Caray, Caray!

Although I love the fact that more and more US audiences are tuning in to telenovelas, I agree that the unnecessary censorship is super annoying. The US audience will continue to grow thanks in part to the likes of Wm Levy and CdelaF participating in shows like Dancing With the Stars (let's face it, everyone wants to see more of these galans after watching them dance shirtless) and also to the fact that most of the traditional daytime soaps are off the air. I've heard some of my gringo/a friends say they love the fact that the novelas END and don't go on for years or decades. That is a mighty large attraction. But yes, the censorship is ridiculous. Maybe TNs should be broadcast on cable channels instead.
 

Hey Urban, this is a great post. I've said before in some of my comments the way they censor is really dumb. I used to watch Rescue Me on FX and they showed Tommy Gavin's bare butt on that show. It was on at 10pm. These telenovela love scenes I've seen are pretty tame. What gets me is you know I recap Amores Verdaderos and the Character of Kendra (Kendho) wears constant, what we call butt floss, dominatrix, lingere outfits. They have not censored that, but they censor a woman's bare back, go figure. Even in modeling scenes from this same novela, they showed thong bathing suits with no censoring and some of the butts were hanging out. I just don't get it!
 

I think the censorship is ridiculous, and the non-standard standards on what is censored even more ridiculous. All manner of graphic violence is regularly shown on U.S. television, yet stuff gets chopped out of romantic scenes where nothing explicit was shown anyway? Because we would all be so scarred to see evidence of normal (or better-than-normal) human anatomy like breasts or a bit of buttcheek? What is so scandalous about it?

Televisa is not filming porn. There is nothing in the original scenes that is explicit or indecent.

The blurring just makes me laugh (especially when, like, one character's backside in a skimpy swimsuit gets blurred, but others IN THE SAME SCENE are left alone), but I really hate it when they chop out stuff such that you don't know what happened.

I have mixed feelings about the silencing of stuff like gay and racial slurs.
 

In this day and age, I think distinguishing between broadcast and cable channels is pointless. Just let parents put blocks on stuff they don't want their kids to access, or supervise their viewing.
 

American culture can be super-weird about breasts. They've been sexualized to the point where some people have a conniption over any exposure, even moms feeding their babies, as though it is indecent.
 

ITA Julia. These days pretty much everyone gets the basic cable channels, so it really shouldn't be treated any differently than broadcast channels and vice versa. Parents can choose what channels and programs their kids can't access. And as you all have pointed out, the stuff they are editing out is not lewd. The violence allowed on almost all other channels is way worse for a child than seeing two people make love or seeing side boobage/butt.

Plus, the censorship is so random and haphazard, that it really makes no difference or any sense.

When they blurr out something like dog poo, or bleep the word pipi (seriously!), I just have to laugh. It just seems like someone is smoking something. :)

I sent a letter to Uni about this nonsense some months back, but of course heard nothing back. I didn't expect to.
 

This is a tricky topic because people disagree about what should get censored. I don't often see it because (1) if something is taken out entirely I don't even realize it, and (2) if something is bleeped, and I know it got censored, I don't know what it was. Recently on Por Ella Soy Eva I misunderstood a gay reference getting censored, thinking What? We haven't already seen this in the United States? I found it very old-fashioned. But people on Caray corrected this for me. There have been gay storylines on the TNs, and what probably got bleeped was an offensive word- most likely maricon (fag). I was OK with that getting censored, as I am OK with racial epithets being censored. Still it's a bit unsettling to know you're missing something, something which apparently was OK for audiences in Latin America. With HBO and Showtime, I can't imagine what there is that I haven't already been shown.

There are things I don't want to see. I don't want to watch a graphic rape scene. I don't want to watch torture. Frankly, I could do without stories involving guns entirely. I can accept that graphic depiction of violence may serve a purpose. It may show the audience how the victim feels, and that is what sociopaths lack- a sense of empathy. But I won't watch it.

And there are things I'd like to see more of. We all have naked bodies under a fraction of an inch of clothing. I don't understand the objection to showing it. But I know there are people who think this is the worst thing we can watch. So in the end I don't like censorship. I'd rather see what the artists originally intended and judge for myself. Who gets appointed the judge of what's appropriate? Really, if I don't like what I see, the button on my remote is only inches away.

 

Sometimes the censoring adds a lot of humor. For example, when the abstract artwork gets blurred, like in Triunfo de Amor. That was hilarious. I wouldn't have even noticed the stylized and vague nude figures in the background if they hadn't slapped the blurring on them.
 

The networks probably figure they'll get more angry complaints if they show too much, than if they show too little, so they err on the side of caution. I'd like them to relax their standards a bit, but I understand why they do it.

I'm often amused by the industrial strength bras the ladies wear. Lot's of times they take off their blouses, so the networks have to make sure there's no way anything can be seen through the bra. In real life, many bras are much thinner material than the ones our heroines always wear. At least they're colorful!

