During a three-year trial run starting in October, shows will carry an age-group distinction and content ratings of 'V,' 'S,' 'L' or 'D' - indicating violence, sexual content, coarse language and suggestive dialogue. Children's shows and popular cartoons could also receive an 'FV' rating for depicting consequence-free fantasy violence. The previous system rated programs according to their estimated age-appropriateness. However, rating a program for a 14-year-old belies the fact that children mature at different rates - some may be able to understand adult themes or the consequences of violence at younger ages. The new system is more explicit than its predecessor; it rates content rather than relying on subjective evaluations of maturity. However, vestiges of the old system's problems still exist.
One of the networks' main concerns is the likelihood that politicians and advertisers could misuse the new rating system and dictate television programming. Members of Congress have already proposed bills to dedicate certain hours exclusively to "family shows" and to dictate that shows with a violence rating are aired only after 10 p.m. In this position, the liberties and First Amendment freedoms that network programming deserves could be jeopardized.
Vice President Al Gore excitedly discussed how the changes would grant parents control over their televisions. Imagery of the nuclear family gathering to watch television is outdated. Even with a new rating system, working parents fight a losing battle with their TV sets. Ratings are only a misleading comfort device.
Families should not rely on the ratings system to guide their children - it is not an adequate tool to discriminate between good and bad television. High-quality shows that utilize violence may be marked with the same ratings that poorer-quality ones would receive. Consequently, the new system promotes a false security that children are exposed to "better" television. Parents should take responsibility for what their children watch by taking time to discuss programs with their children or watch with them. They should not abuse the rating system as a way to justify television as a babysitter - there is no substitute for a parent's role.
Developing a rating system in hopes of improving the quality of television programs is like firing at a target without aiming. Ratings cannot - and should not - change television. What they probably will so is make parents believe their children are insulated from televised violence and sexual content. Assigning a program a letter-rating does nothing to determine children's emotional readiness to handle the underlying themes - that must be left to their parents. Relying on television ratings to protect children will not work - parents must invest time to ensure that children understand what they watch.
07-16-97
should be sent to: daily.letters@umich.edu | should be sent to: online.daily@umich.edu |