The Energon Pub

In a recent article posted on arstechnica.com, Matthew Lasar reported that the Federal Communications Commission has submitted an inquiry to the public asking for feedback on how well parental blocking devices for television are working, sighting the Transformers films advertisements as a possible violation of said devices.

In a nutshell, the FCC is looking to enforce the rule that MPAA films rated PG-13 or above are not marketed towards children under 13 years of age, thanks to a response given by the Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood gave based on the inquiry "[to] the extent to which inappropriate commercials [are] aired in programming viewed by children and on possible solutions to this problem". In the report submitted by the FCC, both Transformers and Transformers Revenge of the Fallen were cited as examples on how such parental blocking devices such as the "V-Chip" weren't regulating such content and allowing children to view said commercials.

Congress has asked the FCC to supply them with a compendium of every content filtering device available. The FCC has until the end of this week, August 29th 2009, to supply the report.

You can read the article in its entirety here.

What are your thoughts on this? Let us know by clicking Discuss this topic above.

Seibertron.com, bringing you the most complete news in the Transformers Universe.

Oh yeah? I know all about the FCC .

so its ok for a 13yr old but then if you're 12, suddenly its wrong? because god knows there's such a jump in maturity or whatever between those ages.

always found these "age restrictions" funny, regardless if its for movies or music or television or drinking or anything really.

its bad enough they added ratings to television but now they wanna control what trailers play on there? wow....and my god, do parents that actually follow these ratings even exist? are there parents who will refuse to let their child see something because the tv said its bad? i sure as hell hope not.


how about just letting parents you know....be a parent and they can decide what is or is not appropriate.

When I was a kid, there were these two kids down the road who weren't even allowed to watch The Simpsons, the favourite show of all their friends at the time, because TV told their parents that it was too bad for them... Mind you they were also restricted to G-rated movies and their parents kept a close watch on what music they listened to...
Parents like this do exist, they want to shield their children from whatever harshness they perceive in the world. However it should also be noted that these same parents usually don't monitor their kids internet access, and figure that just because THEY don't know how to get around content filters and blockers, their kids won't either.
I'm very glad I never had this problem.

My eyes can't roll back any further in my head...for a variety of reasons...

This is silly. The very audience for Transformers istelf is underneath that age.

My girlfriend & I have a 3 year old son who we clash quite a bit about what he watches and whatnot. She had a very strict christian upbringing & lived a very sheltered life and she wants to do the same thing to our son. I raised myself starting when I was 11, I've been hooked on drugs, been to rehab for alcohol, been an enforcer for the local MC(Motorcycle Club) and I pretty much grew up in bars(with my parents) so I have somewhat more lenient views. But I must say though I love Transformers and so does my son, I even felt dirty when I took him to the theatre to see ROTF. we had been watching trailers and following it for over a year and he was very excited. Me & my girl agreed to take him to it because the first one wasn't that bad and our son knows the difference between reality(people with guns and strangers with candy) and fantasy(giant robots that turn into inanimate objects and whatnot). Since it was rated PG-13 the same as the first one we decided he could come to see it. Imagine my disdain for the ratings system and Bay when within the first 5 minutes they had already said "ass" and frequently got more foul as the movie went on. I can't really understand how it managed to have the same rating as it's predecessor, just seems like the MPA dropped the ball on that one quite a bit. I think that the whole ratings system needs a dramatic overhaul so that it is a bit more clear for parents to used it to deem things appropriate for their children. But ultimately I believe that it's the parent's duty to filter what their children view. Sorry for the long rant but I figured this would be information that helped explain just how strange I think these ratings are.
PS: i'm not a bad parent just because I had a "colorful" life, I do not want my son to have the same experiences I did, but i'm not going to completely shut him off from the world or take anything away from him that might help him grow into the man he'll become.

