...but if a 17 year old running down a street naked (filmed from behind) is enough for a scandal, I want to say: Grow up, America.
I would venture a guess that they likely have already gotten a couple of complaints about the content of the show in relation to the age of the actors, and in order to prevent them from giving ammo to the complainers that could be used against them, they can just remove any content that might expose them to potential legal action. It may be relatively innocent, but if removing a young person's butt from an episode keeps the government from taking action, then it's well worth it for the company, especially when you consider the amount of money they would spend on fines and legal fees in the event they had to defend themselves against some charges.
MTV and Child Porn
20/01/2011 03:07:20 PM
- 999 Views
I find the idea that a 17-yearold is covered by child porn laws strange
20/01/2011 03:44:46 PM
- 467 Views
Age of consent varies state by state, but 18 is he cutoff for other things nationally
20/01/2011 05:25:09 PM
- 425 Views
I think 18 is the cut-off for child porn in most places, regardless of the age of consent. *NM*
20/01/2011 08:26:30 PM
- 189 Views
...
20/01/2011 08:27:56 PM
- 464 Views
In fairness, there are other considerations than just what turns pedophiles on.
20/01/2011 08:35:45 PM
- 447 Views
I don't know the show...
20/01/2011 04:10:27 PM
- 481 Views
I don't think it's necessarily a scandal
21/01/2011 01:48:27 AM
- 491 Views
Why's that an issue?
20/01/2011 09:17:53 PM
- 453 Views
The British version aired on BBC America. It has the same scene. Nothing happened. *NM*
21/01/2011 01:30:10 AM
- 172 Views