NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote
By Mary Ann Banta Board Member, National Coalition on Television Violence Almost from its inception, television has attracted critics concerned with violence portrayed in prime-time and Saturday morning children's programs. Spokesmen for the broadcast industry took the position that television and the violence portrayed on television had no affect on behavior of the viewer. To many this was a strange position for an industry that was also selling commercial time with the specific intent to influence the viewer's purchasing behavior Both broadcasters and media activists have collected research data on the number of violent acts portrayed during entertainment programming and the effects of viewing television violence. More important, the industry conducted research and subscribed to rating systems to ascertain what people were watching.
Numbers were most important because network and station revenues were not impacted by the effects of television, but by the numbers of people of a specific age range (market segment) who were watching television. As time went on, it became clear to media researchers that no single study that points to television violence as a "cause" of aggressive or violent behavior, but that television is certainly a "contributing factor" to an individual's aggressive behavior and to the problem of violence in society. The research also pointed to two other effects: Developing insensibility to violence Developing an excessive fear of violence. Dr.
George Gerber described the latter as a "mean world syndrome" where the viewer perceives the world as more violent than it actually is. The summer of 1993 marked an important milestone for the issue of television violence. Due to the work of Senator Paul Simon (D-IL), the industry met and discussed the issue media violence with media activists. For the first time the industry leaders acknowledged that there may be some reason for concern. The broadcast industry and the cable industry both agreed to monitor their offerings for levels of violence.
While organizations such as National Coalition on Television Violence (NCTV) had been monitoring for years, the industries had tended to disregard these efforts as tainted. They assumed that groups concerned about television violence could not or would not conduct unbiased, reliable research. UCLA was chosen to monitor broadcast television, while Media scope was contracted to do the same for cable television. When their reports were issued, both found levels of televisions violence that corresponded to what had been reported by NCTV. Both reports also agreed that the level of violence was too high and much of what was broadcast was inappropriate for young children. Also, during the summer of 1993, Senator Kent Conrad (D-ND) began to organize a task force dealing with the issue of television violence.
Ultimately this group included both media activist groups and large national organizations like the American Medical Association and the National PTA. Initially the Senator's intention was not for legislative action but to merely put the broadcast and cable industry on notice that this was a serious problem and required action on their part. Rep. Edward Markey (D-MA) had been actively working for the passage of V-Chip legislation in the house.
Senator Conrad introduced the Children's Media Protection Act of 1995 in the Senate. As a result of their collaborative efforts a section of this proposed legislation, popularly known as the V-Chip legislation, became part of the Telecommunications Act. The law requires manufacturers to install a "V-Chip" in new television sets and requires that, if the networks establish ratings, they must transmit these ratings so they may be recognized by the V-Chip. The networks are urged to devise their own rating system within one year. The FCC is required to review the rating system devised and if the system is not established, or if the FCC rejects it, the FCC is permitted to choose a panel to develop a rating system for the networks. The law does not require the networks to APPLY the system, just to establish a system this may be a moot question.
If the cable industry uses a rating system, or if any one of the four broadcast networks use it public pressure would force the other networks to go a long with the rating system. The legislation requires insertion of microchip circuitry in new TV sets allowing parents to screen out shows that have been rated for No V-chip, per se, because nobody has had to make one, according to William Posner, president of EEG Enterprises Inc. as quoted by Roger Fillion (Reuters). The final product may not be a chip, but a modification of existing technology in TV sets, i. e. , the closed-captioning system. According to industry spokesmen, modification to the existing closed-caption to include the V-chip rating would not be difficult.
A rating code would be carried within an unused portion of the television signal, the black bar that appears when the horizontal hole on a television set goes out of whack and the picture rolls. It would be an improvement over existing technology that allows parents to block an entire channel, since the V-chip could automatically block selected programs. The Electronic Industries Association has been working on a V-Chip technical standard for more than 3 years. President Bill Clinton looks on the V-Chip as giving the remote control back to the parent.
The administration supported the V-Chip and has aided in the formation of a means to create a rating system. Senator Paul Simon, a long time critic of the industry, surprised and disappointed many when he opposed the concept of the V-Chip and the legislation, which incorporates it into new television set. In an article written for Business Wire and also in a speech on the floor of the Senate he argues that: The V-chip is no substitute for the industry disciplining itself In areas of high crime where children watch 50 % more TV, the V-chip would not be used Teenagers will find a way around the V-chip. They will see the programs at the homes of other children It will take years for the V-chip to be in all TV sets TV needs to be cleaned up now. Will the V-chip distinguish between gratuitous, glamorized violence and other types? Will broadcasters shy away form any programming deemed to be violent.
It will be a pro for cable and a negative for broadcast television. Yet it is broadcast television that has made the most progress in lessening violence. For 10 - to 14 - year-old males a negative rating will have drawing effect. Donald Wilson president of the American Family Association said the V-chip "sounds like a good step on the surface, but in the long run would absolve the entertainment industry of their responsibility. " Ted Turner, chief executive of Turner Broadcasting noted movies have become more violent, despite a rating system. He predicted that advertisers' concern would change the face of television: "I think it is going to result in more Brady Bunch-type programming. " In mid-January America On Line asked members whether they supported the concept of a V-Chip. Have the 24, 890 responses received, over 55 % said they supported the concept of a V-Chip, almost 40 % were against, and about 5 % did not care AOL stresses that this is not a scientific survey.
Many expressed concern over the government's intervention by requiring the industry to install the V-Chip, suggesting that it be optional. Others were concerned about the cost. The cable industry is receptive to an industry-devised rating system, perhaps because shows with coarse language, excessive violence, and sexually suggestive scenes are more common on cable than on broadcast television There are so many cable networks that the industry as a whole is less averse to labeling broadcast networks that rely on a "broader" audience than cable. The broadcasters rely on advertising for revenue, whereas cable revenue comes from subscriber fees and advertising. Brian Lowry of Variety quoted NBC West Coast president, Don Ohlmeyer, often. He says that the networks air relatively little violent p...
Free research essays on topics related to: national coalition, television violence, rating system, television set, v chip
Research essay sample on V Chip Television Violence
