|
|
quote:Originally posted by sleazenation:
and where does that stand in relation to, say tabacco advertising in sport?I think the idea behind the tobacco ban in sports advertising is because the thinking is that tobacco is harmful, and if sports heroes are seen wearing fuck-off sized logos for Marlboro (or whatever) that this is going to encourage kids to explore smoking. Which is a relatively good thought, I reckon - given that cigs are carcinogenic, and all - but sidesteps the fact that most kids end up smoking at some time anyway.
Anyway. I don't see how it'd be very similar: there's not as much of a proven link between porn and ill-health as there is between smoking and cancer (et al). The tobacco advertising ban seems to be rooted largely in health concern (well, if I were being devoid of cynicism, that is), while the porn ban is - as the article suggests - based largely on an idea of morality.
I agree with SFD: it shouldn't be a problem, but you know it will be. |
|
|