Adult Content on Radio and TV (from Seattle Board)

[Daryl Lynn L.A.]

Child porn is a crime. Porn itself is not. The industry is regulated, with laws that apply to it directly. 18 USC 2257 is one of them. There are also laws in every state that criminalize the sexual abuse of minors. There is a difference between criminal activity and legal activity.

I know that there are a lot of people who think the existence of adult, legal porn is a problem. Conservative talk radio and the religious talk shows talk about it all the time.

It's very difficult to enforce those laws. It's very difficult to get age verification for anything on PornHub. That industry is awash in sexual abuse of minors. They thrive on minor girls, the younger, the better. The videos with the younger ones get more clicks.

My two students signed contracts that were not worth the paper they were printed on. When they protested that their contracts were being violated because the director was insisting on their performing acts that they did not agree to, they were told, "Oh, contracts are just a legality." The production company had no intention of adhering to the contracts.

And that is why there should not be a radio station dedicated to discussing porn videos. People are hurt, they do not consent, often they are not paid, or promised a check later on, or paid much less than they agreed to. It's a dirty, shady, underworld business.

Linda Lovelace, who was thought to be the ideal super-sexual woman for every man, because of her ability to do "Deep Throat", performed while her captor, Chuck Traynor, held a gun on her off camera. Undoubtedly, millions of women were cajoled by their partner, "Hey babe, why can't you be more like Linda Lovelace? She's really good at deep throat stuff. Babe, do more deep throat. Go deeper." Linda did that on threat of her life.

That's different than the sex therapist who has a radio show explaining to idiots who cannot intuitively understand how some gadget works, teaching the idiots to use the gadget. There's a huge difference. Apples and oranges.

 

[michael hagerty]

Playboy ads were staples of ESPN advertising in the early years. There was one featuring Alex Haley and Elliott Gould, with a bed of slinky jazz playing, as the narrator talked about the sophisticated journalism, criticism and "the world's most beautiful women" subscribers would find in the magazine's pages every month. They were nearly as common as Sports Illustrated ads, with their offers of cheap watches or windbreakers as enticement to subscribe.

Here it is!

Ah. Not a big sports fan, so missed seeing them.

When you said “major television advertiser”, I was thinking OTA, not cable.

 

[davideduardo]

Ah. Not a big sports fan, so missed seeing them.

Yo tampoco. (Me neither)

When you said “major television advertiser”, I was thinking OTA, not cable.

Yeah, FCC regulates those issues to some extent on OTA TV, but not on cable. Cable, on the other hand, has to worry about everything but the FCC as far as what "profanity" and "obscenity" really mean.

Many don't realize that the FCC does not have a list of dirty words. But, to paraphrase a Supreme, "they know it when they see it".

 

[Mikey Radio]

Speaking of underage, here's a topical news item that's been making the rounds just within the past day...Priscilla Presley talks about the fact that she was only 14 and Elvis was 24 when they met. Evidently it's because she 'was a listener'.

Priscilla Presley addresses age difference between her and Elvis Presley​

IN CASE YOU MISSED IT: Priscilla Presley addresses age difference between her and Elvis Presley

During Monday's press conference for the Sofia Coppola film, Priscilla, at the Venice Film Festival Priscilla cleared the air regarding her famed relationship with the King of Rock and Roll. Priscilla, who was 14 at the time, met the Jailhouse Rock hitmaker, then 24, while he was serving in the...

uk.style.yahoo.com

Priscilla, who was 14 at the time, met the Jailhouse Rock hitmaker, then 24, while he was serving in the army and stationed in Germany. "It was very difficult for my parents to understand that Elvis would be so interested in me, and why, and I really do think (it was) because I was more of a listener.”

 

[CTListener]

Ah. Not a big sports fan, so missed seeing them.

"Entertainment for Men" was right there on the cover every month, so ESPN was an obvious advertising buy. ESPN wasn't even pretending to try to attract female viewers in 1982.

I actually bought my first issue of Playboy to read an article! It was the then-sensational interview with Jimmy Carter, in which he admitted "lusting in his heart" for women other than his wife. But yes, I did take a look at the centerfold. Several looks, in fact, as she was Patti McGuire, the very attractive future wife of tennis star Jimmy Connors. There was lust in my ... um, heart.

 

[boombox4]

It's very difficult to enforce those laws. It's very difficult to get age verification for anything on PornHub. That industry is awash in sexual abuse of minors. They thrive on minor girls, the younger, the better. The videos with the younger ones get more clicks.

