PressEthic

I've come to accept that certain things on television are censored in this country, as much as it bothers me. But sometimes the censors take it to another level. Take, for instance, the Michael Vick middle finger episode. As I was watching SportsCenter on Sunday, they showed a clip of Atlanta Falcons quarterback Michael Vick flipping off some fans as he headed towards the locker-room after an especially disheartening loss to the New Orleans Saints. But as I waited to see the actual "obscene" act, two giant blurs entered the screen, covering both middle fingers. I guess we, the television audience, are just not quite prepared to see a single middle finger trust into the air.

Now, the main argument for censoring certain images is to not offend people. For instance, you are not going to see any nudity on network television because many people would be offended and might (God forbid) have to explain the human anatomy to their children. You are also not going to hear very much offensive language, for the same reasons. But what about a middle finger? Who exactly does that offend anymore? Are people worried their children might see it? Personally, I resorted to "flipping the bird" most frequently as an immature elementary and middle school student.

The whole thing just seems so juvenile to me. It makes me wonder how we can expect our media to reflect the grim and violent realities of the war in Iraq when we are not even ready to see a middle finger.