From Violence to V-Chip

It's not been a good month or so for the major US Networks.

It's not the continuing attrition of audience figures by cable.

It's not the dearth of new ideas that seems to strike every summer.

It's not even an outbreak of bloodletting in the ranks of middle-management.

For the first time, the audience has bitten back - on not one, but several fronts. And it's brought some big guns into the equation.

The V-Chip

For TV viewers outside North America, the V-Chip is a clever little doohickey that sits quietly inside your TV, jamming programmes you don't want your children (or your dog or your grandparents, or whoever) to see without your knowledge. It's a kind of remote-controlled on-off switch, which automatically cuts the TV off if a programme's rating exceeds a certain level.

The point at which it turns off is set by you. The rating of the programme is set by the by the broadcaster in accordance with a rating system set up by a committee established under Section 551 of the 1996 Telecommunications Act. Effectively, it enables you to deny access to any programme that doesn't meet with your approval.

By the end of 1999, every US TV set will have a v-chip option included (whether you then use it or not is up to you).

If you want to find out more about the v-chip, check out http://www.familysafemedia.com/frequentl... for the answers.

Quite understandably, networks are less than pleased at TV's having anything in them which might lower the viewing figures. And sure enough, earlier this month the Republican Chairman of the Senate's Commerce Committee, John McCain, wrote a letter to FCC boss William Kennard to ask if the broadcasters are doing their ratings properly.

Because if the ratings aren't correct, then the little doohickey doesn't know when it should be switching your TV set off.

Which (a) defeats the object, but (b) doesn't lose the network any viewers.

Senator McCain wants an investigation into reports that a substantial amount of programming remains un-rated.

As can be imagined, the last thing the networks want is Washington breathing down their necks, and, worse still, bringing in tougher legislation to enforce the rules.

Gun Law

As if that wasn't enough, Washington came within a hairsbreadth of finding Hollywood as a whole responsible for every violent act in America today. As a result of the Columbine tragedy, some hard questions were asked by the nation's legislature - and rightly so. Are TV and movies too violent? Are our children de-sensitised by constant exposure to acts of mayhem on the screen? Does Hollywood NEED to show violence so graphically? Hollywood says it will institute a system of self-regulation to tone down on-screen violence where necessary. Only time will tell how effective that will be.

Go To Page: 1 2