Software for the finest computer – The Mind


Posted by Tim Bryce on March 11, 2015


– If we cannot publicly discuss certain subjects, it seems perfectly reasonable the media shouldn’t either.

To use this segment in a Radio broadcast or Podcast, send TIM a request.

When it comes to political correctness, the media has no qualms in dictating to the public what should be considered appropriate or inappropriate for such things as race relations, sexual content, violence, religion, actions at work, even humor. If you happen to make a faux pas, you are quickly taken to the woodshed where you are disciplined and re-instructed in terms of what is right and wrong. From this, we now know what racial expletives and jokes are permissible and which are not, what we can or cannot say about sex in public, violence, and what behavior is appropriate in the work place. As I mentioned, this is primarily being driven by the media, particularly television and movies.

Yet, have you noticed the media doesn’t exactly follow its own rules? I have seen too many sitcoms who cannot seem to get a rise out of their audience without some mention of male or female genitalia. Basically, they have defaulted to toilet humor. Had we made the same comments in public, the PC police would have likely taken us to the woodshed.

Television commercials alone are aplenty discussing erectile dysfunction, women lubricants, sexually transmitted diseases, condoms, feminine protection and hygiene products. Even for senior citizens we are bombarded with ads for diapers. Whereas public discussion of such subjects is frowned upon by the PC police, television has no problem with such subjects. For example, we are now warned about four hour erections, genital yeast infections, and how to stimulate sexual arousal.

So, my question is simple, if we have to be politically correct, why isn’t the media asked to do likewise? What is good for the goose, should be good for the gander, right?

I believe what we are witnessing is a reversal of censorship. Years ago there were public censors monitoring the media and instructing them what was permissible and what was not. Such censorship boards have long since disappeared and, seizing on the opportunity, the media is now dictating what we should think and say. Interestingly though, they fail to police themselves.

It’s not that the subjects or words are particularly offensive to me (although I cannot bring myself to openly discuss “menstruation”). It is the hypocrisy of the media I object to. If the media is going to be critical with the words and actions of the public, I see no reason why the public should hold the media to the same standards. If we cannot publicly discuss certain subjects, it seems perfectly reasonable the media shouldn’t either.

Could it be the almighty advertising dollar sways the conscious of the media? No, it couldn’t be. After all, they have too many scruples for that; don’t they?

Keep the Faith!

Note: All trademarks both marked and unmarked belong to their respective companies.

Tim Bryce is a writer and the Managing Director of M&JB Investment Company (M&JB) of Palm Harbor, Florida and has over 30 years of experience in the management consulting field. He can be reached at

For Tim’s columns, see:

Like the article? TELL A FRIEND.

Copyright © 2015 by Tim Bryce. All rights reserved.

NEXT UP:  ADAPTING TO THE CORPORATE CULTURE – There are both logical and physical aspects to be considered. 

LAST TIME:  METHODOLOGY DESIGN 101  – “If you don’t know where you are going, any road will take you there.”

Listen to Tim on WJTN-AM (News Talk 1240) “The Town Square” with host John Siggins (Mon, Wed, Fri, 12:30-3:00pm Eastern); WZIG-FM (104.1) in Palm Harbor,FL; and KIT-AM 1280 in Yakima, Washington “The Morning News” with hosts Dave Ettl & Lance Tormey (weekdays. 6:00-9:00am Pacific). Or tune-in to Tim’s channel on YouTube.



  1. twiceraisedfreemason said

    Reblogged this on Raymond Sean Walters and commented:

    – If we cannot publicly discuss certain subjects, it seems perfectly reasonable the media shouldn’t either.


  2. I truly wish that there were not a simple explanation for this hypocrisy, but there is, and it lies in the dichotomous nature of the media itself. In the ‘entertainment’ media, the purpose is to debunk and destroy reference to traditional values and morality. The more shocking the situations and dialog (to ears attuned to traditional standards) the more certain the programming is, over time, to effectively reprogram our standards of what is normal and acceptable.

    In the world of ‘news and commentary,’ the purpose is to control the discussion and to define the terms of the debate. Issues are so hemmed in by PC language and the illusions that have come to define “white/affluent guilt,” that the talking heads are not even questioned as to why there is virtually never any alternative point of view presented to counter the ‘party line.’

    In either case, the Orwellian concept of controlling the language to control the thoughts applies.

    Liked by 1 person



  4. Tim Bryce said

    An M.C. of New York City wrote…

    “The media is awful and you are spot on. Do as I say, not as I do; isn’t it?”


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: