Editorial of an Editorial
I was appalled this morning when I read this editorial from the Washington Times:
Remember when the hottest Christmas toy was a Tickle Me Elmo doll? This year, kids will be clamoring for Internet-ready cell phones and video iPods. Parents, if the cost doesn’t deter you, consider this: These new gadgets come with ready access to hardcore pornography.
Consider some of the items likely to be on the Christmas wish lists on your refrigerator.
Apple iPod: It’s not just for music anymore. The new iPod is capable of downloading and storing up to 150 hours of video. Porn industry giants — such as Hustler, Penthouse and Playboy — are formatting content for the new hand-held. Another pornographic site, SuicideGirls, reportedly sold 1 million downloads of nude models within a week of the video iPod’s debut.
This aggravates me because normal kids aren’t smart enough to access the porn and if they are smart enough to go to the great lengths necessary to search, subscribe, pay with mummy and daddy’s credit card and upload… don’t you think those kids are bright enough to watch it? Any normal kid isn’t this smart… only 1337 h4×0r5 like my Zod had that childhood gift!
Besides, why would a child bother spending time downloading porn to their iPod when there are cool music videos, annoying Disney movies and Family Guy podcasts to download?
The truth is, the man who wrote this editorial had no idea what he was talking about.
Who is the author, you ask? He is Daniel Weiss, senior analyst for media and sexuality for Focus on the Family. That’s right… a family organization (i.e. Christian evangelical propaganda organization). In fact, he also runs a web site called Pure Intimacy, which is a site that contains articles pertaining to sexuality and Christian faith.
While he claims in the editorial that major porn companies are formatting content for the iPod, this is news to me… In fact, they have already formatted content for it in the past and I have not heard anything new on this topic. Last month I read an article in Wired that stated who industry giants are actually staying away from the opportunity. So, how does Weiss justify the following statement made at the end of his editorial?
Will moms and dads buy these news toys for their kids? Pornographers certainly hope so.
This claim is ludicrous. Pornographers don’t put the content out hoping that it will be viewed by children. The man who wrote this editorial is deluded and should be discredited as a religious fundamentalist pushing his agenda under cover of a pro-family label.
The Washington Times ought to be ashamed of themselves for publishing this junk. Then again, what more can you expect from a mainstream ‘news’ source that sponsors advertising for pro-conservative hate t-shirts on their front page?
November 28th, 2005 at 3:32 pm
It wouldn’t surprise me that Daniel Weiss, or any conservative Christian writer, would spread fear about the hot new _secular_ toy this holiday season. This isn’t even really a religious issue but rather just a nonsensical one. Mr. Weiss is outraged that the iPod video can be used as a video _tool_ to display video that he [and all reasonable people] would deem inappropriate for children. The very notion that he is seemingly surprised by this and feels obligated to share with parents this information shows his lack of understanding in the issue in totality.
A VCR, DVD player, computer, PSP, Tivo, and any number of other _tools_ that allow the playing of video information can also be used to view pornography, is Mr. Weiss implying that we should also ignore these _tools_ as well due to the “ready access to hardcore pornography?” I doubt it.
As Kitka observes, it is unrestricted and unobserved Internet access that is the pipeline for delicious hardcore pornography and not the iPod itself. It would be like blaming a bullet for killing someone when without a gun a bullet is harmless. [Without a person to fire the gun, the gun is worthless.] Mr. Weiss should have been responsible and instructed parents that if they buy their children a iPod [with video or not] they should be responsible parents and monitor what their children are viewing/listening to.
I bet the moment someone puts “Veggies Tales” on the video iPod he’ll change his mind.
November 28th, 2005 at 5:10 pm
That is a pretty humorous piece of right-wing rhetoric. The best part is the accusation that pornographers are lying in wait for kids to download their stuff. Last time I checked pornographers want customers that can pay not bandwidth leaches. This reminds me of how they tell you in DARE that drug dealers will give you “the first one free.” What? Where are these drug dealers?
November 29th, 2005 at 8:27 am
Warning Parents: Thinking of buying little Johnny a PC for the holidays? Don’t! Pornographers want your kids to own computers!
