my dear friends previously a year back it was a report that I&B will permit to show adult content but due to very heavy protest against that this was never come true.....and now at present condition its not possible at all to show any such channels.....and also I&B ministry will not clear any such request made by any broadcaster.
-
Amazon Deals - ToS - Like us?
Adult content on India DTH/CAS/IPTV services
- Thread starter s_parkhi
- Start date
- Replies 297
- Views 267,251
gregory house
philosopher-in-chief
You are absolutely correct. There is no force in the universe that can fight against a person (called a politician) who is out to fight on behalf of a nameless majority (called the public) and for a subjective cause (called public interest).Those who want adult content should stick to the internet. There is no way politicians and people who are interested too much in public interest are going to let adult content on Indian screens. Soon we will have running notices when cigarettes/ alcohol are shown on screen. Who knows what else they might consider against public interest. I think that in another ten years even holding hands in public will be considered prurient, lascivious, vulgar and what not.Films that get under 13 certificates in US will not even get A certificate in India unless they are amputated severely. It seems that 13 year old Americans are more mature than 45 year old Indians. And we call them racist!
then what is the diffrence between india and china, if this is democracy,they themselves enjoy foreign trips, and may be watching sky, and we sithear and just expect for whole life and nothing happens, and what we expect a bullet train, 16 lane highway, no just few channels just to keep in touch withworld, and that access denied.
gregory house
philosopher-in-chief
Unfortunate but true. Read or saw something similar, but am unable to remember where (CNN/BBC maybe). There are many films tackling this very topic - paranoid people who don't use their heads - including the following.
M (1931)
The Man Without a Face (1993)
M (1931)
The Man Without a Face (1993)
You are absolutely correct. There is no force in the universe that can fight against a person (called a politician) who is out to fight on behalf of a nameless majority (called the public) and for a subjective cause (called public interest).
Those who want adult content should stick to the internet. There is no way politicians and people who are interested too much in public interest are going to let adult content on Indian screens. Soon we will have running notices when cigarettes/ alcohol are shown on screen. Who knows what else they might consider against public interest. I think that in another ten years even holding hands in public will be considered prurient, lascivious, vulgar and what not.
Films that get under 13 certificates in US will not even get A certificate in India unless they are amputated severely. It seems that 13 year old Americans are more mature than 45 year old Indians. And we call them racist!
Great post, really. But, in a sense we also have to hold ourselves responsible. As a sphere of society, the upwardly mobile/more than 'literate' section of society in India is politically rather apathetic. We feel some sort of guilt at having political aspirations in a country where many men and women are denied basic human rights, or have far graver problems than anything we can even imagine experiencing. Yet, we do have a lot of legitimate aspirations that don't disturb anyone else.
Unfortunately, there are no real outlets to what we want, no real methodology of it being inforced and no real interest amongst any of us in making a real change for ourselves. Would we ever actually publicly display our desire for loser regulation through so many spheres of society? Unlikely. That is ultimately what allows "a person (called a politician) who is out to fight on behalf of a nameless majority (called the public) and for a subjective cause (called public interest)" to do what he does.
Those who want adult content should stick to the internet. There is no way politicians and people who are interested too much in public interest are going to let adult content on Indian screens. Soon we will have running notices when cigarettes/ alcohol are shown on screen. Who knows what else they might consider against public interest. I think that in another ten years even holding hands in public will be considered prurient, lascivious, vulgar and what not.
Films that get under 13 certificates in US will not even get A certificate in India unless they are amputated severely. It seems that 13 year old Americans are more mature than 45 year old Indians. And we call them racist!
Great post, really. But, in a sense we also have to hold ourselves responsible. As a sphere of society, the upwardly mobile/more than 'literate' section of society in India is politically rather apathetic. We feel some sort of guilt at having political aspirations in a country where many men and women are denied basic human rights, or have far graver problems than anything we can even imagine experiencing. Yet, we do have a lot of legitimate aspirations that don't disturb anyone else.
