Regulation, Shmegulation
Posted by Kyle
April 25th, 2007 at 04:00pm
In All Things TV
As Dan posted this morning, the FCC wants to be able to regulate violence on TV. They already have naughty words and naughty pictures, but they don’t currently have the power to fine evil broadcasters for showing people hurting each other.
Why does the FCC want this power? It’s because somebody has to protect our children. As everyone knows, there were no bad things in the world before the invention of television, and if children weren’t constantly exposed to images of violence or sex, the world would be restored to its prelapsarian perfection.
Ok, that’s a straw man, but my real point is, why should we all have to suffer just because parents don’t want their kids seeing bad stuff? Yeah, kids shouldn’t watch 24. I’m not sure anyone should watch it anymore, but the show has never been suitable for children. There are lots of ways parents can keep their kids from watching shows they find objectionable. They can use the V-chip, which apparently is built into all new TVs, and many cable boxes, although apparently nobody’s using it. The truth is though, even the most vigilant parents can’t stop kids from watching the content they want to watch. If we’d had a V-chip in my house when I was a kid, I would have had to show my mom how to set it up.
So if we can’t stop these wily kids from watching bad stuff, does that mean we need more regulation and fines to solve the problem? No!!!! I mean, it’s hard enough dealing with the FCC now when all they have control over is sex and bad words. What kind of artificial demarcations will we get with violence? Is it OK to show a fist-fight, but only if there’s no blood? If an on-screen explosion kills dozens of people is it safe as long as we don’t see any bodies? Can a gun be fired on camera? Do you really want the government to make these decisions for you?
And to make matters worse, they want to expand oversight to cable TV. Now, everyone knows that cable television is one step away from showing man-on-dog orgy/snuff films, and they get away with it because (and this is so sneaky) people choose to pay for the privilege to watch cable TV. Any innocent can accidentally turn on a television that is accidentally hooked up to an antenna receiving broadcast signals, so we can’t allow filth over the air, but you actually have to jump through quite a few hoops and pay a hefty fee to choose to receive cable programming. If you don’t want that stuff on your TV, you can stop paying your bill, and it will magically go away.
One potentially good thing to come out of this would be a la carte pricing. The argument is, “yeah I pay for cable, but I only want EWTN and Nickelodeon. It’s the evil cable company that makes me get all these filthy channels like FX.” I can see that point. I have about 7,000 cable channels. I probably watch 15 of them. And 5 of the ones I want to watch don’t come in at all thanks to our deadbeat cable company, Time Warner Cable. Now, if I could save some money by only paying for the 15 channels I want, that would be great news. If the cable companies are only forced into it to stave off the threat of content regulation, oh well.
You know, I just spent all this time pontificating, when The Onion has already done it so much better with satire: Study Finds Cable-TV Violence Leads To Network-TV Violence.
“why should we all have to suffer just because parents don’t want their kids seeing bad stuff?”
God, I hate the FCC. My question is, why should we all have to suffer just because some people can’t/won’t parent their kids? If you don’t want your kid watching Nip/Tuck or Queer as Folk or 24 or 7th Heaven, of all things, don’t let them. It shouldn’t be the government’s responsibility to parent your kids.
And if they do impose regulations, like not showing blood in a fight, that’s even worse. Disconnecting the consequence from a violent action is what people were complaining about way back when they said Power Rangers was making small kids go all WWE on each other. If someone punches another person in the face, there should be blood, and revolting crunching noises from broken cartilage and metacarpals. For my part I think cartoonish violence is much more influential (and imitative) than the realistic kind. But that doesn’t mean I shouldn’t be able to watch Battlestar Galactica (which I don’t recall being all that graphically violent, but maybe I’m just numbed by zombie movies) because some stupid people let the TV babysit their kids.
/rant.
Yeah, that Battlestar Galactica example in the article seemed out of place. Although, it did contain one of the most violent acts in the history of television (the near-complete destruction of the human race). The whole show is really about dealing with the consequences of violence.
I am so upset by this whole issue of kids being kept in a protective bubble, I have trouble forming actual thoughts. Coincidentally, earlier today I had to talk to someone on the phone who had a problem with a book my company published, and by the end of the conversation (where I could do nothing but say “mmm-hmm. yeah. uh-huh” to his disapproval of our decision to publish bad words in a book for teenagers) I was shaking, I was so mad. He lost me completely when he actually said to me “what with things like Columbine happening, and West Virginia, you have a moral responsibility not to expose children to bad things, because these things directly contribute to where the country is now.” WHAT? I have a responsibility to do WHAT??? Are you telling me a TEEN NOVEL is the major problem here? SERIOUSLY? But I couldn’t say anything. It hurt my brain.
Why do some people think that popular culture is out to get them? Why can’t they just ignore/avoid what they don’t like instead of crusading to have it removed from the face of the earth?
It’s like the recent incident with Mike Daisey. He’s a monologist who uses a lot of bad words. A school group ended up at one of his shows somehow not knowing about his filthy mouth. They left in the middle of the show, which would have been fine, that sort of thing happens. But one of the chaperones decided to go on stage and pour water on Daisey’s handwritten notes, which are the original text of his performance. Daisey actually tracked him down a few days later and talked to him on the phone. He has a fascinating account of the whole thing on his blog.
ah yes. let’s not expose our children to bad things. that will make being a grown up SO much easier for them. because if you don’t know bad things happen, they will never happen to you! hooray!
i am reminded of the time an angry parent tore out a page of one of our books that showed a girl refusing to eat her veggies. because having an negative opinion about broccoli is ten times worse than DESTROYING A BOOK. jesus.