I also think the standards are a teeny bit less for extras, such as a random model, than for the actors, who may not want to reveal various things.

As for language, the Colombian druglord shows always bleep out tons of cusswords. Why say them in the first place? Even when these shows come out on dvd, they usually continue the bleeping. Not that I enjoy hearing the rough language, but the sudden silences or bleeps detract from the flow of the scene.
 

Well, Hombre, the thing is that these things are not blurred and bleeped when they're shown in Mexico. So if the actors don't want to reveal various things, they have to keep their clothes on.

Speaking of which - in FELS, the Reyes brothers revealed more than just their buns.
 

Yeah, like their lack of brain cells. Oh, you mean the other end.
 

Three words: Janet Jackson's nipple. In a way American broadcast television has never quite rebounded from that, and that belatedly includes our Spanish-language channels--who do seem to be erring more on the side of caution, as Hombre said.

The killing joke, of course, is that violence is almost always okay...maybe a bit more timeslot-dependent than in the past, but still. For instance, IIRC, when Uni ran the final episode of Llena de amor they left in the scene where someone actually got shot in the groin.
 

Yes, violence is ok in our culture, including sexual violence since rape is fine to show. But sex, lovemaking, bodily functions, and the human body, including the genitals of babies, and especially the bodies of women, are a big no no.
 

Bill, I hope Anthony Comstock saw that from the Great Beyond.

Anthony Comstock would still not be satisfied with how the media are being censored. There are those who would go so far as to ban so many normal things from television,, including any references to romantic love.

I have never understood why violence is regarded as acceptable in our entertainment. The number one subject of US entertainment is Crime, not always accompanied by Punishment. The fact that this subject is largely absent from news coverage and much entertainment in other countries and permissible in ours leads so many people outside the US (and a few within) to think it is a hotbed of crime when crime stats have dropped in many places.

The censorship of romantic scenes makes me wonder at the insecurities of people who demand it and those who green-light it. A number of years ago I appeared on Sally Jesse Raphael's show about romance novels where I told the women of America that while men have Playboy centerfolds we have romance heroes... with four hot models standing behind me. Men are more threatened by what is on those printed pages (and the book covers) than women are by the centerfolds.

I guess they really can't handle seeing live action of that.
 

Ah yes, Janet Jackson's nipple and the dreaded wardrobe malfunction. Wasn't that an awful lot of fuss over nothing. We're a strange society.
 

I wasn't going to comment on this subject, but after reading all your comments I feel the need to say something on this subject. I do know that Fernando Colunga's novelas from Amor Real to STUD have all been edited/censored in the USA. AR has a epilogue parade scene and a Manuel/Mati sex scene at the end - it was shown in Mexico but not on Univision in USA.

The Pasion sex scenes between Rico and Cami were edited/censored before they were aired on Univision.

Alborada - Luis said one of the seven dirty words never to be said on TV and was beeped. There were several other scenes of violence that were also either blurred or edited before airing in the US.

MEPS - the one sex scene towards the end before Eduardo's near death scene - was edited/censored/blurred before it was aired in the USA.

STUD -- big time edits and censorships with all the sex scenes in the cabin (love shack).

I know it isn't fair and most of you probably think it is ridiculous, but according to FCC rules and regulations, no full frontal nudity can be shown on network television to the general public where children could possibly/potentially watch (even by accident). Also, George Carlin, a legendary comedian in the USA, did an entire routine about the seven dirty words the FCC will never allow to be said on the radio, television or in the movies.

As far as my mom and I are concerned, if a production has to add excessive amounts of nudity, dirty words and excessive violence, there must be something really lacking in the storyline or the producers just want to get an "R" or "Mature" rating for their production.

This is just my thoughts and opinion.
 

Movie producers often try to avoid the "R" rating no matter how attractive it sounds to many adult viewers. They know it cuts the teen and family audiences that are often the bread and butter of their profits.

Although you wouldn't know it to read what I read about people not wanting to go to the movies these days because of sticker shock on what a day (or evening) at the movies costs or the rudeness of audiences. But that's another discussion for another forum.

Excessive violence is never necessary and nothing should be gratuitous. However, when a novela couple gets romantic that should not be messed with.
 

It is almost never full frontal nudity that is getting edited out, because it wasn't there in the first place. Many of us have often seen the original scenes online or broadcast in or from another country, and usually what gets chopped or blurred is nothing that isn't shown elsewhere repeatedly, so it's just weird.

Incidentally, I have seen full frontal nudity on U.S. broadcast television. I think it was on PBS. It did startle me a little, because I thought they couldn't do that.
 

When I watch TV or movies I'm there for the story. If sex and violence is there beacuse the story can't stand without it, I'm ok with most of it. Too much of it is there because the story sucks. I feel the same way about car chases and special effects. If they make sense fine, most are unnecessary.

