Canadian TV Now V-Chip Ready

nitemayr writes: "The Toronto Star, along with many other publications, report that many Canadian broadcasts are now V-Chip ready. The V-Chip (which I'm sure you will remember) allows viewers to filter television based upon ratings imposed by others. This is a boon to lazy parents everywhere (In Canada) who can now safely lock their 'kidz' in front of the tube without having to worry about them seeing violence or mayhem, unless they watch the news, or a documentary, or almost anything on the CBC (Candadian Broadcast Company)" " Invisible to viewers, the rating code triggers the chip, which turns the television screen to black if the rating is too high." Really.

Comments

Excellent!

[Adversary]

This now means that canadians now enjoy the best of both worlds.

Parents no longer have to feel that irrational guilt that the programs their children are watching might cause them to shoot up their school, or do something equally embarasing to the parents.

Children will discover the joy of learning, as they reprogram the chip (I doubt its much more difficult than getting past a "child-proof" cap, but its still positive reinforcement). They get all the sex and violence as before, only now they don't need to worry their parents might be checking up on them!

So everyone is happy! Until they discover that TV still sucks.

More complex filtering.

[Christopher Thomas]

I'd rather see television shows come with some sort of classification tag, so I could build custom filters to screen out the truly offensive programming on television:

The sad thing is, this kind of selective filtering would be a beautiful feature to have (especially if it replaced the commercials with a nice screen-saver).

The fun thing is that I can see something like this being rigged "ad hoc" when/if programmable TVs come to the masses (be it TIVO-style, with a separate box managing content, or integrated into the television set, or by using a computer with a tuner card instead of a TV). You could figure out what's playing by taking the time of day and your location, or a "signature" based on a hashed few-second excerpt of the show, or both, and firing them off as an anonymous query to a CDDB-style database to find out if it's something you've told it you want to watch or want to filter.

Then have a coding contest to see if you can write a filter that can automatically distinguish between a commercial and your show...

Heck, I even see an easy way to automate public and private database generation and commercial filtering, given a signature-generating algorithm. This is a really nifty problem.

It's not enough

[Samrobb]

I'd rather see television shows come with some sort of classification tag, so I could build custom filters to screen out the truly offensive programming on television:

• Reality TV
• Infomercials
• Colorized versions of classic films
• Lame talk-show vehicles for one-time stars with dying careers
• Anything related to the WWF or XFL
• Friends
• Any show based around sickeningly sweet little children
• Jerry Lewis movies
• Steven King movies
• Odd-numbered Star Trek movies
• Any news broadcast that mentions dot-com, dot-bomb, or e-anything.

Ultimate control would be hooking this up to a Tivo, and specifying that any blocked content would be replaced by something with greater entertainment value, like Plan 9 From Outer Space.

Re:It's not enough

[demaria]

In a similar topic, here is what JMS from Babylon 5 had to say about a particularly violent scene in the "Dust to Dust" episode:

"This scene *should* be very affecting. It goes to Joe's Theory of Violence on TV. To wit...that we need more of it, but it has to be realistic violence. It has to show consequences. You glorify or desensitize violence when you shoot somebody, and they just go down, no yelling in pain, no sobbing as their guts fall out onto the street. It's just gunfire, loud noises, excitement and fun. If you're going to show violence, then show it for what it *is*, and show it the way people would react to it. Make the audience understand that this is a *person*, not one in a series of body counts."
http://www.midwinter.com/lurk/guide/050.html

Seems like a good system

[miahrogers]

Well I think it's a good system, the only things that worry me are that they might bundle some extra "goodies" with the vchip tvs. Like all that DMCA stuff that would prevent me from taping copyrighted shows (maybe a nice little ability for the tv to do that god awfully annoying fade from light to black thing that some DVDs do during "copyrighted" shows).

I also wonder if they would offer to let parents just screen out one show or so, or maybe allow a few shows. I know my parents (back when I was 5 or so) had selective ideas of what I should watch. They'd much rather say "no, you can't watch MTV" (I was five) than "no, you can't watch shows on the discovery channel that use the word 'sex'".

Re:Seems like a good system

[Alatar]

Reminds me of an episode of the Simpsons

Homer Simpson: Hey, what gives? I thought you had a satellite dish.

Homer clicks the remote several times, sees nothing but dead air

Ned Flanders: Sure dodilly-do. Over 230 channels...looocked out!

Re:"lazy parents everywhere "

[Steve B]

If you don't like the V-chip...turn YOURS off. Leave MINE alone

No, the proper answer is, "If you don't like the V-chip... don't buy one -- and let the people who want one pay the legitimate market price for it, not the subsidy price generated by forcing it on anyone who buys a new TV."