My two students signed contracts that were not worth the paper they were printed on. When they protested that their contracts were being violated because the director was insisting on their performing acts that they did not agree to, they were told, "Oh, contracts are just a legality." The production company had no intention of adhering to the contracts.

18 USC 2257 applies to any depiction of sexual content "intended for shipment or transportation in interstate or foreign commerce". Section 2257 includes records-keeping requirements, where any content provider in the US must keep age records of any performer and be able to provide such proof, of legal age of all performers, on request. Congress didn't write that law, and others associated laws, just for kicks.

Breaking them is a felony.

The law was enacted in 1988.

As for sex talk on radio, I never have liked it. Some of the shock jocks liked to talk about sex back in the 2000's. It never impressed me. I don't really get into rap and pop songs that go into great detail about sex, either. But a lot of them are hits, they just bleep out the F bombs and other words. Some of the lyrics are almost explicit in their depictions of sexual activity.

Maybe, in a way, we've already got a version of 'porn radio'.

 

[boombox4]

"Entertainment for Men" was right there on the cover every month, so ESPN was an obvious advertising buy. ESPN wasn't even pretending to try to attract female viewers in 1982.

I actually bought my first issue of Playboy to read an article! It was the then-sensational interview with Jimmy Carter, in which he admitted "lusting in his heart" for women other than his wife. But yes, I did take a look at the centerfold. Several looks, in fact, as she was Patti McGuire, the very attractive future wife of tennis star Jimmy Connors. There was lust in my ... um, heart.

Carter took a lot of heat for that interview. And also some misconstrued heat for his honesty.

It's amazing how that mag could actually have decent, in depth interviews. Of course, they had their TV show, where you could see Steppenwolf and Deep Purple play. 60's to the max.

 

[radiofan2023]

Carter took a lot of heat for that interview. And also some misconstrued heat for his honesty.

It's amazing how that mag could actually have decent, in depth interviews. Of course, they had their TV show, where you could see Steppenwolf and Deep Purple play. 60's to the max.

Were they actually playing, or faking it well?

 

[boombox4]

Were they actually playing, or faking it well?

I think both the bands were actually playing. I know Deep Purple actually played "Hush" live. It doesn't have the wild organ intro, though.

EDIT TO ADD: It's obviously a recording of a live performance, but looking at this vid again, it might be lip syncing to a live recording made in a studio somewhere? Kind of hard to tell if it's truly live or not, looking at the playing.

Here's the clip.

 

[Daryl Lynn L.A.]

18 USC 2257 applies to any depiction of sexual content "intended for shipment or transportation in interstate or foreign commerce". Section 2257 includes records-keeping requirements, where any content provider in the US must keep age records of any performer and be able to provide such proof, of legal age of all performers, on request. Congress didn't write that law, and others associated laws, just for kicks.

So, this law applies to the PRODUCER of the content. For example, in L.A., it would apply to big companies like Vivid or Playboy Enteprises, who produce the content themselves and load it onto their own sites.

But Pornhub is an aggregator.They host videos made by private individuals - about 14 new videos every minute and 115,000,000 (115 million) visits per day in 2019. They are like You Tube - just a depository where anyone can load private videos. They just make the web space available and post ads to generate revenue. YouTube is an uploading service, which hosts users' personal videos.

Like FaceBook, Pornhub uses Section 230 of the Communcations and Decency Act of 1996, to defend themselves, which states that an interactive computer service cannot be treated as a producer of information. They are not hosting their own content. They are hosting other people's content, and they say that it is difficult for them to discern from the videos, who is 18 years old and who is not. So, they have little incentive to remove potentially profitable material.

And that is why a radio station set up to chat about pornography is not a good idea. First, there's a problem with human trafficking and underage content, and second, there's a legal liability problem if a listener hears someone touting an underage or rape video of the listener that the listener is trying to get removed.

 

[Will_H_69_9]

So, this law applies to the PRODUCER of the content. For example, in L.A., it would apply to big companies like Vivid or Playboy Enteprises, who produce the content themselves and load it onto their own sites.

But Pornhub is an aggregator.They host videos made by private individuals - about 14 new videos every minute and 115,000,000 (115 million) visits per day in 2019. They are like You Tube - just a depository where anyone can load private videos. They just make the web space available and post ads to generate revenue. YouTube is an uploading service, which hosts users' personal videos.

Like FaceBook, Pornhub uses Section 230 of the Communcations and Decency Act of 1996, to defend themselves, which states that an interactive computer service cannot be treated as a producer of information. They are not hosting their own content. They are hosting other people's content, and they say that it is difficult for them to discern from the videos, who is 18 years old and who is not. So, they have little incentive to remove potentially profitable material.

