Should Wal-Mart display ‘Porno?’
by Christian TotoMy son is only three weeks old, but he’s already impacting how I feel about censorship and marketing in the 21st century.
Kevin Smith’s latest raunch-fest, “Zack and Miri Make a Porno,” comes out on DVD Tuesday (Feb. 3). It’s a sweet romance wrapped in Smith’s signature humor – the R-rated variety. Nothing wrong with that, assuming older audiences are the ones gobbling up the movie tickets – or DVDs starting this week.
But Wal-Mart didn’t want to stock the DVD with the word “Porno” in the title. The Weinstein Company, which is distributing the DVD, agreed to meet their request.
The Red Bank, N.J. native is bemused by the brou ha ha.
“I’m just so shocked that the word ‘porno’ meant that much to people in terms of, like, they found it insanely offensive and don’t want to see it on display,” he told CTV, a Canadian media outlet.
Plus, he worries some unsuspecting DVD shoppers might pick it up and be aghast at what the film actually portrays.
Normally, I’d side with Smith. It’s just a word, right?
My son won’t be old enough to watch a DVD for a while, and it’ll be a decade before I even think about letting him get to know either Zack or Miri.
But I can sympathize with parents trying to explain to their children what “porno” means. It’s one reason folks shop at Wal-Mart in the first place.
Censorship hounds might decry the decision. Heck, the retail giant is a favorite target for left-leaners on a good day. But both sides came to an agreement, and the movie in question can be bought at Wal-Mart or any other outlet without any edits to the film itself.
And I’d still rather watch “Zack and Miri” than Barney, Dora the Explorer or any other kiddie treat my son will be clamoring for in the next few years.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
24 Comments
It’s not censorship since a government entity didn’t cause it to be done. Weinstein just wants to sell DVD’S, they don’t care about covering up the overly long and awkward title,
Just like it’s not discrimination for a Christian church to not want to hire a homosexual, transvestite, or transgender misfit.
It’s marketing, because Wal-Mart knows their market.
It’s not censorship because all parties involved are free to make the decision to carry or not carry the product or to sell the product or not sell it.
It’s the opposite of censorship.
This has nothing to do with censorship. It’s the free market. If the gov’t tells companies what they can and cannot sell, that would be censorship. Good for WalMart.
Well, yesterday, Springsteen was whining about his deal with WalMart… so maybe they ought to stop selling his trash.
http://clarkcountypolitics.blogspot.com/2009/01/bruce-spingsteen-leftist-hypocrite.html
Smith’s worries about people inadvertently buying his film are pretty shallow, Alex … for precisely the reason you mention. If I buy Midnight Cowboy for my young nephew and don’t so much as glance at the rating, then I deserve what’s coming to me (although pity my poor nephew!)
I agree censorship is a non-issue here, but incidents like this often bring the free speech crowd to its feet. The same crowd that will sadly remain silent should the Fairness Doctrine get real traction.
I think its a good decision by WalMart to have the word “porno” removed from the title,and still carry the movie.
Regardless of what the movie is about, most families don’t want to walk with their children near a product that says “porno” on it. If they did, it would probably be their last trip to that store.
Little kids do not see or equate the same things that adults do when it comes to sex. Most of the problems we have in this country as it relates to sex is the complete sexual repression of the populace.
Most of the problems we have in this country as it relates to sex is the complete sexual repression of the populace.
That was meant to be sarcastic, right?
That people and organizations aren’t consistent is irrelevant, generally, to the legitimacy of the decisions they make. Freedom requires the right to be inconsistent and arbitrary.
Yea, Walmart, Why don’t you try and find equivalent items that are “Made in the USA” instead of these DUMB publicity stunts someone keeps comming up with???? And while you’re at it, how about putting Checkers in all those unattended checkouts so I can get the hell out of the store in a reasonable time????
Its funny when I read this article, because here in the Toledo Blade (one of America’s Greatest Newspapers!?!) the movie was consistently billed as “Zack and Miri”, in both the listings from the theaters and in the print ads. If I wasn’t an ardent reader of reviews, I wouldn’t have had any idea that they weren’t displaying the correct title. Perhaps the paper was concerned with using valuable print inches on stupid words….but that viewpoint doesn’t seem to impact their editorial pages.
Typical Hollywood. They would be aghast if someone was handing out Christian pamphlets at a studio, or even took a Bible to work. Yet when they don’t get to shove their morality down your throat, they get incensed. Smith is a one-note vulgar hack.
>>here in the Toledo Blade (one of America’s Greatest Newspapers!?!) the movie was consistently billed as “Zack and Miri”>>
That’s weird, Jim. I figured Toledo’s populace, at least the many Democrat voters who eat up every word in one of America’s Greatest Dog-Cage Liners, would be enlightened enough to cope with “Make a Porno” in the movie’s title. Silly me. I guess I have been away from NW Ohio for too long.