Face it, you have your hand out just like those folks on welfare you mutter about.
/.

As a parent, the V-Chip is worthless to me

[SnakeStu]

As a parent of young children, I am concerned about the garbage they are exposed to on TV -- like another person wrote, when they watch TV my wife or I must be "at the ready" to switch channels if the content suddenly becomes inappropriate. But unlike that other person who saw this as a reason the V-Chip is good, I see the V-Chip as worthless for parenting. Indeed, the claim to "protect children" is the grease commonly used to remove liberties, whether it's what we view or what we own.

Why is the V-Chip worthless to me? For the same reason that movie ratings are worthless:

• I may (and probably will) disagree with the ratings applied to any given item
• I have no control over what content will have the rating applied.

What it comes down to is that, as a parent, I still have to make all the same parenting decisions whether I use the V-Chip or not. If that's the case, then there's clearly no benefit. And if there's no benefit, what is it for?!

Thus, I steer my children to books (and physical activity, what a concept!) and limit their TV and movie watching. Even "kid movies" are often subjected to pre-viewing by my wife or I, or at least a very trusted relative, because a lot of the "kid movies" are full of garbage that we don't want to become part of our kids' world views.

canada vs. china

[invictus]

From the people who brought you content filters for china, now presenting:
Canadian Television for Parents who are too busy to be parents. Seriously,
the possibility for abuse of such a system by those in control of it far outweighs
any perceived gains. In reality does it do anything more than allow a parent
to ignore their children just that much more? Gosh, I didnt know johnny was
building pipe bombs, i thought he was safely plastered to the tube with nary
an evil thought allowed to enter his innocent little head, eh. What we need
isnt content 'safeguards' what we need is parents to sit down with their
children and teach them right and wrong. Dont expect little sally to get her
morals from 90210 reruns, and fashion tips from britney spears.

just my $.02

Random thoughts from a parent

[clary]

I bet the author is something like 21 with no kids and some wacko idea of what it is like to be a parent these days. Slashdot is so sickingly liberal, and is inhabited by people who, for the most part, are kids in college or young adults who don't have kids of their own.

*chuckle* There are some of us old farts with multiple kids. We just can't afford that expensive hardware that lets the young folks post so fast...

Trust me *boys*....the older you get the more conservative you will become, and all of the nonsense the higher educational system imparts on you will quickly fade.

I was actually very conservative in the current US sense when I was in college. I have since become very much more libertarian.

That leads me to to something another poster said in this thread, but which is worth repeating. The problem is not the V-chip itself, but the mandating of the V-chip. I wouldn't mind having another tool in my parenting efforts, but others should not have to subsidize my parenting by buying V-chips they don't want.

But to say that the V-chip is bad just because some outside organization rates a show, and you might think that a 13 year old should be exposed to just about anything for the experience, or, probably so you can win some sort of dysfunctional free speech argument, I only need to point to a few infamous locations here in the US to dispute your argument....lets start with Columbine high school in Colorado. Lets then move on down to San Diego. You know...thats where teenagers are blowing other teenagers away faster then aDuke Nukem can say "Damn I'm looking good".

Hold it right there, partner. It is a bit of a stretch to blame TV for animals who blow away innocent human beings. Those shooters had other problems, some including parents who didn't notice they were making pipe bombs in the garage. I challenge you to show that a V-chip would have made one iota of difference in any of those cases.

It WILL be. Just look at movie ratings.

[SlushDot]

You can see any movie you like. The MPAA rating means nothing... oh wait... Most if not all local governments have passed laws prohibiting movie theaters from showing films rated NC-17 or higher except in specially zoned areas of town. Hell, blockbuster (1/3 of US rental market) won't carry NC-17 films. And no, mother teresa, this isn't just "porn". The original Robocop was rated NC-17. It was EDITED for the movie theater, because NC-17 == automatic prohibition from being shown at more than 3/4 of all US theaters. "Not forced on me?" You bet it's forced on me.

I fully expect TV to do the same. It'll start off slowly, e.g., no TV-MA programs allowed on the air before 9:00pm, then it'll be no TV-PG or higher rated programming during "kids time slots", then some things will be restricted to 2:00-5:00am only. Then, "since no one is watching this" and "it's no longer profitable to the TV station", programs with too strong a rating will be dropped all together, by the TV station's choice. Then, once people are "used to this stuff not airing", it won't be hard to pass legislation to keep it from ever returning to the air waves.

You wait and see. This is how it goes. Why isn't any asking who is doing this "rating" anyway? DOn't you wonder?

Re:"lazy parents everywhere "

[dstone]

TV is bad. It is mind numbing entertainment and in this house it is on for about 1 hour a day. Both of my kids have been taught that tv is not good for them.

