Cofyknsult

This reminds me of a prank we used to play in our late teens (i.e over 40years ago) which was to board AF and SR planes with a porn magazine, and as quickly as possible dispose of it in a magazine rack. Then we waited and watched... IFE in those days was not what it is now, IT WAS MUCH BETTER !

KNRG

*sigh* Some people already do, no need for any visual stimulus, and feel so compelled to upload videos of it onto the Internets.

bdemaria

Back in the day of smoking/non-smoking flights, airlines used to designate certain rows/sections of the plane as "smoking" and the rest as non-smoking. Perhaps they could institute the same policy, and designate certain rows as the "Unfiltered Zone" for those pax who simply must be able to access all that the internet has to offer.

brp

I don't know. The studies on "second hand porn" have not been conclusive to date.

Cheers.

journalist212

Perhaps this is the reason behind the new seat covers in J on the 762.

bocastephen

How ridiculous. Why not just mind your own business and tell the passenger who complains to mind their own business and look at their own reading material or laptop computer.

Some of you AA folks are really too much. Everything is a security threat, there's a terrorist hiding under every seat and now we're going to report offensive reading material to the authorities?? Give me a break!

How about just doing your job instead...which, by the way, does not include paying attention to the reading material or viewing habits of your customers. You're there to coordinate and evacuate them in an emergency, maintain some degree or civil order and provide inflight service. I don't see 'library matron' in the flight attendant job description.

bdemaria

Maybe I missed the post, but I don't see any reference to this as a "security threat"

I do keep my eyes to myself, but sometimes - depending on the position of the seats, the cabin, etc.... it is impossible not to see the centerfold you are admiring when you unfold it so that it actually overlaps onto my seat or the porn you are watching when you set your laptop on the tray table.

You can listen to all the porn you want, even watch all you want on your iPod b/c the size of the screen insures a degree of privacy.

OzinUK

An interesting note,
Why wou you want to bring so-called offensive material into a crowded plane anyway? Personally I would rather keep my vices to myself.
I have never actually sat next to or been made aware of anyone who has brought out any porn into public view whilst travelling. One of the interesting things about internet access on th planes is that it would a be a bit of a novelty. Thus ensuring some moron decided he wants to push some boundaries.
However I would be inclined to agree with a policy of filtering only as it is a public facility. where using your own laptop or magazine just brands you a pervert in public, and most porn mag readers woudl attest to the fact that its not something you necessarily broadcast that your are partaking. In this case children have direct access to the facility be it accidental or otherwise.
And so just like libraries, schools and other public facilities some degre of filtering is required. It is a can of worms and there are difficulties in enforcing/policing it. Sure you can ssh around it but most wouldn't un less they were a desperate. And those would be considered more of a public nuisance and dealt with as such.
As to personal laptops etc, you can only say what the FA's already do, but polite humiliation often does its job, and reticence on a plane will get you more than just a warning these days...

bocastephen

The security threat comment was a general reference to many AA (and UA and DL) crews who see a security bogeyman hiding everywhere - their paranoia is getting extremely old and annoying.

Spreading out a huge porn centerfold across your seat is in bad taste - but watching something on your personal laptop or quietly reading a porn magazine without spreading it wide open are personal and private activities. If you don't want to see it, then don't look at it.

journalist212

WOH!!! I feel compelled to respond because sluggo was responding to my request for information on what the airline's SOP has been over the years with offensive print material.

The question pertained to the problem (passenger complaints, clearly inappropriate stuff like a snuff porn being shown to a 10 y/o unaccompanied minor, egregious cases), not the FAs policing you for your copy of penthouse forum hidden inside your comic book or your skin-a-max dvd.

These FAs (especially the dedicated ones like sluggo and other fters) have much better things to do than be our moral cops. With all due respect, your post is unfair to him and other FAs. He never claimed a terror issue.

This is clearly a slippery slope and one where the rubber meets the road. How do you balance free speech and freedom with protecting kids from obscene content. It's a debate bigger than me and this board.

