Tv Comm PaperEssay Preview: Tv Comm PaperReport this essayTom HoganComm-25517 October 2016For this week’s assignment regarding television, I chose to watch Game of Thrones and The Jersey Shore. While I am an avid fan of Game of Thrones, I could not have been more miserable while watching The Jersey Shore. Throughout both shows, there is a significant presence of sexual and inappropriate content; however, Game of Thrones uses sexual content in a more artistic way, whereas The Jersey Shore utilizes sexual content in a far more lewd manner. In my opinion, the directors of Game of Thrones use sexual content throughout their series very realistically. Although some viewers may feel that the show is far too graphic in its display of sexual content, the directors have used this content to accurately depict the dynamic of many relationships in a feudalistic society such as that in the television show. Contrary to how sexual content is displayed in Game of Thrones, the dynamic of sexual content within The Jersey Shore is highly risqué and was very shocking. Throughout the episode of Game of Thrones which I watched, there were four particular scenes which I considered to contain sexual content, while The Jersey Shore had at least six.
Without a doubt, the prevalence of sexual content on mainstream media has had an impact on the amount of young adults engaging in sexual acts prematurely. According to sources, “About 20 percent more males and females are having sex today by the age of 18 than they were in the early 1970s. Researchers have made the link to mass media as the cause for this sexual revolution” (Eliassin). The result of sexual content being so frequently displayed on television has normalized sex for many young adults. Exposure to sexual content within media is so common now that many of societies adolescence are engaging in sex at far younger ages than previously in history.
I believe that the FCC has a more relaxed position regarding violence than sexual content for two primary reasons. Foremost, is that in the majority of situations, children are far less interested violence than they are the concept of explicit content. Second, that many children are not receiving proper sexual education young enough today. As technology has evolved to the point that every child has a phone capable of uncensored internet activity, it is imperative that we educate young children on the implications of engaging in premature sexual activity. Therefore, in attempts to lessen the impact which sexual content within the media has on young children, the FCC seeks to censor television as much as they can by law. I believe that the FCC regulations put in place are strong enough and require no further censorship. Whether viewers agree or disagree with the content displayed, I feel it imperative to protect the right to free speech free of unreasonable censorship.
The FCC is not opposed to the ability to restrict a variety of media. For instance, under the DMCA, any content on the Internet can be considered free speech when it is considered “indirectly linked” to copyrighted media (“excludable”). However, this does not mean that Internet content on any form of medium or that it should be removed by the FCC. Under the DMCA, the FCC provides guidance on how it will do this. These guidelines provide guidance for the Commission’s proposed regulation, allowing it to proceed on its own and without legislative support at any given time.
As stated before, the Internet is an important topic for the First Amendment and the Fourth Amendment. The First Amendment protects all speech. Therefore, when the government forces people, corporations, and individuals to see one another on a TV or DVD, they should be allowed to see, read, and interact with the content produced on that medium.
[4] The FCC notes this. However, “the same kind of censorship” as in the DMCA doesn’t apply if a law-abiding citizen can find the content on their mobile phone. To ensure that the FCC knows about what is and is not illegal, the company is required to offer users access to their account information. An FTC spokeswoman stated in response to the FCC’s guidance, “These services require no prior notice to sign up that users are a part of the public. In addition, users are also subject to the privacy and financial safeguards we have put forth in connection with the information sharing activities of the company.” Such content might have the same amount of data, meaning a lot more people would be interested to have it. The FCC also clarified that this definition includes only “unrelated content. Any such content included by the company (including the content of individuals and third parties who use it) which is not included in the FCC’s definition.” As this includes only the content of third parties that receive information from the company, users could not be arrested or charged based on this definition.
[5] FCC staff note that a wide range of concerns about the FCC’s regulation also exist among Internet consumers as well as advertisers. For example, the FCC notes that the net neutrality rule does not take into account traditional media media, including television, radio, and print, or online news and information services. Instead, the FCC describes this media as “content originating or produced outside of the United States and therefore subject to the government’s own policy regarding freedom of speech, free press, freedom of the press, and independent public opinion, free expression and individual rights under the American Constitution and laws of the countries, states, and territories of Europe and the Caribbean as well as other areas of the world.
[6] FCC staff note also note that in contrast to the media industries. Internet media outlets such as Cablevision, Time Warner Cable, and AT&T (with the exception of Turner Broadcasting Systems) were allowed to compete on their own online platforms, such as Apple’s web TV and Google’s Android TV. AT&T was allowed to market its own mobile TV platform and Apple sold its own online games store (similar to TV Everywhere).[8] For a list of other media organizations, see here.
[7] Comcast, for example, does not sell any of its customers’ personal data in bulk. Rather, a subscriber can search for Comcast by telephone only.[9] In addition, some Comcast customers are able to sell their personal data by using an unlicensed “cookie” that, when opened, allows Comcast to collect and store their information as part of its business. The practice can be problematic since the privacy of customers is not guaranteed by law, but can be circumvented using encryption, which can be the major advantage of online cookies.[10] Many of these cookies are sold in e-commerce stores through the Internet and in stores by third-party brokers or distributors, particularly if you want them to be able to track
[16] The privacy policy about use of these data and the fact that one-time and large usage of these cookies can adversely affect an individual’s online choices. Furthermore, a user’s email or RSS feeds that show up in their mailbox are actually sent to other users’ websites, which is not required by the Privacy Act.[11] When the user asks for any information about those user requests, these cookie are accessed through a “cookies database,” a program that records the personal information of the users who want. In addition, the Privacy Act applies to these cookies as well [12] in the event those cookies are used in a manner that is harmful to the user. The Privacy Act does not require a user to provide, provide, or share any personal information with any third party; it only requires the use of the information in ways that are reasonably necessary to serve the benefit of the user’s account, or are designed to protect personal information from third parties, and in those ways that are not reasonable.[13] In an effort to avoid these two privacy concerns, many of the largest and fastest growing e-commerce chains allow people to search by keyword or by their choice. This provides a simple but effective way to avoid the privacy concerns while also helping to ensure that shoppers’ information is kept fairly confidential.[14] Even after this policy change, there are still concerns with allowing people to search for websites on various different websites as long as they opt into the site name and URL that they provide (e.g., websites/images for which they provide URLs that include the website name and URL). Some consumers argue that this issue exists because those with a desire to use alternative websites have the ability to find the site that they want to go to in some cases without having to pay more. Another thing that is more important is that shopping for online content is not considered too hard for a user to do and thus not subject to the need of filtering and filtering, which is a major issue for those who want to do online shopping. For example, those who have already decided how to shop online are not required to fill out the necessary details of what is done online to do so. However, it is possible, at least some sites that support the use of online shoppers have an online checkout system.
6.6.3. Privacy and Information Security 3rd Party Platforms (SPS) are providers of information to third parties who store information for them as part of the online shopping experience. A service provider may choose to share user data with others or to obtain subscriber information from them only for legitimate purposes. Information security is a common concern with other services and services, especially when the company is a third party hosting it or a third-party hosting the service it is in the interest of. As discussed above, third-party technology companies can access and use customer data,
The requirement of minor