I think of myself in the scene, as an observer. I wouldn't sit in a room watching a couple strip down, make out, and have sex, so I really don't want to watch it on TV, either.
 

From Jardiera's excellent recap hot off the press:

"Their celebratory sex follows but Viewerville—thank gawd--gets pre-empted from viewing the obnoxious nookie-fest."

So you see, censorship can be desirable (not to mention merciful) at times.

Carlos
 

I agree that I don't want to watch gratuitous sexiness and violence that does nothing to develop the story or characters, but I would rather have the original production team, the artists who are creating the work, decide how much to show, and not some hacks at Lunivision making it choppy or plastering on censoring that only draws attention to whatever they're trying to hide. That is distracting and unnecessary.
 

Case in point regarding perplexing and inconsistent censorship: in last night's Por Ella episode, Rebeca says "maldito" a couple of times. They left it in the audio, but in the captions it's replaced with "[...]" to protect our virgin eyes.

I can't decide what's more ridiculous: censoring "maldito" at all, or censoring it only halfway.
 

OT, but it annoys me when Blogger changes fonts on things in my post in the middle of words and sentences that I can't see in a preview. It makes my posts look they they were done by a child.
 

Are you writing your posts in Word and then pasting them into Blogger? I don't know if that makes a difference or not, but I remember having problems with that... don't remember exactly what the problems were, though.

And, have you tried pasting your text into the HTML tab instead of the compose tab?
 

I usually write in word and post them in Blogger, but I will often edit them later. I hope tomorrow's article looks right because editing that one would pose a problem.
 

Thoroghly engaging and timely discussion. Thank you, UA.

Of course we all have our biases and there are certain instances where we are annoyed by censorship and others where we wish they had been. Language, sex, and violence all have their supporters and their opponents.

I agree with all the comments regarding gratuitous scenes of violence, torture and rape. Even if integral to the story, it can be suggested, but not be forced to watch it. I can take some of it, but like those infernal car chases, do they have to go on and on? We get the point.

Language also is subjective-objective in the eyes of the scriptwriter/director or the ears of the beholder (us in viewerville). Some language that seems offensive to us is used in other cultures as terms of endearment. I think they should all be left in. However the repetition of that basest of words over and over in a sentence or paragraph, just wearies us (even if you are exposed to it in the street -- or public transportation).

Language associated with bodily functions, geesh, we learned those when our mothers toilet trained us. Other words associated with body parts and bodily functions are in the medical lexicon and I hear them popping up all over the place, rather explicity, on Doctor discussion shows. Are there that many prudes left in the country that we can't use the proper name for them in a telenovela (where appropriate, of course)?

Sex vs. romance. What Dionisio and Isadora were about to engage in was just sex. We were spared watching two people we dislike engage in an activity we like to think is reserved for two people who love each other (regardless of gender).

Like ithabill, if I don't know it was there, I don't miss it. Most of us have pretty good imaginations to fill in what wasn't there. But, I do get mightily annoyed when I see a beautifully executed love scene (which is like a romance novel for the eyes) cut out or chopped up or fuzzed out of the broadcast, when it is there on-line.

Silvia Navarro is one major actress who has never shied away from tastefully done unfrontalnudity in a scene that calls for it. The more power to her.

What gets ridiculous for those who do appreciate a "naturally occurring" love scene, is to see that bra left on (thank you Hombre), or not, but also both partners totally mummified in sheets and clothing on the morning after. We tend to accept that as part of the current standards of decency permitted, but who really makes love in their bra.

Until we (talking gringos here) are able to de-mystify a nude body, it's not going to happen that censorship will diminish in this area. The French do it, the Italians do it. When oh when will we.

On this side of the pond, there are too many salacious or up-tight audiences (and reporters who feed them) who feel the need to make a scandal out of an actress not wearing panties and accidentally allowing it to be known or those wardrobe malfunctions, intentional or not. If nobody made a big deal out of it, the purrient value would soon go away. (Did we really need to see photos of Princess Di or Kate minus certain articles of clothing to know they pretty much look like other younger women?)

Hmm, I was only going to make a short comment. Sorry. I guess I'm like a lot of you--conflicted over what I would want censored for my own viewing.

Last note: I don't stay away from movies, books or television because of possible disturbing content, as long as it is part of the story. If that's all it has for a storyline, then I'm not interested.
 

UA-if it helps, I used to save my word documents in "plain text" then copy and paste. That seemed to cause fewer issues.
 

If the Spanish networks are caving into the gringos, then they're just shooting themselves in the foot in the long-run.

The gringos are just playing Crab Bucket because they're jealous of their awesome ratings, so they're trying to drag the Spanish stations down with their little rules instead of learning from them.

And the fact the Spanish networks are caving means the gringos are winning this game of crab bucket.

This is terrible.