Though it doesn’t come up that often, I’d always imagined that permanent nudity was allowed on TV, Facebook, etc. as part of the anti-discrimination law protecting permanudes. But it still might be considered controversial by some.
I think a funny idea would be registered permanudes would go uncensored in the media, while unregistered people would continue getting the black bars or mosaic treatment.
You know, I never quite thought of that, but that’s probably what would happen. I suppose there’s no reason they couldn’t still censor-bar the permanudes if they wanted, but we all know sex sells, so most likely they wouldn’t.
A major problem would emerge for publicly shot footage where it’s impossible to get releases (and thus pn status) for every person in a crowd…
So do you censor a potential pn person and face legal action for that, or do you not censor them and face potential legal action under “public decency” laws (however idiotic things like nipplegate are, they’re sadly the norm, though over time in a society with pn laws that would probably change, as the very existence of such laws and their acceptance by the majority of society would require a major change in attitudes towards nudity).
That’s a good point. I suppose either the law/regulation that allowed registered nudity on TV would have to include some kind of “good faith belief” clause, or else they would have to censor anyone they couldn’t verify was registered.
Or it could be some of both. If there’s a news report and a naked person walks by in the background, acting like they belong, I doubt the station would get in trouble even if it turned out that person was naked illegally. (Though they would be on the hook to make sure it was censored if they ever showed it again after finding out.) But at the same time, most stations would probably play it safe if they have doubts. If during that same report some naked lady came up close and jiggled her boobs at the camera, they would most likely pixelate it. Perfectly legal if she’s registered (and hey, it’s too funny not to show at all) but it’s clearly unusual behavior so you have to wonder. They probably wouldn’t want to risk it unless they got a chance to verify she’s registered before airing it.
Though it doesn’t come up that often, I’d always imagined that permanent nudity was allowed on TV, Facebook, etc. as part of the anti-discrimination law protecting permanudes. But it still might be considered controversial by some.
I think a funny idea would be registered permanudes would go uncensored in the media, while unregistered people would continue getting the black bars or mosaic treatment.
You know, I never quite thought of that, but that’s probably what would happen. I suppose there’s no reason they couldn’t still censor-bar the permanudes if they wanted, but we all know sex sells, so most likely they wouldn’t.
A major problem would emerge for publicly shot footage where it’s impossible to get releases (and thus pn status) for every person in a crowd…
So do you censor a potential pn person and face legal action for that, or do you not censor them and face potential legal action under “public decency” laws (however idiotic things like nipplegate are, they’re sadly the norm, though over time in a society with pn laws that would probably change, as the very existence of such laws and their acceptance by the majority of society would require a major change in attitudes towards nudity).
That’s a good point. I suppose either the law/regulation that allowed registered nudity on TV would have to include some kind of “good faith belief” clause, or else they would have to censor anyone they couldn’t verify was registered.
Or it could be some of both. If there’s a news report and a naked person walks by in the background, acting like they belong, I doubt the station would get in trouble even if it turned out that person was naked illegally. (Though they would be on the hook to make sure it was censored if they ever showed it again after finding out.) But at the same time, most stations would probably play it safe if they have doubts. If during that same report some naked lady came up close and jiggled her boobs at the camera, they would most likely pixelate it. Perfectly legal if she’s registered (and hey, it’s too funny not to show at all) but it’s clearly unusual behavior so you have to wonder. They probably wouldn’t want to risk it unless they got a chance to verify she’s registered before airing it.