Forgotten wrote:My girlfriend & I have a 3 year old son who we clash quite a bit about what he watches and whatnot. She had a very strict christian upbringing & lived a very sheltered life and she wants to do the same thing to our son. I raised myself starting when I was 11, I've been hooked on drugs, been to rehab for alcohol, been an enforcer for the local MC(Motorcycle Club) and I pretty much grew up in bars(with my parents) so I have somewhat more lenient views. But I must say though I love Transformers and so does my son, I even felt dirty when I took him to the theatre to see ROTF. we had been watching trailers and following it for over a year and he was very excited. Me & my girl agreed to take him to it because the first one wasn't that bad and our son knows the difference between reality(people with guns and strangers with candy) and fantasy(giant robots that turn into inanimate objects and whatnot). Since it was rated PG-13 the same as the first one we decided he could come to see it. Imagine my disdain for the ratings system and Bay when within the first 5 minutes they had already said "ass" and frequently got more foul as the movie went on. I can't really understand how it managed to have the same rating as it's predecessor, just seems like the MPA dropped the ball on that one quite a bit. I think that the whole ratings system needs a dramatic overhaul so that it is a bit more clear for parents to used it to deem things appropriate for their children. But ultimately I believe that it's the parent's duty to filter what their children view. Sorry for the long rant but I figured this would be information that helped explain just how strange I think these ratings are.
PS: i'm not a bad parent just because I had a "colorful" life, I do not want my son to have the same experiences I did, but i'm not going to completely shut him off from the world or take anything away from him that might help him grow into the man he'll become.

can I say that I agree? RotF deserves this. so long as the toys don't get pulled before I finish getting the autobot cars.

Parents cant decide on commercials! I mean come on its a commercial!
I think its wrong i mean they can block rated r commercials but PG-13
Hasbro has tons of toys for kids under 13! Just sayin it aint right!

isn't the parent's decision to say what there child should or should not watch?

Worrying about filtering non-explicit ads for a movie based on toys. This is all kinds of pathetic.

This is pretty damn funny if you ask me. What will hasbro do? Their main demo is kids. And the movies arent even that bad. From what iv seen they were pg13 cause of a few choice words used. Seeing as how hasbro has what 3 years until teh next movie im sure they'll figure some thing out. But on another note, half the damn shows the kids watch these days are worse than both TF movies combined. Shouldnt the FCC be worrying about what they can watch for free and on their own instead of some thing their parents have to physically take them to see? Ill never understand how regulation corporations(is the fcc a corp?) work.

The FCC is a bunch of hypocrytes....they have no lives. I wonder how many of them took their underage children to the movie and bought popcorn and all !!!

Hard Hacker wrote:This is silly. The very audience for Transformers istelf is underneath that age.

While the majority of the audience for the toys might be under that age, I doubt that can be said for the film franchise. I have always felt that it is a conflict of interests to have a film that is rated PG-13 or R that has an accompanying toy line that is obviously directed to an age younger than the film is rated.

My parents were pretty strict about which films I could watch when I was growing up and they adhered pretty strongly to the PG-13 rule being for 13 and up, with a few exceptions. When I was a kid, we didn't have a lot of PG-13 movies (or R for that matter) that featured products or characters that were geared toward me. I think Batman might have been really the first for my generation, or at least for me personally, where the film was PG-13 and there was a massive push of toys to younger kids.

I'm a new parent. I don't have to worry about this with my 4 month old at the moment. But I will one day. I don't know where I'll stand on all of this stuff. My fiancee watched all of the crazy horror movies as a kid and she doesn't feel that there's much wrong with that whereas I'm not desensitized to all of the violence, gore, etc and am glad that I'm not. Hopefully we'll be able to figure out a happy compromise because I don't feel that my daughter should be exposed to that.

I'm still not sure what I think of a kids toy line getting turned into a film not geared toward kids (I'm basing that statement solely off the film's rating). Definitely a conflict of interests in my opinion.

While I have some conflicting views on all of this, the bottom line is that I want it to be MY choice. Not the government's. Not someone else's. My fiancee and I will figure out what is appropriate for our children.

HA...Hahaha...BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Sorry for a mild laugh attack. Anyway: this is retarded. Adn whoever said the thing about the "maturity jump" from 12 to 13, that thing don't exist, I can't keep a straight face about anything before! XD

Here's an idea: Let the parents be the parents!

I honestly dont know if there are repercussions this site for explicit text, and right now, I dont care, **** the FCC. This is honestly RIDICULOUS. Transformers is a show and movie based of TOYS, (don't get me wrong, I'm in love with Transformers and am not at all criticizing it) to try and censor the commercials for it and claim is inappropriate, blah, blah, blah, etc, etc, is insane. If this goes to far and the toys get banned (I hope not) or they make the show have to be appropriate for figgin' 6 year olds then the FCC has finally taken it to far. The way I see it they SHOULD have a kiddy transformers show, AS WELL as a semi-more mature show for older teenagers or something, but it should not be blocked off, I mean for christs sake, its a show/movie/comic/whatever about a war between giant alien robots, its bound to be "inappropriate" at some times.

