To keep an eye on my son, we just mirrored the TV and stereo signals from the living room to the kitchen. We actually see and hear everything he does. THAT'S how you stay informed!
This seems overly skeptical to me. Not having the list memorized doesn't translate to me not gaining any information from reading the label. I imagine there are additional terms I'd probably want to see on the advisory list, and possibly terms I don't think merit parental advisory. Still, the label does inform me that reasonably responsible people believe other reasonably responsible people may find the content inappropriate for young children. Surely that counts as at least some information!
> To keep an eye on my son, we just mirrored the TV and stereo signals from the living room to the kitchen. We actually see and hear everything he does. THAT'S how you stay informed!
I think you inferred that I was saying a parental advisory label was the only way to stay informed, and that's certainly not my view. For example, in my house, nobody turns on the TV (not even me) except for on Saturday mornings to watch cartoons. I have 5 kids; I can't possibly monitor everything they watch all the time -- so we turn it off, they play during the week, and we watch 1-2 hours of TV a week as a family.
Moreover, especially at a young, impressionable age, the real problem is not whether they learn about swearing or immorality, but whether they learn to participate in it. I know about murder, rape, slavery, etc., but I don't participate in them. Now, I'm not equating dropping the f-bomb with murder, I'm merely pointing out that when participation is purely mental, it's very rare that children (and many adults) have the maturity to know about vulgar thoughts without participating in them. Given that background knowledge, I exercise discretion regarding what concepts I allow my children to take in, to the extent that I'm able.