner.
Posters promoting the movie: Who’s There? (Kaun Hai Wahan?), show Jesus Christ hanging upside down on a crucifix with knives in the background. One features a man stabbing Jesus while he is being crucified.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Dec 1, 2011 18:10:41 GMT
The Indian film I suspect reflects the influence of the view propagated by Hindu nationalists in India that Christianity and Islam are "alien" impositions which should not be tolerated. To be fair to the Indian government (run by the officially "secular" Congress Party and its allies) it does enforce blasphemy laws which prohibit insult to most religions (partly because they fear potential civil unrest). The Pamela Anderson scandal reflects a mindset seen a lot in comedians in Britain and Ireland - they revel in offending people because it gives them a sense of power, and promote nihilism because it makes them feel brave. These specimens who love to insult handicapped children are prime examples of the breed: www.telegraph.co.uk/news/celebritynews/8916298/Jimmy-Carr-defends-joke-about-handicapped-children.htmlwww.telegraph.co.uk/culture/theatre/comedy/8841360/Is-Ricky-Gervais-the-new-Woody-Allen...-or-a-witless-bore.html Ricky Gervais is a very outspoken atheist - I don't know about Jimmy Carr [addendum - on checking Wikipedia I find Carr is an atheist - brought up Catholic and converted by Richard Dawkins' writings - nice comment on Dawkins' view that atheism makes you civilised - and by sex, which shows the female population of Britain are even more unselective than previously thought. I am sorry to say Mr Carr is of Irish parentage.]
|
|