While I don't agree with agencies like the FCC, I can understand at least part of the intent of their operations. However, I object to the use of organizations, independant or government run, to create systems of censorship. I believe that ultimate responsibility comes to the parent(s) of children with respect what they are allowed to watch.

Another matter to consider is that in the wide realm of media control, censorship rulings have not shown consistency in their results.

Take the movie "Zack and Miri Make a Porno" for example. The following poster was banned by the MPAA for US theatre posters:



The reason was that it suggested sexual conduct. However, I understand that the MPAA didn't object to the following poster for "Good Luck Chuck", which was in theatres a year prior and its imagery could be interpreted in a similar fashion:



Now I know this discussion is about the FCC, not the MPAA, but I see many parallels in the failures of the efforts of both organizations.

This kind of thing is the reason I have to have an internet safety class every year.
I mean, I know what I'm not suposed to do on the internet!
Anything fun.

I'm not a Parent, I'm an Uncle. I saw ROTF with my 5 year old Nephew and My Brother(my Nephew's father). We were absolutely appalled by the amount of unnecessary foul language and sexual innuendo. As plenty of people have stated before, this is a movie about TOYS. It's said that they can't tell a Dark, Serious story because Kids won't grab onto it, but they'll tell a Lude, Obnoxious story instead? I cannot properly articulate my surprise and disgust to learn that this is one of the highest grossing movies across the world in recent memory. It is proof that Bay and the rest of the production team have no respect for this as a Mythos, but merely as a Cash-Cow Franchise that they could exploit in such a tasteless manner. And apparently, they were right; box-office numbers don't lie. While there were a handful of truly captivating visual moments that my nephew and I alike were both awe-struck by, there is no excuse for the inclusion of so much American Pie "College Humor".

My brother was deeply saddened to find out that he won't be able to watch this with his son on DVD the way he does with the first movie. I find Bay and his production team entirely irresponsible for putting out something with this amount of Nonsense Content. I am not at all surprised to see that there are groups targeting this movie as a [Prime] example of Movies with the wrong kind of content marketed at the wrong age group. I wonder if anyone has resigned or been fired over this debacle?


I almost forgot to mention; I generally LIKE Mr Bay's movies! This one was just not handled properly at all.

Why do we even HAVE an FCC?

Listen....as a kid, I watched PG-13 and R-rated movies often. I watched various Japanese animes ( before anime got huge in the mid 1990's. ), played violent games ( I have fond memories of Dayna Plato getting neck drilled, blasting monsters in Doom, and ripping Lu Kang's spine out of his body. ), and played with toy guns that actually looked like guns ( no faggy orange caps )....and I came out just fine, I don't even have a traffic ticket yet.

It's amazing how a 1 year difference is considered a huge maturity gap.
When I was 18, I was no different when I was 17....same with 20 and 21. NO DIFFERENCE! Amazing how people, especially in positions of authority, can't seem to grasp this.

The FCC ( stands for **** censorship commies to me ) outta work on safety standards ( like cells phones that won't mess your head ), getting these damned digital TV boxes to stop pixelating, and so on....NOT decentcy standards or what your kids can and can not watch. We don't need an American Mary Whitehouse.....anyone living in the UK knows the useless bitch I am referring to.

FCC, go do us a favor an just die....and the faster the better.

I would say that the Bayverse movies are not kid friendly and shouldn't be shown to kids much younger than 13. (like it was said, 12's not a big leap, so that wouldn't be a problem either.)

There is a lot of foul language, a lot of sexual content, and ROTF is excessively violent. (Especially Optimus.)

Knowing all of this going in, if you decide to take or allow your child to see it, then it's completely on you. (As it should be.)

I could see the ads for the film be restricted to/from certain channels and times, but this is becoming nonsense.

No, I don't like the fact that my TFs have been smutted up, talk like a trucker, and kill viciously. However, it does say it's PG-13, it tells you why it's been rated as such, and as all informed parents should do, they should go see the film themselves, without junior along for the ride, see if it's something he can handle and something the parents are willing to let him see.

If parents did their jobs better, we wouldn't need groups running to the FCC like a tattletale running to the Principal. Parenting has gotten so bad that the government feels that we need a resource telling us what we can and cannot do.

Blame the parents, not the government. They wouldn't get their foot in the door if we had never opened it.

Some parents today do a genuinely terrific job.

Some do what they can, when and if possible, but fall flat on their faces from time to time. (That's a good portion of the parents today. Good people, just not perfect, and it shouldn't be expected of them either.)

