Slashdot Mirror


FCC Looks Into Regulating Violence on TV

The Importance of writes "The FCC's regulation of indecent and profane speech has gotten a lot of attention recently. Now, the FCC is considering getting into the business of regulating violence on television (broadcast and cable/satellite). This isn't unexpected, because the House Commerce Committee ordered the FCC to conduct the study. Notice of Inquiry [PDF] [TXT]. Somehow, I don't think the FCC is going to tell Congress there is nothing they can do about violence on TV."

5 of 506 comments (clear)

  1. Max? by DAldredge · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Does everyone in DC have a tv set from max headroom? I mean how fscking hard is it to turn the tv off or program your tv to skip the channels you do not like?

  2. I'd trade violence for sex on TV anyday ... by Bryan+Ischo · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ... for me and for my kids. Better yet, don't censor the airwaves at all, just require a very thorough, detailed, and precise rating system, and enforce it. Then parents can decide what is suitable for themselves to view as well as their children, and nobody needs to step on anyone else's right to broadcast what they want or watch what they want.

    Also, I think that any program whose audience is intended to be children, should not be allowed to have commercials. This would protect kids from commercial interests and would have the side benefit of reducing the amount of insipid commercial programming that wastes kids' time and rots their brains and bodies (because producing such programming would no longer be profitable, and all that kids would be left with would be educational programming on PBS).

    Of course, there's nothing more important than responsible parenting, and that should be the first line of defense for children. But just because we want parents to be responsible doesn't mean that we shouldn't give them all the tools possible to be such, and provide as much of a safety net as possible for those kids whose parents are not responsible.

  3. Maybe I am too European, but ... by thomasj · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I find it more disturbing having my kids see guns on television than breasts.

    But, ... I am from Europe.

    --
    :-) = I am happy
    :^) = I am happy with my big nose
    C:\> = I am happy with my OS
  4. Funny how... by Transcendent · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ...we used to make fun of other countries (like in the middle east) because of how their government censored the public.

    Put another religious leader in the american government, and I guess we'll get the same result.

    </politeness>

    Why is the US so damn anal about nudity and violence? The mid east cuts off people's appendages on TV and normal public, Europe had free nudity on TV and on the beaches (Canadain women can even walk around topless)... but damned if someone curses or shows a little leg on my good ol' American Television!

  5. Re:The V-Chip by Bryan+Ischo · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Very true, but the V-Chip system is pretty weak.

    I work for TiVo and I implemented most of the "parental controls" functionality present in TiVo software. I can attest to the fact that V-Chip ratings are pretty hit-and-miss: some networks use them consistently, some don't. It's much worse with digital over-the-air broadcasts: even though the FCC has more control over over-the-air broadcasts, all the stations that I have seen very, very rarely broadcast ratings in their PSIP data.

    I am all for the V-Chip system because it gives parents the ability to restrict their kids viewing without actually controlling the content itself (V-Chip ratings simply augment the content and make it easier to determine ahead of time if the content is acceptable for a child to watch).

    But, I think that V-Chip ratings should be *much* more detailed, precise, and most importantly, UNIVERSALLY ENFORCED. And I think that the FCC should have the responsibility and power to force all broadcasters to very thoroughly and accurately rate their broadcasts.