That said, if an FA went way overboard, and censored reasonable material based on their own unreasonable standards & had someone arrested for not complying, I have a feeling lawsuits would result, and the FA & cops would have a serious headache for the consequences. At the end of the day, it's the police who decide who to arrest, not the crew. And yes, I have had the police wrongly called on me by an AA employee who was having a hissy fit. I wasn't arrested, the cops got mad at the AA staffer & I received a nice gift from AA apologizing for their conduct. I believe that staffer moved on to an exciting opportunity outside of the organization.

bdemaria

So I should have to close my eyes b/c you choose to watch porn on your laptop??

journalist212

An interesting test case... and in my opinion an example of a crew going too far (Mr. Zacky covered up the shirt, and was only removed from the plane after he asked for their names so he could write a complaint).

from:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4924982/

OLBERMANN: Rather than tease out one of our typical long-winded introductions to tonight‘s No. 1 story, we‘ll going to give you a warning. The topic matter, even in the careful way we intend to present it, might be offensive to you or confusing to any kids who might be watching with it. It might just be weird.

It pertains to a T-shirt that somewhat graphically portrays a play on words you could make using the president‘s last name and what an airline did to a passenger who wore the T-shirt on one of their flights. We‘re even going to give you a related story first to give you time to decide whether or not you want to see this.

First to the airport in Birmingham, England, where a teddy bear, some fruit and some clothes have gotten a Portuguese man sentenced to 10 days in jail. They were in the carry-on bag of Jose De Silva, a bag which he left in the departure area of his flight back in Portugal while he went outside to have a smoke. Somebody noticed the unattended bag and before you knew it, 1,000 passengers and staff had been evacuated, three incoming flights diverted, 15 departures grounded and the airport closed for three hours.

British police charged Mr. De Silva with creating a public nuisance. The judge has sentenced him to 10 days in jail for leaving his bag unattended.

That did not happen to Mr. Scott Zacky. He only got thrown off his flight. Going from Oakland to L.A. with his wife, Mr. Zacky went casual, wearing a T-shirt under a button-=down shirt, only the top three buttons of which were undone. As he board the Southwest Airlines jet, a flight attendant told him he would have to cover up that T-shirt completely, that it was—quote—“offensive.”

He did so without making a scene. The airline doesn‘t even dispute that. But then he asked them how he could file a complaint. That‘s when they threw him and his wife off the plane. Stand by for the T-shirt.

Now, you‘ll notice we altered this just slightly. You‘ll probably get the idea anyway. If you don‘t, whatever you do, don‘t ask mom or dad to explain it to you.

The owner of the shirt, Scott Zacky, joins us now from Los Angeles.

Good evening, sir.

SCOTT ZACKY, THROWN OFF FLIGHT FOR T-SHIRT: Good evening.

OLBERMANN: So did you get thrown off that plane because you were wearing that T-shirt or because you asked the flight attendant how to file a complaint?

ZACKY: I think that‘s still unclear to us. The shirt was completely covered, so I believe it had to been I was going to complain.

OLBERMANN: We called Southwest obviously to get their side of the story. And their spokesman said: “One of our pilots took offense to his T-shirt and asked that he be removed from the flight. He,” meaning you, “was accommodated on the very next flight.”

Did the pilot—do we know, did the pilot dislike the politics or did the pilot dislike the woman in the illustration?

ZACKY: You know, it‘s unclear. I wish the pilot was more concerned with piloting the aircraft and the safety of the crew.

It‘s remarkable to me that this is—that he‘s capable of this and removing us from the plane. Obviously, he had made up his mind. And I like the choice of words, accommodated on the next flight. I don‘t know how—I made a reservation, not an accommodation.

OLBERMANN: They put you on next flight and nobody said anything about it; everybody was fine with you wearing that shirt under this other shirt on this next flight?

ZACKY: Didn‘t have to change an outfit, went right on the next flight. It was incredible. It seemed confusing even to the ground crew in Oakland. I have to say, they were even perplexed.

OLBERMANN: I keep thinking as we‘re looking at this T-shirt—and let me say what it says without—we show it—now drop it, so I can just say what it says. Just drop the illustration for a second, guys. It says, “Good Bush, Bad Bush.”