And that is why a radio station set up to chat about pornography is not a good idea. First, there's a problem with human trafficking and underage content, and second, there's a legal liability problem if a listener hears someone touting an underage or rape video of the listener that the listener is trying to get removed.

yeah, Howard Stern and many Stern clones let porn stars and anything that would be "Sexual content" on the air promote sexually charged content on the air, then Janet Jackson's nip slip saw around the world changed all that.

speaking of porn, several states have been trying to roll out laws that tries to make it harder to access porn as they wanted you to verify your age via digital ID or driver license/physical IDs, and my home state of Texas was about to become the biggest state to do so last week with a bill known as "House Bill 1181" which not only would had used age verification but also make it to where when you access sites like pornhub, xhamster, xvideos, ETC, you would have gotten a message from the Texas State Health & Human Services that would have been a public health alert to warn that Porn could cause addiction, eating disorders and things that would be a mental health issue, which the bill itself did not go to effect yet cause a federal judge stuck it down, meaning it's now likely to be appealed by conservates in office and will most likely go to a supreme court decision and we all know the supreme court would be for this.

the reason why this is not a good idea, is not cause kids can access it, it's cause it opens up pandora's box for many things like identify theft, serves getting hacked and of course ransomware on said computers, and if the computers get hacked, guess what happens, you will get outted as a porn watcher by hackers who will use their power to shame people, and not only that, there are tools already in place to allow parents to make sure kids don't see porn (which most parents don't care enough to use said tools), the fact that people would just find ways to bypass this via VPNs to use to access it where they can find a server not based in the location where the age verification system is in place and other methods to beat it and last and not least, it would just create a angry group of incels who can't watch porn anymore (and porn is a outlet to help us let out sexual tension if you are lonely) cause they can't get with a person to have sexual relations and just do horrible acts of mass murder and domestic terrorist attacks all cause they can pleasure a person.

ABC News' report of Texas' house bill 1181 being stricken down by a federal judge as unconstitutional:
Judge strikes down Texas law requiring age verification to view pornographic websites

my solution would be just banned free porn access and make it where you must pay for porn anyway, and no porn advertisement online anywhere.

 

[boombox4]

So, this law applies to the PRODUCER of the content. For example, in L.A., it would apply to big companies like Vivid or Playboy Enteprises, who produce the content themselves and load it onto their own sites.

But Pornhub is an aggregator.They host videos made by private individuals - about 14 new videos every minute and 115,000,000 (115 million) visits per day in 2019. They are like You Tube - just a depository where anyone can load private videos. They just make the web space available and post ads to generate revenue. YouTube is an uploading service, which hosts users' personal videos.

Aggregator sites like PornHub have been sued in the past for not policing enough what goes on their site. I heard about this on the CBC. There have been groups who pressure the banks to keep from servicing porn sites' payment processing, unless the porn sites police their content better. That was also talked about on the CBC about eight months ago.

As I said earlier, the individual channels and content producers -- who produce the content that is available at places like PornHub -- have to abide by 18 USC 2257. This includes a lot of the larger porn companies that used to put out DVDs and the like -- they apparently have gone online, and many of them have 'channels' on the aggregator sites. Those companies have had to abide by 18 USC 2257 since it became law in 1988.

And, either way, adult porn is legal, most of it that is produced today is made by independent, adult women and adult couples who make money off of the 91% of the American men who consume it, and the 60% of women who also consume it (the numbers vary according to study. I'm quoting the PubMed / NIH study that was linked upthread). There are also studies that show that a majority of younger people do not hold the same negative attitude towards porn that Boomers do. Boomers are statistically more anti-porn than Millennials and GenZ'ers.

Anti-porn is aging out, except maybe in the religious right.

It's curious that no one here seems to have any opinion about hip-hop and rap songs that are all about sex, minus the bleeped out F-bombs and other bleeped words. Some guy or woman rapping about getting or receiving various types of sex, on songs being played on the radio where even kids can hear it -- somehow that is not problematic but some talk host discussing porn would be. It just doesn't add up.

I don't care to hear either on the radio, but then, radio caters to the demos that like porn and like hearing that sort of sexual lyrical content in the music they consume. The same demos aren't into talk radio of any type, so there's probably no chance of the return of Dr. Ruth anytime soon.

 

[Daryl Lynn L.A.]

As I said earlier, the individual channels and content producers -- who produce the content that is available at places like PornHub -- have to abide by 18 USC 2257. This includes a lot of the larger porn companies that used to put out DVDs and the like -- they apparently have gone online, and many of them have 'channels' on the aggregator sites. Those companies have had to abide by 18 USC 2257 since it became law in 1988.

