Posted in: Movies, TV | Tagged: amc, The Walking Dead, tv, walking dead

Walking Dead's Audience Shocked At Negan's Violence And Complained To The FCC

One might think that if there's a sign alongside the road that says "Bridge Closed", drivers might find another way to get where they're going rather than to drive on through. When it comes to the warnings on films and television series, viewers are more apt to blow on past the warnings then complain that they did so. The Daily Dot has submitted a Freedom of Information Act request to the FCC to see what kind of complaints were submitted by viewers in response to their having watched The Walking Dead's season 7 opener, "The Day Will Come When You Won't Be."

Now it should be mentioned that the episode itself opened with a TV-MA rating, which by definition on the TV Parental Guidelines website means:

For Mature Audience Only
This program is specifically designed to be viewed by adults and therefore may be unsuitable for children under 17. This program may contain one or more of the following: crude indecent language (L), explicit sexual activity (S), or graphic violence (V).

However even with that warning being shown, along with the image at the top of this post being shown after commercial breaks during the episode, some members of the audience found themselves utterly shocked and mortified when something involving graphic violence happened. The Parents Television Council president Tim Winter said shortly after the episode aired. "It's not enough to 'change the channel,' as some people like to advocate, because cable subscribers — regardless of whether they want AMC or watch its programming — are still forced to subsidize violent content. This brutally explicit show is a powerful demonstration of why families should have greater control over the TV networks they purchase from their cable and satellite providers."

As most conservative groups would insist, it's less about personal accountability "It's not enough to change the channel," but that they shouldn't have to even ever accidentally come across objectionable material to begin with. It also being a "Parents" council, it would be valid to ask – why since the network legitimately noted their series as TV-MA (so we're talking 17+), why are parents letting their kids watch it to begin with. Again, it goes back to the accountability issue – of the parents not being bothered to be aware of what their children are watching.

One interesting point with regards to the complaints is that it shows a lack of a  general understanding with regards to the FCC's regulation of violence (on broadcast or cable). Found on the FCC's website is the following entry on their FAQ page:

Does the FCC regulate violence on television? The FCC does not currently regulate the broadcast of violent programming. On July 28, 2004, however, the FCC opened an inquiry into violent programming and its effect on children. The FCC has received public comments and opinions from many segments of the public. The FCC will publish and make available the report resolving the inquiry on the FCC website.

So, that means America, with it's origins in religious conservatism, nudity and bad words are heavily regulated, but violence is fair game (technically during any timeslot).

But that lack of regulation notwithstanding, here's a sampling of some of the viewer's complaints:

"…although we do monitor what our 12 year old watches…"

Let's check this shall we – they're letting a 12 year old watch the episode, when it's labelled as inappropriate for those under 17. They say that it's ok because the parents are present. How exactly does that work, since the light from the TV screen will hit the eyeballs of the parents and children at the same time. Unless the parent is watching it in another room, with the child on time-delay, how exactly if something really bothersome happens is the parent supposed to help that?

"…there is a chance that someone could decide to copy…Negan's actions"

There's little question that all dramatic series always have the challenge of upping the bar season over season, in increasing the stakes, danger, and consequences. The complainant thinks that someone could emulate Negan's killing with a baseball bat? And what about the living humans that Daryl has shot with his crossbow, or all the people stabbed with knives? There seems to be a number of references to "gratuitous violence." In a show about humans fighting for survival and resources in the midst of a zombie-infested world. What were they really expecting to have happen when the fur begins to fly?

"Watching ISIS behead someone isn't as terrible"

It would generally require someone to keep in mind that a fictional series about zombies is in fact fiction, while watching an ISIS beheading video is not. The difference would be subtle to some viewers it would seem who would prefer to kick back with a series of ISIS snuff films rather than watch an actor roll with a scene as it was originally written years before in a comic book.

How dare Chris Hardwick use the F-Bomb!

Really, for all the deaths, killing, and emotional torture that's been thrown about – someone saying f*ck is someone's idea of a moral outrage? However at least this one is technically in the prevue of the FCC's current jurisdictions to review since it covers what could be considered obscene language. Though in the fine print, it still falls short since the shows in question have the rating warnings, and it's a cable network and not being broadcast over the air.

If you'd like to see the rest of the complaints all their glory – here's the rest of the documents received by the Daily Dot's  Freedom of Information request.

Enjoyed this? Please share on social media!

Stay up-to-date and support the site by following Bleeding Cool on Google News today!