NEWS STORY: TV rating plan gets bad reviews from many religious groups

c. 1996 Religion News Service WASHINGTON _ Television’s proposed new rating system for programming, which the major networks plan to begin using Jan. 1, generally flopped with the religious community, drawing responses that ranged from harsh condemnation to cautious concern. The plan, unveiled Thursday (Dec. 19), will use a system of rating programs based on […]

c. 1996 Religion News Service

WASHINGTON _ Television’s proposed new rating system for programming, which the major networks plan to begin using Jan. 1, generally flopped with the religious community, drawing responses that ranged from harsh condemnation to cautious concern.

The plan, unveiled Thursday (Dec. 19), will use a system of rating programs based on the program’s appropriateness for six age levels. Programs broadcasters deem appropriate for all ages, for example, will carry a rating TV-Y; for children seven and above, TV-Y7. Programs containing material”many parents would find unsuitable for younger children”will be labeled TV-PG; those for adults only will be designated TV-M, for mature audiences only.”The net effort of this system will be to pump more smut into America’s family rooms,”said Gary Bauer, president of the conservative Family Research Council, a spinoff of psychologist James Dobson’s Focus on the Family. Bauer called the rating system”an insult to parents everywhere and a clear sign that Hollywood has no intention of curbing sex, violence and foul language on television.” Andrea Sheldon, director of government affairs for the Anaheim, Calif.-based conservative Traditional Values Coalition, focused her attention more on the programming than the rating.”Hollywood has totally missed the point,”she said, calling after-school and evening television”a wasteland for the bizarre.””Few Americans recognize the angry Nazis, the hate-filled bigots, the motorcycle-riding lesbian nuns … who seem to be the staple for afternoon talk shows,”she said. The new rating system, she added, is”shallow and of no help to parents or Americans who want to know exactly how bad a program is.” Other critics were less harsh, but still dissatisfied with the industry’s proposal to regulate itself.”We applaud the efforts of the industry to address the problem and voluntarily find ways to help parents select TV programs which are appropriate and healthy for their children,”said the Rev. Don Argue, president of the National Association of Evangelicals, the pre-eminent organization of evangelical and theologically conservative Protestants. But Argue, echoing such critics as the National Education Association and the national Parent Teacher Association (PTA), said the industry should provide a rating system that would identify shows by their content _ sex, violence, and language _ rather than the age-appropriate standard.”People have strong feelings on this issue _ about protecting children and preserving freedom of speech,”he said.”After looking at the issue, we would ask industry leaders to consider the content-description rating system for the sake of our children, who are America’s future.” That view was echoed by the Rev. Thom White Wolf Fassett, general secretary of the United Methodist Board of Church and Society:”Instead of the proposed broad, vague categories, we strongly suggest that the proposed rating system identify content with symbols, such as `V’ for violence, `S’ for sex or `L’ for language.” The Rev. Arthur Lawrence Cribbs Jr., a former television news reporter in San Francisco who now heads the Office of Communications of the United Church of Christ, said part of the problem is that”as television comes of age”it is offering”mature and sometimes adult content”programs to people who may be too young for them. While praising broadcasters for grappling with the issue of mature programming, he said the industry seems to be”wanting to answer the question in a way that allows it to do what it feels is in its own best interests.” Cribbs said that while much of the heat of the controversy between broadcasters and their critics is on violence in the media,”some viewers are raising their eyebrows and questioning the values and message of moral character”portrayed on television.”That raises the question of what makes for maturity _ especially when the subject matter deals with sexual innuendo and/or personal choices about materialism and gaining advantage in any given situation,”he said. Cribbs said the rating system is intended to signal to parents that a program is suitable for audiences within a certain age range.”But the issue of television’s influence on society is lost when the industry leaders deny that programs can result in behavior and understandings,”he added.”The rating system should be a guide for those who are concerned about what television teaches.” Cribbs said that some viewers are now questioning whether television is capable of making self-regulating decisions that are in the best interests of society.”The dialogue has begun,”he said,”but the answers are not coming easily or quickly.” MJP END ANDERSON


Donate to Support Independent Journalism!

Donate Now!