Originally Posted by
alex_b
I think this is a fair point and well made. There are plenty of R movies that are PG/G when without audio, those type of movies would be fine as they provide an appropriate means for parents to manage their children's access to inappropriate content.
Well, there is clear guidance for United to follow . . .
Saying that showing a movie containing graphic scenes to a captive audience that is bound to contain children helps prepare kids to "the real world" seem fatuous to me, I've never seen a billboard containing graphic torture and in most other situations I have much more ability to get up and leave if there is inappropriate content on.
That isn't what has been said. What has been said is that the real world contains such things and parents should either stay home to protect their children from exposure to such things or realize that dealing with exposure to such things is part of life.
Presumably those who see nothing wrong with what UA chose to show wouldn't mind R, NC-17 or higher films? Presumably if it's legal it's right to show it?
Perhaps you would like to quote the earlier posts where any such assertions were made. I never saw them. What was said is that PG-13 movies--particularly since they are edited for airline use--should be acceptable on airplanes.
Personal IFE (DTV, seatback TVs or iPads) is a different matter; there are far more controls a parent can exercise and if someone one seat over is watching something that is making a parent uncomfortable they have the option of swapping seats with their child or asking the other passenger to adjust their screen, choose something else etc. I try to be mindful of other passengers when choosing the volume on my headset and not having anything too inappropriate on screen if there are kids around, and I don't think that's an unreasonable imposition.
Been on an international flight? Find a seat where a child doesn't have a view of multiple screens in virtually every direction.