Whatcha wanna bet that if “Jersey Girl” hadn’t tanked and “Clerks 2″ had been the #1 grossing film of the year, that Wal-Mart would not only have NOT asked the Powers That Be to alter the name, they’d have asked him to make the word “Porno” larger in full foil-embossed 3-D glory.
I say that, having noted that my nearby Wal-Mart (and I’m a 20-minute drive from four of them) has a larger Rap Music section than the Soundtracks. Remember, nothing exceeds like success.
Its a non-issue. Even though I despise Wal-Mart for other reasons, Wal-Mart is free to sell what it wants and not sell other things. Its their own business.
Stickwick Stapers-
Oh gosh, you are so funny! Thank you for the Monday morning laugh.
It is WalMart’s store. What they chose to sale is their choice. Not anyone elses. And it certainly isn’t censorship. And mostly this is a nonissue.
I’m pretty sure the only reason Wal-Mart wants the name changed is to avoid the complaints they’ll get from an extremely vocal minority of shoppers. It costs money to answer the phones and send apologetic letters and gift cards to the perpetually pissed off. Money they probably won’t make back selling a DVD that’ll be in the big “Movies for $5″ in less than a year. If they can avoid the issue by throwing some weight around up front they should.
My son learned the word “pornography” in the fourth grade from a program called “latch key kids”. As all the kids participated in the class during previous years, and the program had never included lessons on the differences between “child pornography” and “adult pornography” on the internet, parents hadn’t thought twice about allowing our kids to attend the program again. The principal was as angry as we were when we brought it to his attention, since the teacher never bothered to inform him of the curriculum change.
The reality is, it is our job to both protect and educate our children, not Wal-Mart’s. If you are concerned about what your child is going to see in the movie aisle, don’t take him there. If you’re concerned because it is something that you can’t stop him from seeing, be a parent and explain it to him first.
[...] rental services.One misconception that people have about online DVD rental is that it is way too Should Wal-Mart display ‘Porno?’ – bighollywood.breitbart.com 02/01/2009 by Christian Toto My son is only three weeks old, … [...]
WISDOM, “If you are concerned about what your child is going to see in the movie aisle, don’t take him there” is an utterly moronic comment. Are we not supposed to take children out of the house? Is the grocery aisle at Kroger no longer safe? Show a little respect and a little common sense.
The argument that parents are responsible for protecting their children by not taking them to public places assumes that children are not people and do not have the right to access to the village commons.
Children are citizens with special needs due to their age and development. It is in everyone’s interest to support a standard of public decency in order to support parent’s efforts to raise well adjusted children. It’s a response to a developmental reality. Children are, by definition, impressionable. By definition they do not have the maturity to deal with those things adults understand.
Would we scoff and say not to fuss about a lack of ramps on public sidewalks, just stay home? That if someone isn’t prepared to do the extra bit necessary to lift wheelchair wheels over the curb, that the handicapped don’t actually have a *right* to be in the public square? Of course we wouldn’t.
Children have a right to be in our public spaces every bit as much as any adult has a right to be there. They have a right to have their particular developmental needs accommodated.
EPorvaznik – That’s what made the whole thing stick in my mind….not like the Blade at all. And….I don’t think its possible to be away from NW Ohio for too long, particularly if you are conservative.
Don’t take your kid there. It’s that simple. Don’t like it? Tough.
The world cannot be wrapped in foam padded, have all the sharp corners removed and be limited to words and images appropriate for a three year old just because you’ve got kids.
I’ve raised three kids–and sometimes I’ve had to explain things to them–just like my parents did and their parents before them. It is not societys’ place to act in loco parentis for you.
The world is made for adults. Being children for a short time is how we get there. The things you want to avoid explaining won’t disappear because you leave off ‘made a porno’. You’re going to have to explain them eventually.
I think this mandate for a G-rated world is having repercussions. I think that this attempt to keep children from seeing any of the adult world leaves them unprepared for what comes after the padding comes off–and worse, I think it leaves them eager for and susceptible to the temptations of the ‘forbidden’ adult world.
That being said, Wal-Mart did nothing wrong legally. And it probably won’t hurt the movie in the least to have the film that everyone’s calling ‘Zack and Miri’ labelled ‘Zack and Miri’.
[...] Big Hollywood » Blog Archive » Should Wal-Mart display ‘Porno?’ bighollywood.breitbart.com/cftoto/2009/02/01/should-wal-mart-display-porno – view page – cached My son is only three weeks old, but he’s already impacting how I feel about censorship and marketing in the 21st century. — From the page [...]
You must be logged in to post a comment.