I keep thinking of the TV ad that used to run with the woman who opens a beer with her belt buckle and the bottle foams over. And the announcer says, “Get yourself a Busch.” I guess the pun is OK in advertising that can be seen by millions of people, but not in public on a flight that contained, what, 100, 200 people?

ZACKY: Or under another shirt. I mean, thank God they didn‘t go through my luggage. I had bought T-shirts on this trip, this being the least of the provocative ones.

OLBERMANN: I guess I‘ll just leave that alone. Maybe the guy had—maybe they have better X-rays at the airports than we know about.

Are you going to sue?

ZACKY: Well, going back to that word, I‘m going to accommodate them, with counsel if possible.

(LAUGHTER)

ZACKY: I think it was way too extreme, and they‘re getting carried away. And for one pilot to be able to remove somebody for something that offended him or her is going way too far. And I think that I will probably pursue at least what my options are.

OLBERMANN: On the premise of what? Do you feel you were damaged or are you just trying to protect the Constitution or what?

(CROSSTALK)

ZACKY: Well, we were embarrassed and humiliated. It was uncalled for. I completely cooperated and complied. You know, when you think of somebody being thrown off an airplane, for people to hear you were thrown off an airplane or asked to get off an airplane, it sends the wrong signal.

And this was something that my wife and I were both thrown off. And it was embarrassing and humiliating. I think I want maybe Southwest and other airlines to draw a more defined line as to what they can remove somebody from a plane for or not.

OLBERMANN: Last question, political vetting, we have to ask. Everything that concerns with politics, you‘ve got to ask political vetting. Can you tell us what your politics are?

ZACKY: Republican, surprisingly enough.

(CROSSTALK)

ZACKY: I bought this...

(CROSSTALK)

OLBERMANN: Why did you have the T-shirt?

ZACKY: I bought the shirt because I thought it was funny. You know, I don‘t draw political lines when it comes to humor. I think it was a funny shirt. The place that I got it had a lot of funny shirts. And I don‘t think it‘s—I think, especially up in San Francisco—I bought it in Haight Ashbury. I think that‘s one of the free speech capitals. And it was an incredible experience.

OLBERMANN: Yes, indeed. Scott Zacky, thanks for sharing that experience with us and good luck as you pursue this further.

ZACKY: Thank you. Thank you very much, Keith.

OLBERMANN: Before we wrap up the show, let‘s recap the five COUNTDOWN stories, the ones we think you‘ll be talking about tomorrow.

No. 5, the Iraqi prisoner abuse scandals continues, new photos and from the president an apology to King Abdullah of Jordan and a public show of support for Donald Rumsfeld, who testifies tomorrow before the Senate. Four, the electronic ballot battle, manufacturers saying they‘re safe and secure, opponents saying they can be hacked into easily and won‘t provide a paper trail if a recount is needed. Three, Spider-Man meets Major League Baseball. Baseball wins. Outrage over the plan to advertise the movie on bases causes baseball tonight to back off. The ads will appear on only the on-deck circles, not on the bases.

Two, nightclubs for Christ, older teens, 20-somethings, etcetera, whooping it up in the name of Jesus, occasionally even moving. And, No. 1, T-shirt gate, one man thrown off a plane when he wanted to voice displeasure that Southwest Airlines employees had found that Bush T-shirt offensive.

That‘s COUNTDOWN. Thanks for being part of it. I‘m Keith Olbermann.

bocastephen

Just look at your own space, not mine.

chj

Many people watch porn. The great majority of people (at least in the developed world) clip their nails, clean out their ears, and perform other tasks pertaining to personal hygiene. Polite people do not do either in public.

For what it's worth I am in my mid-20s - this isn't a moral thing, just general good manners. Just because I clip my nails doesn't mean I want to watch you doing so. The analogy obtains with regard to "adult materials" as well.

brp

Wow, this is an overreaction to something that wasn't said. So, anytime a flight attendant has some request, the "general reference" to "security threats" is appropriate because you find it getting old and annoying? And it doesn't matter whether it was even used as the reason? I'm all for a good irrelevancy now and again, but this one is a bit too far.

Oh, and if your neighbor plays their stereo cranked up to eleven at 3 a.m., just don't listen.

Cheers.