Unfortunately, there are no real outlets to what we want, no real methodology of it being inforced and no real interest amongst any of us in making a real change for ourselves. Would we ever actually publicly display our desire for loser regulation through so many spheres of society? Unlikely. That is ultimately what allows "a person (called a politician) who is out to fight on behalf of a nameless majority (called the public) and for a subjective cause (called public interest)" to do what he does.
gregory house
philosopher-in-chief
It is not about interest at all. I am sure lots of people are interested. The question is what will that interest lead to. In some sense, democracy leads to the devaluation of an individual's identity. A person becomes a number.How many votes does it take to elect a politician? People who have got less than 33% of the polled votes get elected and speak for 100% of the total population. So the system itself is flawed in some ways. And it cannot be rectified because a complete rewrite of the constitution is required. And that only happens after major revolutions.So, finally, it leads to a compromise. As long as I do not upset the Apple cart , pay a small bribe here and there, and keep my mouth shut when someone's face is being blackened because he spoke the truth, things will be fine.It is a pessimistic view, I agree. But I would rather be a pessimist who dies at 70 knowing what I believed in, however disgusting it may be, was true than die an optimist at 25, surprised that someone/something who/which I believed and trusted in stabbed me in the back.
the main problem is everbody wants to appper pure(good child) in societyand espacally counrty like india, where s** taboo so r social values,and no politician or any member of any IB wants to be a part of such things,so naturaly any one will not oppose it. they want to be a part of good thingssuch as helping poor in rural areas with photo in news, and where hell is the help done in rural and remote villages, and those who go there to help theyin turn r harassed.
It is not about interest at all. I am sure lots of people are interested. The question is what will that interest lead to. In some sense, democracy leads to the devaluation of an individual's identity. A person becomes a number.
How many votes does it take to elect a politician? People who have got less than 33% of the polled votes get elected and speak for 100% of the total population. So the system itself is flawed in some ways. And it cannot be rectified because a complete rewrite of the constitution is required. And that only happens after major revolutions.
So, finally, it leads to a compromise. As long as I do not upset the Apple cart , pay a small bribe here and there, and keep my mouth shut when someone's face is being blackened because he spoke the truth, things will be fine.
It is a pessimistic view, I agree. But I would rather be a pessimist who dies at 70 knowing what I believed in, however disgusting it may be, was true than die an optimist at 25, surprised that someone/something who/which I believed and trusted in stabbed me in the back.
I don't disagree with the point within the Indian context. But, I do disagree with it as a generalized statement, to an extent. With an adequate feedback mechanism, democracies do function, with relative efficiency.
I don't really find anything appealing about our own version of democracy. The relative inefficiency of the public sector - public services and government agencies included is quite frankly shocking. The fact that everyone in this country knows that there is massive black money in land deals, but they are allowed to go on uncheked is appaulling, but what ultimately destroys any hope of change is that even those of us who can see it all are happy enough to participate in it out of complete apathy.
My point in the Indian context was largely down to issues of the upwardly mobile being ignored because we aren't as active a class of citizens. Minority rights have (in a relative sense) come a long way, but the minority of upwardly mobile remain politically isolated unless we are entrenched in the political system.
How many votes does it take to elect a politician? People who have got less than 33% of the polled votes get elected and speak for 100% of the total population. So the system itself is flawed in some ways. And it cannot be rectified because a complete rewrite of the constitution is required. And that only happens after major revolutions.
So, finally, it leads to a compromise. As long as I do not upset the Apple cart , pay a small bribe here and there, and keep my mouth shut when someone's face is being blackened because he spoke the truth, things will be fine.
It is a pessimistic view, I agree. But I would rather be a pessimist who dies at 70 knowing what I believed in, however disgusting it may be, was true than die an optimist at 25, surprised that someone/something who/which I believed and trusted in stabbed me in the back.
I don't disagree with the point within the Indian context. But, I do disagree with it as a generalized statement, to an extent. With an adequate feedback mechanism, democracies do function, with relative efficiency.
I don't really find anything appealing about our own version of democracy. The relative inefficiency of the public sector - public services and government agencies included is quite frankly shocking. The fact that everyone in this country knows that there is massive black money in land deals, but they are allowed to go on uncheked is appaulling, but what ultimately destroys any hope of change is that even those of us who can see it all are happy enough to participate in it out of complete apathy.
My point in the Indian context was largely down to issues of the upwardly mobile being ignored because we aren't as active a class of citizens. Minority rights have (in a relative sense) come a long way, but the minority of upwardly mobile remain politically isolated unless we are entrenched in the political system.