I wonder about people who teach their children that a medium is inherently bad. TV is not just about entertainment. I live in Canada and for < CAN$20/mo on satellite, I'm able to watch the Discovery Channel, The Knowledge Network, two PBS stations, the CBC, etc. This goes beyond entertainment -- it's educational and interesting and thought-provoking. As an example, I recently got to relive Carl Sagan's Cosmos Series (on PBS, I think) -- back in its day, that TV show was so awe-inspiring to me and helped drive me to study science. (I'm in my 30s now.) There was great TV way back then and there's great TV now. World history, war documentaries, Bill Moyers, Scientific American, Nova, BBC News -- all those shows were on tonight. None of those are particularly entertaining or mind-numbing in my opinion.

My point is this... sure, those shows will probably pass thru the V-Chip, but what's the message you're sending to your children then? Reliance/trust in technology and government ratings over developing their own critical viewing skills? Will the V-Chip or ingrained TV-prejudice protect them when they catch a glimpse of forbidden programs on the TV at the mall or a friend's house or in their college dorm? Better hope so...

Re:"lazy parents everywhere "

[Sodium Attack]

You almost had me. As I started to read your comment, I thought, gee, I'm not a parent, I don't know what it's like to raise children, so I should listen to someone who does know what it was like.

You almost had me. I didn't realize you were a troll, until:

I only need to point to a few infamous locations here in the US to dispute your argument....lets start with Columbine high school in Colorado.

I propose that for the 21st century, the "Nazis" in Godwin's law should be replaced by "Columbine." It seems that anytime anyone doesn't like something, it's become traditional to blame Columbine on that thing. "British beef caused the Columbine tragedy! Chinese spies caused the Columbine tragedy! American television caused the Columbine tragedy!"

Leave MINE alone you hypocritical free expression at all costs liberal!

Liberal? Now I know you're trolling. Liberals are just as happy to be censors as conservatives are.

Baby Hackers!

[ocip]

This could be inspiration for a new generation of young hackers. Start small, hacking away with their television set, then gradually move them up to kernel-hacking! It's a natural evolutionary path!

The Domino Effect

[Cerlyn]

I'm assuming that Canada uses the same television standard as at least one other country. Many manufactuers likely would consider it less expensive to put these chips in *all* of their televisions rather than making specialized additions for Canada.

As a case in point, consider newer automobiles which have their headlights on all the time. Only a few locations (all of Canada and the state of Florida I believe) require headlights to be on continuously. But instead of making specialized vehicles for these locations, automobile manufactuers added the feature to most if not all of their lineup. To consumers, having headlights on during the daytime is advertised as a "safety feature." You see dozens of these cars during a trip on any major roadway in the United States.

When one country accepts these televisions for their additional functions, it allows any other country that wants this technology to easily lap it up. Only the broadcast end of systems will need to be changed. It becomes real easy for someone to turn on things "at the flick of a switch" when the masses already have it in front of them.

(Personally, I believe parents should watch what their kids are doing, and not rely on any regulatory or industry body to do so. Rating and censoring products should only be used as tools, and parents must be able to disable these quickly should said products go astray from *their* beliefs, not the original rater's!)

Noone forces you to use it?

[freeweed]

I keep seeing this point repeated over and over. And then I think of all the parents with their "You can't monitor your children 24 hours a day" claptrap. Guess what folks? NO parent has ever been able to monitor their children 24 hours a day. And yet, millions of kids don't spend their day watching violence/sex/whatever on TV. I certainly never did, parents around or no. Then again, I had a pretty good idea what was 'appropriate' for children (at least in my family), and just didn't watch anything else. Why? Because my parents raised me to not just absorb the outside world, but to process it as well.

Those of us that can think for ourselves, and are well over 18 and therefore not going to be influenced by this chip directly, still have problems with it. Look at it this way: do we honestly want an entire generation of children raised who have all their entertainment/information censored the same way? I remember Catcher in the Rye (considered to be a true literary classic nowadays) being banned when I was in school, and the line back then was "It doesn't affect you, we're saving the children, butt out". Sorry, but parent or no, I have an obligation to society to make sure we don't tread the same path that historically we've walked so many times before.

Book bannings, TV censorship, Internet filtering, 'adults' sections in the library, 'appropriate for women' topics of conversation, segregated schools.... Sorry, but 1790 or 2001, I don't see much difference between any of this. And this isn't just some 'information wants to be free' rant. However, when we choose to restrict it, suddenly we're all relying on a select group of people's opinions to dictate our own?

Not to indulge in hyperbole, but 1984 was based in the UK, and was not really an anti-communism rant like so many people take it to be. Orwell's entire point is that this could happen to us, and we're as likely as not to invite it in ourselves.