And then we have the majority... parents who don't give a damn, and let their children become monsters and turn into something even worse when they grow up. (Have you ever paid attention to teenagers today? UGH. Like. A. Plague.)

Because of the majority of douchebags, we have the government stepping in and saying "You won't do it? We'll do it for you. The cost? Others will have to pay the price for your mistakes."

Be a parent, a good one.

Seibertron wrote:

Hard Hacker wrote:This is silly. The very audience for Transformers istelf is underneath that age.

While the majority of the audience for the toys might be under that age, I doubt that can be said for the film franchise. I have always felt that it is a conflict of interests to have a film that is rated PG-13 or R that has an accompanying toy line that is obviously directed to an age younger than the film is rated.

My parents were pretty strict about which films I could watch when I was growing up and they adhered pretty strongly to the PG-13 rule being for 13 and up, with a few exceptions. When I was a kid, we didn't have a lot of PG-13 movies (or R for that matter) that featured products or characters that were geared toward me. I think Batman might have been really the first for my generation, or at least for me personally, where the film was PG-13 and there was a massive push of toys to younger kids.

I'm a new parent. I don't have to worry about this with my 4 month old at the moment. But I will one day. I don't know where I'll stand on all of this stuff. My fiancee watched all of the crazy horror movies as a kid and she doesn't feel that there's much wrong with that whereas I'm not desensitized to all of the violence, gore, etc and am glad that I'm not. Hopefully we'll be able to figure out a happy compromise because I don't feel that my daughter should be exposed to that.

I'm still not sure what I think of a kids toy line getting turned into a film not geared toward kids (I'm basing that statement solely off the film's rating). Definitely a conflict of interests in my opinion.

While I have some conflicting views on all of this, the bottom line is that I want it to be MY choice. Not the government's. Not someone else's. My fiancee and I will figure out what is appropriate for our children.

Very well stated. I grew up on TF G1, GI Joe, and Speed Racer (one of the few cartoons where people died). I even remember when PG-13 became a rating! Stuff like this kills me. I have a 7 y.o. daughter and a 5 y.o. son, both of which love TFs - they've seen both movies, have the toys, etc. Being an active parent, I monitor what they watch and how it affects their behavior. I'm aware there are batteries in the remote, other channels to choose from, and if all else fails - I can always shut the damn thing off. Until all of these options break down, I can handle it. Perhaps the government should be more concerned with getting it's own crap in line first - after all, its quite the glass house they live in.

I find alot of this funny,

Not because of the FCC mind you,

But because people here seem to be under the impression that the FCC does control minds and therefore wil keep you from showing an R rated movie to a 10year old.

They can't, these people are not magical elves or trolls with powers to control your minds or your hands from pressing the play button on your DVD player....nor do they control the choice for you to go out and rent or even buy a film verses watching it's censored twin on the Telly.

They are asking to filter the foul language on a film rated for children of 13 years of age but geared towards children just by its source material of a much younger age. I really can't see any foul here.

And the Rating system is again a guideline....so adults can pick up a film Titled "Deep Impact" and be sure it's rated PG-13 verses X. And children can go watch R rated films in the theatre, as long as they are accompanied by an adult.....which is fine. It puts some responsibility into the hands of the adults allowing their children to go watch said movie.

But the ratings system, again....does not maintain magical powers. It is not a guideline for new parents to raise their children......it's a guideline for film. For entertainment. For a leisure in our life......

So again, I find it funny, people seem flustered over something geared to monitor our entertainment. Not even restrict it really, just label it.

Laters,
Josh

Convotron wrote:While I don't agree with agencies like the FCC, I can understand at least part of the intent of their operations. However, I object to the use of organizations, independant or government run, to create systems of censorship. I believe that ultimate responsibility comes to the parent(s) of children with respect what they are allowed to watch.

Another matter to consider is that in the wide realm of media control, censorship rulings have not shown consistency in their results.

Take the movie "Zack and Miri Make a Porno" for example. The following poster was banned by the MPAA for US theatre posters:



The reason was that it suggested sexual conduct. However, I understand that the MPAA didn't object to the following poster for "Good Luck Chuck", which was in theatres a year prior and its imagery could be interpreted in a similar fashion:



Now I know this discussion is about the FCC, not the MPAA, but I see many parallels in the failures of the efforts of both organizations.

just a side note "Zack And Miri Make A Porno" became simply "Zack And Miri" because of the FCC I was quite surprised when I picked up the UNRATED DVD of it and it didn't even say porno on it. You know Kevin Smith probably had a caniption over that one.