Those are companies who operate as businesses. But that doesn't apply to individuals who can create any user name they wish and upload any content they wish, just as they do on You Tube. They're anonymous. No way to track them down.

There are also studies that show that a majority of younger people do not hold the same negative attitude towards porn that Boomers do. Boomers are statistically more anti-porn than Millennials and GenZ'ers.

Linked below is Gen. Zer Billie Eilish's comments to Howard Stern where she remarks that her brain was ruined by porn starting at about age 11. Eilish was 19 at the time, awkwardly trying to chat with a befuddled 68 year old Stern, who makes $100 million dollars a year enthusiastically promoting the roughest porn possible to his majority male audience, who believes that it is the women's role to shut up and submit. Eilish catches Stern off guard by commenting that women don't behave in real life sexual encounters the same way that they are required to behave in porn movies -- and Stern is lost. He is just lost. It has still never occurred to Stern that women are anything more than a sperm receptacle or a plastic doll. He's clueless.

The same demos aren't into talk radio of any type, so there's probably no chance of the return of Dr. Ruth anytime soon.

Dr. Ruth is too tame for the demographic that this OP is touting. Dr. Ruth advocates for kindness, mutual consideration, and mutual respect among consenting partners. We won't hear a Dr. Ruth type on the radio again. In an age of "grievance culture", the production of videos showing the greatest amounts of subjugation, brutality, and cruelty are in demand. It doesn't matter if the director, or producer, or videographer is female. They will still produce male- centric content in which a female is nothing more than an orifice to be abused.

Billie Eilish says watching porn as a child ‘destroyed my brain’

Singer says exposure from the age of 11 messed her up when she began dating as ‘I was not saying no to things that were not good’

www.theguardian.com

 

[Kelly A]

There is a difference between criminal activity and legal activity.

Some may think that way because they're trying to clear their conscience because they use it. 'I only consume legal porn created by consenting adults.' You have no idea the circumstances of how 'actors' and crews are treated or their history, only that you enjoy it, so it must all be above board.

I know that there are a lot of people who think the existence of adult, legal porn is a problem. Conservative talk radio and the religious talk shows talk about it all the time.

Really? Then read these:

SOS International | Pornography and It's Impact On Sexual Exploitation

The truth is pornography has a distinct impact on sexual exploitation due to its accessibility and deception. These factors cause problems for both consumers of pornography and the people who are at-risk of being trafficked for its creation.

sosresponds.org

Why are people silent about the abuses and exploitation in porn? | Yomi Adegoke

Mia Khalifa - once the most popular adult actor on the planet - has revealed not only the pittance she was paid but also the rampant exploitation of an industry that often seems strangely immune to criticism

www.theguardian.com

Shattering the Porn Star Fantasy - CEASE / Centre to End All Sexual Exploitation

“…porno people are a hard-grafting, ill-paid fraternity who, by and large, look out for each other and help each other through. They pay their rent, with the deaths of feelings.”Martin Amis, British novelist In our hypersexualised world, “porn stars” are envied, admired and desired. […]

cease.org.uk

You and others need to stop trying to justify using porn. It's addictive and damaging to the consumer and people who produce it. Of all the things you enjoy listening to via right-wing talk radio, maybe you should listen to them when it comes to consumption and support of porn?

 

[Kelly A]

If they carry it out, though, it's potential jail time.

What?? Some teen musical artist singing music written by someone much older than they are isn't illegal. There are hundreds of songwriters who sell music and lyrics on the open market. There is no age limitation on who buys the music.

 

[Daryl Lynn L.A.]

Some may think that way because they're trying to clear their conscience because they use it. 'I only consume legal porn created by consenting adults.' You have no idea the circumstances of how 'actors' and crews are treated or their history, only that you enjoy it, so it must all be above board.

Really? Then read these:

SOS International | Pornography and It's Impact On Sexual Exploitation

The truth is pornography has a distinct impact on sexual exploitation due to its accessibility and deception. These factors cause problems for both consumers of pornography and the people who are at-risk of being trafficked for its creation.

sosresponds.org

Why are people silent about the abuses and exploitation in porn? | Yomi Adegoke

Mia Khalifa - once the most popular adult actor on the planet - has revealed not only the pittance she was paid but also the rampant exploitation of an industry that often seems strangely immune to criticism

www.theguardian.com

Shattering the Porn Star Fantasy - CEASE / Centre to End All Sexual Exploitation

“…porno people are a hard-grafting, ill-paid fraternity who, by and large, look out for each other and help each other through. They pay their rent, with the deaths of feelings.”Martin Amis, British novelist In our hypersexualised world, “porn stars” are envied, admired and desired. […]

cease.org.uk

You and others need to stop trying to justify using porn. It's addictive and damaging to the consumer and people who produce it. Of all the things you enjoy listening to via right-wing talk radio, maybe you should listen to them when it comes to consumption and support of porn?

