Slashdot Mirror
FCC to Develop 'Super V Chip' To Screen All Content
An anonymous reader writes "The Senate Commerce Committee has stepped in and approved a legislation asking the Federal Communications Commission to 'oversee the development of a super V-chip that could screen content on everything from cell phones to the Internet.' Since the content viewed by children is no longer restricted to TV or radio Sen. Mark Pryor, D-Ark., the sponsor of the Child Safe Viewing Act, feels that the new law is necessary. 'The bill requires the FCC to review, within one year of enactment, technology that can help parents manage the vast volume of video and other content on television or the Internet. Under the 1996 Telecommunications Act, TV makers are required to embed the V-chip within televisions to allow parents to block content according to a rating system.'"
Why not just turn your children over to the government when they're born?
Parents today obviously have ZERO interest in spending time with their children and monitoring their activities and habits.
This is ridiculous.
Peace sells, but who's buying?
Unplug the TV.
..carpeting the whole world because we refuse to wear shoes instead.
It is our obligation, as adults, not to prevent the reality from reaching the senses of minors, but to provide adequate explanations and guidance. Those technical censoring measures are the result of the intention to avoid adult responsibilities, to "sweep the problem under the rug", so to say.
...except commercials.
I don't, I have a preteen kid. Among my friends almost nobody uses the V-chip. Infact half of them dont even know their TV has the V-Chip. And those who know find it a pain to set up thresholds and remember the password. The only person I know who knows how to use the V-Chip is my brother's 10 year old son. He is a remarkably curious boy who reads all the manuals and figures out things mainly to annoy the adults. He would set the V-chip threshold very low (or high, I dont know the parlance) and make his mom scream, in a strange mixture of admiration and admonition, "You make the TV play Law-and-Order now or I am going to ground you for a week!" and the boy would laugh and giggle.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
Does anyone not wonder what has happened to parental responsibility? I know what my kids watch on tv, movies they watch and what sites they visit on the internet, all without government intervention. This will just be another crutch for the negligent parents to use.
Speedy thing goes in; speedy thing comes out.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
No, it means that those who see it will be instantly identified and required to report to a local center for neuralization, then the Government will...er, ah, what was I saying. I forget. Never mind - look, it's stopped raining.
AT&ROFLMAO
So every form of content that exists will require a mandatory rating by some sort of standards body? Because, after all, that's how the V-chip works at the moment.
Yeah, good luck with that, folks.
Last night I went out to dinner with two close friends. As we watched, a mother semi-ignored her 4 or 5 year old girl as she cried and screamed and jumped up and down in a royal temper tantrum. It seems mom was too busy chatting with her friend to notice as the girl bellowed at the top of her lungs even as one of the waiters came over and offered the girl a balloon to silence the child. The mother occasionally glanced at the girl and said things like "It's okay." and "What's wrong?" then went right back to gossiping with her friend about what was going on at her job. This went on for 15-20 minutes until she finished her conversation and then all three left.
It's bad enough that some parents think that television is a babysitter. It's even worse that some feel the Internet is a more interactive babysitter. Now, it seems, your cell phone and ipod are capable of acting as babysitters.
Sadly, judging from my experience in the restaurant, technology might actually be a better babysitter than some parents...
This technology is all overkill anyway, and here's why:
To view content, you have to physically have access to a device that can display the content. As a parent, you should be able to remove that physical access for all 'locally controlled' devices; you can't prevent them from watching a friend's phone or whatever regardless of V-chips or whatever.
There is this thing called an 'off switch' and, failing that, circuit breakers.
You don't want them to have a phone, don't give them money to buy one. If they're old enough to get a job to afford their own, then they should already have the capacity to handle whatever content they can obtain anyway.
To me, these laws just take away responsibility and, with it, freedom from the general populace.
"There are a dozen opinions on a matter until you know the truth. Then there is only one." - CS Lewis (paraprhase)
This is the same Mary Pryor who is cosponsoring the Protecting Children from Indecent Programming Act.
Ah yes...one step closer to a society that takes no responsibility for anything their children do. I guess you could argue that using a technology such as a super V chip helps parents automatically filter content that they are concerned their kids will see. Unfortunately, as a computer tech, I see so many parents ask tech shops about spying software and filtering software so they don't have to actively monitor what their kids are doing. If a parent is worried with who their kid is chatting with online then they need to be involved and ask. Parents have built in monitoring called "looking". I know its a low-tech foreign concept but it works. If you are open and honest with your kids, actively talk to them about dangers, keep them using search engines that filter bad content by default (like google) and watching what they are doing and who they are talking to on the internet then things like this are not needed. But that would take too much responsibility I guess.
Sorry, but I disagree. It is our responsibility as adults to introduce children to reality as they are able to understand the explanations and guidance. A five-year-old is not likely to understand any possible explanation for a violent rape scene that he/she saw on TV. I'm really astounded that people think of the V-chip as censorship. Could somebody explain exactly how a screening tool that can be turned on or off by the owner is censorship? The V-chip is nothing more than a tool. It can be used for good and for bad. Good parents will carefully monitor what their children are watching (either to keep them away from inappropriate content or to explain questionable content). Bad parents will rely solely on the V-chip (a huge mistake) to allow them to shirk their responsibility. I have two children. I use the parental lock-down features on my cable box, but I also monitor what they are watching. The parental lock-down is nice because it cuts down on inappropriate content that may show up while I'm running through channels in the presence of my children. It also makes sure my eight-year-old isn't going to change channels to something that's not suitable for him (or his little sister) while I'm in the bathroom. But I'm also fully aware that it is not a substitute for responsible parenting. Some channels don't include rating informations for all shows (The Science Fiction channel and HDNet are two notable offenders), and the most questionable content comes from the commercials rather than the programming itself. Therefore, I make sure I'm there to explain behavior that is and is not appropriate. I like the V-chip as a tool, and nothing more. These laws aren't about mandating that people _use_ the V-chip. They are about making sure that it's available for those who _want_ to use it.
GreyPoopon
--
Why is it I can write insightful comments but can't come up with a clever signature?
Have you ever considered turning off the TV...sitting down with your children...and hitting them?
- Bender
____
~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey
Could somebody explain exactly how a screening tool that can be turned on or off by the owner is censorship? ... These laws aren't about mandating that people _use_ the V-chip.
True, but it is mandating (I think) that every adult has to pay for it, presumably in everything from computers to phones, which is still an issue. What's wrong with overseeing the development to make it available as an option to those who want it?
There's also the question of how they intend to implement a rating system for the Internet.
If you think so then YOU be in charge of vacuuming it.
You know, the real tragedy here is that we've had movable type printing presses for some 600-800 years, and still no one has come up with a rating system for books! How am I supposed to know what books are appropriate for my children or school district without some sort of letter grade system!? I am supposed to actually read all these books? Why, there must be 10's of thousands of them out there.
Obligatory User Friendly Strip
The snow doesn't give a soft white damn whom it touches. -- ee cummings
I don't see why the under-performers in our society need to get the biggest (relative) incentives to breed! Perhaps we should be giving at least the same incentives to child-bearing couples of every socio-economic class instead of cutting most of them off at the middle-middle-class mark.
Blar.