----------------------------Original message---------------------------- >That is, (W)hy is it "safe" to *show* IRA members, but not to *hear* them? >It reinforces the notion that TV is just radio with pictures, that the main >televisual impact is based in the sound, that television's images are just >there to augment the information that is predominantly carried by the >sound. I suspect the use of actors vioces but not vissages was as much a reflection of an imperfect and outdated statute as it was an acknowledgement of the power of words. A friend of mine shot a film in the Maze prison with many IRA members convicted of murder etc. The producers of the film were required to use actors voices when the subjects were speaking in their capacities as members of the I.R.A. However, when these same people were speaking about _personal_ experiences or feelings they were allowed their own voices. Loopholes? Then again, as someone once said to me, radio still plays a vital role in our cultures' information system while silent films have more or less gone the way of the Stanley Steamer. Just a thought.-- S. McCarthy, Boston