 

[davideduardo]

Some may think that way because they're trying to clear their conscience because they use it. 'I only consume legal porn created by consenting adults.' You have no idea the circumstances of how 'actors' and crews are treated or their history, only that you enjoy it, so it must all be above board.

You and others need to stop trying to justify using porn. It's addictive and damaging to the consumer and people who produce it. Of all the things you enjoy listening to via right-wing talk radio, maybe you should listen to them when it comes to consumption and support of porn?

Beside the whole frightening human element, the fact is that a porn oriented station would never attract advertisers.

Some would say that such a format would garner support from the porn "industry" but it is likely that they do not want the controversial exposure on a federally regulated medium. They do "just fine" saturating the internet.

There is not any other category of products or services that would patronize a porn format. A few kinds of vitamins, maybe some sex toys. But those are not local accounts and radio for decades has needed local revenue. No local account of good repute is going to want to be heard on such a format except for "gentleman's clubs" (horrific euphemism, eh?) and a few of those stores with "video booths" in the back.

And, of course, the licensee of such a station is going to worry about protest filings, license renewal at some point, and revenue sources once the initial "thrill" of the format wears off (it is hard difficult to write this without finding nearly every word has some kind of misinterpreted meaning or connotation).

But in the area of making mountains out of molehills, this has become very exaggerated in both its possibilities and its potential.

One more day and I'll close this, hopefully forever.

 

[Daryl Lynn L.A.]

Ooops. Goofed this up. I wanted to say that I agree with both Kelly and David. I was worried that such a station might start up. But, David has very logical, practical reasons why it could not attract many sponsors.
I find this topic to be very triggering, as I had 12th grade students who barely escaped with their lives. I appreciate that David will close this soon.

 

[davideduardo]

It's curious that no one here seems to have any opinion about hip-hop and rap songs that are all about sex, minus the bleeped out F-bombs and other bleeped words. Some guy or woman rapping about getting or receiving various types of sex, on songs being played on the radio where even kids can hear it -- somehow that is not problematic but some talk host discussing porn would be. It just doesn't add up.

What surprises me more is that stations that play this material get ad dollars.

As you say, the bad words are edited or blurred. But the content is sexist and highly demeaning in many cases. I think that the fact that Hip-Hop and reggaetón / trap are predominantly produced or performed by members of minority groups tends to insulate the music from a degree of criticism...

... at this point even outspoken me worries about any comment I make being construed as racist...

... or maybe the "old white guys and gals are so outta' touch they don't listen to those songs and if they did, they would not understand them.

But, yeah, the lyrics of lots of current songs don't pass the Baby Boomer morality test.

 

[Daryl Lynn L.A.]

Some may think that way because they're trying to clear their conscience because they use it. 'I only consume legal porn created by consenting adults.' You have no idea the circumstances of how 'actors' and crews are treated or their history, only that you enjoy it, so it must all be above board.

Really? Then read these:

SOS International | Pornography and It's Impact On Sexual Exploitation

The truth is pornography has a distinct impact on sexual exploitation due to its accessibility and deception. These factors cause problems for both consumers of pornography and the people who are at-risk of being trafficked for its creation.

sosresponds.org

Why are people silent about the abuses and exploitation in porn? | Yomi Adegoke

Mia Khalifa - once the most popular adult actor on the planet - has revealed not only the pittance she was paid but also the rampant exploitation of an industry that often seems strangely immune to criticism

www.theguardian.com

Shattering the Porn Star Fantasy - CEASE / Centre to End All Sexual Exploitation

“…porno people are a hard-grafting, ill-paid fraternity who, by and large, look out for each other and help each other through. They pay their rent, with the deaths of feelings.”Martin Amis, British novelist In our hypersexualised world, “porn stars” are envied, admired and desired. […]

cease.org.uk

You and others need to stop trying to justify using porn. It's addictive and damaging to the consumer and people who produce it. Of all the things you enjoy listening to via right-wing talk radio, maybe you should listen to them when it comes to consumption and support of porn?

👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼 This exactly. Could not have written it better. Thank you, Kelly.