Now the FCC is Scaring Me

[nkb]

Our kids see 1/2 hour of videos a day. So tv has not been a problem, yet. We are uber-responsible when it comes to the boob-tube. Of course we don't/wouldn't allow our children to turn on the tv without permission. But children sometimes do things WITHOUT permission whether forbidden or not. That's why we parents have this thing called 'consequences'. In the time it takes a child to turn on the tv and have the parent jump over and turn it off they still could have taken in some very inappropriate material. THAT is my whole point. If you really stand by the position that parents should be able to completely prevent this, then go ahead and tell me that pornography should also be on network tv. I suspect that you won't, because you differentiate between violent programming and pornographic programming. You probably consider 'two seconds' of violent programming to be an acceptable risk, whereas you would never want your child to potentially see two seconds of pornography. I consider both to be equally destructive and want the FCC to have standards that prevent this programming during primetime network tv.

For adults, let them watch this adult programming after primetime or watch it on cable. It has no place on the networks during primetime.

Anyway, I'm done. We can agree to disagree.

Then we both agree on child-rearing philosophies: Parents should shelter their children from potentially harming influences.

As far as pornography on TV goes, I don't have a problem with it. I don't think I am as uptight as a lot of people about sex, but that is a different discussion.
If pornography were on TV, my duties as a parent would be no different than pertaining to violent programming: I take full responsibility for what my kids can see in my house.

On a side note, I think you are exaggerating the effect that 2 seconds of questionable material has on kids. I highly doubt there is any negative effect to incidental exposure, as long as there is a responsible parent available at all times to explain, if needed. Do you think your daughter will turn to a life in porn, if she sees 2 seconds on TV? Do you think your son will turn into a violent killer from seeing 2 seconds of Saving Private Ryan?

As far as pornography on TV (or violent programming), I strongly believe that the market forces will take care of it. TV is based on ratings, which, in turn, determines ad revenue. If NBC decided to show porn in primetime, the hit in ratings (and advertisers pulling their money) would immediately be felt.
So, if the majority of people want to see certain programming (ie, ratings are high), then that is what should be shown. If individuals feel that programming is not appropriate for them or their family, they can choose to watch a different channel, watch a DVD, or not watch at all.

What a concept, freedom of choice!

 

[CokerRat]

I totally agree with Huckster. It isn't about us monitoring our kids (which of course we all faithfully do) but about society in general providing limitations that protect the children of those who are not such attentive parents. I cannot believe some of you consider your convenience and so-called "right" to watch this material more important than the psychological well-being of some children!! Of course it won't be your children...but come on, you know if it is aired, hundreds if not thousands of children across the continent WILL WATCH IT.

The real issue here is accessibility to this kind of material. Obviously dangerous (for lack of a better term) material is available in most homes... its on the DVDs on your shelves, on satellite or pay-TV channels, computers, etc. People know this and pay special attention to ensuring our kids don't get at it.

Network television, on the other hand, is considered a relatively "safe" source. Every home has it and there ARE a set of rules in place that say dangerous material will not be on television and peoples' experience watching TV supports this. This builds an expectation that the really bad stuff will not be on TV in primetime. Ergo, some people will allow their children to watch TV unmonitored. It's not right, but don't say it's not happening. Keep in mind that "children" are not just the really young kids... it can be just as traumatic for a 10-year old to watch gory violence.

If the rules changed, and the public knew there could be extreme violence or pornography on regular TV, then TV's would get locked up like liquor cabinets in most households. Some kids would still see it, but at least parents would know their obligation to prevent it, like we do internet access. However, that is not the case (yet) and it is not up to TV stations to decide to push the envelope in the name of ratings. Gee, that would be bad for business, wouldn't it.......

The bottom line is we all agree kids should not be watching this kind of material. The part you people are missing is that IF this is broadcast, some children WILL watch it because of the expectations people have for publicly available TV. Until you change those expecations, it's unacceptable to broadcast it in primetime. End of story.

 

[huckster]

Hey Cokerrat, nice summary of my position. You said it better than I.