The difference to me is that you don't have to listen to music, see a movie, watch a tv show, or read a book if you don't want to. While driving down the street, however, billboards are in your face. And this one was way over the line, which is why it was pulled down immediately.
ETA: My point being that I generally agree, Strega, but this was just misogyny at it's worst. If Janet Jackson's nipple leads to big fines (ridiculous IMO), then why should these people be able to put the torture and killing of a woman in our faces and not have some accountability for it?
all expression still has to pass the community standards test
Can a community ever be wrong?
Free expression? Please. Businesses are not people. A business has no "right" of free speech whatsoever. They can purchase an ad, and individual people (whose speech does, actually, have some protections) can attempt to get it out of the public eye if they wish. But I cry no tears over a business's free speech.
Can a community ever be wrong?
That question's a bit vague. Can I disagree with a "community decision"? Sure. I don't get a say if I don't live there, though. Even if I do, if more people in the community are in favor of a decision I disagree with than are against, I've had my say but I don't get my way.
Can a community make a mistaken or misguided judgement? Sure, happens all the time. Sometimes bad judgements get corrected later, sometimes they don't.
As far as the film itself goes, I actually don't approve of preventing it from being shown. I may or may not ever see it, but I'm fine with it still being released. The kind of power the MPAA has over this decision is perhaps too much, but that's another discussion. And frankly, I think even without a rating, the movie will get shown and seen. Actually, I'll be surprised if the studio can't come to some sort of agreement with the MPAA over the matter.
I think "community standards" is either vague or mutable. "Marketplace standards" I get, and think they're extremely applicable in scenarios like this. Those standards are measured by the dollar. Even then, you don't know how many sales you lost vs. how many you never had to begin with, etc.
Community standards can be the standards of the majority, but they can quite as easily become inextricable from the standards of the loudest, and that's not something I think is a good rule to be guided by.
Community standards can be the standards of the majority, but they can quite as easily become inextricable from the standards of the loudest, and that's not something I think is a good rule to be guided by.
I certainly agree with that.
Can a community ever be wrong?
Well, there's the notorious example of the German judge agreeing that an Afghani immigrant has the right to beat his wife because that's the norm in his community. There's not a single example of rightness there.
all expression still has to pass the community standards test
I'm not cool with the concept of community standards, either.
Free expression as important to me and GC as it is to you
I'm not saying you're fascists or judging your character or anything. I'm aware that I'm an extremist on this. But since I'm saying "freedom of expression trumps other concerns" and you're disagreeing, I have to think it is more important to me, at least in this instance.
Businesses are not people. A business has no "right" of free speech whatsoever.
No? That's why there was such a fuss over campaign finance reform. Google "corporate personhood." This isn't a bad place to start:
[link]
But regardless... does that mean that the billboard be perfectly fine if an individual person had put it up, and it's only objectionable because of who paid for it?
