Is Christian television truly Christian?

What show are you referring to? It's hard to make an accurate or discerning determination without knowing what show you're referring to, or what that storyline of the show is. You can't gleen an accurate determination out of x number of minutes one happens to catch.

I'm not trying to start a debate. Just trying to get more info.

 

If it's the same as what's on here (adjusted for time zones), it's a rerun of the Show "Grounded For Life", which originally aired from 2001 to 2005. The episode in question is one of several in the run of the show that dealt with the dangers and consequences of drug abuse.

Can't tell you more than that.

 

You can't make an accurate determination, because you only saw a portion. Neither can I.

 

Once again, I'm going to stun the world by agreeing with you here. Although, not for the reaons you think.

The article you linked to in in regards to SkyAngel's support of "a la carte" programming. Which means, the subscriber would have the freedom to order service by individual channel, rathern than by package only as is the case now. Their logic is correct: One could order only the channels they decide are appropriate for their household. I favor a la carte availability (although, I likely will continue to keep my existing packaged service).

Not likely. Generally, channels offerred do not receive a portion of what you pay in cable fees. How, then, do they make money, you ask. Fox et al would make their money by being able to charge more for their advertising, the price of which is determined by how many households view them. Charging local cable companies for carrying them would reduce the number of households, and reduce potential advrtizing income.

That's a bit extreme, not to mention faulty. The Satanic Bible was published in 1969 by Avon Books (founded in 1941). The Hearst Corporation, which owned Avon, sold Avon to Harper Collins. Zondervan, founded in 1931, was acquired by Harper Collins in 1988. Zondervan did not publish the Satanic Bible. A company which belongs to ZOndervan's parent company did, nearly 20 years prior to being acquired by them. Zondervan's terms of acquisition give it great autonomy in its own publishing endeavours separate from its parent company (as does Avon's agreement). BTW, Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation did not acquire Harper Collins until 1989, a year after HC acquired Zondervan. As if that wasn't hard enough to follow.

What makes the issue confusing is the inhierent complex nature of the media industries. But the bottom line is that no one should be naive to think that there is going to be a "cure-all" service or station that frees the parent from having to parent. Anyone who thinks in this manner need to brush up on their parenting skills.

 

question:

It is said by many that a christian can take what is evil and turn it into good by making it appear godly. Does this whole premise of "christian" TV run along the same line of thinking - that there is no harm done by a company choosing to sell product that is labeled as christian alongside that which is not?

So if Sky Angel promotes itself as "christian" TV, or if Zondervan is labeled a "christian" book company, then if they choose to sell ungodly resources, books, programs, etc, under a different name or company they can just wash their hands of any adverse affect on people?

Perhaps there should be a sign over the door, or in the front jacket of a book, or one of those warnings before a TV show:

CAVEAT EMPTOR . . .