Seriously, what kid is his or her right mind is going to go through all of that trouble to get porn on his or her iPod? That’s what Google Image search is for!
November 29th, 2005 at 9:41 am
Robber_Barron- I’m always excited to read your comments… you have a good head on your shoulders.
Ellie- The article makes pornographers look like they’re stalking you from the shadows… it’s pretty sick. I’d like to think what the whole “first one free” idea is that the first time you try drugs you’ll probably just get a free trial from your friends… but I think you’re right, it’s been ten years since high school but even I remember believing that drug dealers gave you your first hit for free! I was once incredibly gullible…
Amanda- Actually, Google Images blocks a lot of porn… and, trust me, I do Google Searches on that topic very often. AskJolene.com is much better…
November 29th, 2005 at 11:39 am
Type “free porn clips” into google, and within about two clicks (use firefox) you’ll find a virtually unlimited number of 30s xxx clips free to download.
To suggest that the iPod is the root of new evil is beyond ludicrous. To take that logic further, we’d have to prevent our kids from using the internet, having a DVD player, or watching cable television.
Argh. These people are nuts. Scary nuts.
December 1st, 2005 at 8:05 am
You would think he’d be excited about the possibilities of a portable ministry. A lot of churches are taking advantage of both audio and video podcasting… But no, he’d rather make people believe that pornographers want to get kids “hooked” young. Why? They have no money and expect it free. Their natural urges will get them interested anyway when they’re old enough to a) buy it legally, and coincidentally also b) afford it.
We really need to slap down this “porn is an addictive drug” thing hard. They’re repeating it over and over in every media source (even Oprah’s doing a show on porn addiction), and if you repeat something people half want to believe (it gives them an excuse, it means they’re not bad for liking porn, they can’t help it) often enough, they’ll buy it. Witness: Iraq = WMD. Witness: Kerry = flip-flop, and contraceptives = abortion.
December 1st, 2005 at 9:43 am
Katie- Wow… I couldn’t have said it any better myself! Beautifully written… we should all band together and start a coalition to counter the porn addiction movement. It certainly is ridiculous…
December 3rd, 2005 at 5:15 pm
I’m in, where do we sign up?
I like porn as much as the next guy, but I am in no way addicted, and I find it incredibly horrific that people can be so intolerant of others. from the bible, love thy neighbour. I don’t go around telling them they are going to hell for having priests molest children, (probably from all the sexual angst that has been building for years). but then they would argue that they can’t be placed in the same group as those priests which they may or may not. to me all I see is uber-religious people, doing “god’s” work. In the same way they are also trying to disrupt the children’s grasp on real concepts (and they are fighting for the children aren’t they?) but they choose to not inform their children about important things like sexual information, and evolution.
I think the evolution one is my biggest “pet peeve” (couldn’t think of much else) as they are trying to infultrate the school’s and more importantly the science area and introduce reliogion as a science. Newsflash for all those who don’t know but religion isn’t a science, it’s a theology, a faith and a giant leap of faith for one. now I’m not trying to argue that you shouldn’t believe in something, but to out and out state that things that can be proven are correct to be wrong, while saying that what they believe is right just because they believe some people long ago wrote a storybook of morals and it caught on is the right answer is just ridiculous. It reminds me of when I told my highschool that my father is black and people believed me. (I happen to be a very caucsion male (I don’t tan, I sunburn).
I could go on but I would be here for a while, so I’ll just close with statement I find very true. relgion takes your natural urges and says they are wrong, and then says the only way to obtain salvation is by following it. sounds pretty confusing doesn’t it. well thats because when your confused you make a better sheep.
December 8th, 2005 at 4:00 pm
[…] I’m sick of seeing newspapers publish editorials that are obviously written with an agenda in mind. How can we continue to trust mainstream media when they publish such utter rubbish? I challenge someone ‘credible’ to step up to the plate and write a story on this subject… it seems the only one willing to do something these days would be John Stewart, and he admits himself to be a comedian, not a reporter. […]