Fantasy ratings

Given the dual job of policing itself and of entertaining the nation’s children, the television industry once again has shown itself to be an indifferent cop and a somewhat malevolent nanny.

For each of the last three years, the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania has conducted an exhaustive survey of children’s TV, analyzing the content of more than 1,000 broadcast and cable programs. This year’s survey, described in a report released Monday, was anticipated as highly telling, it being the first conducted under television’s in-house rating system for violence and the new federal “three-hour rule” requiring a minimum daily dose of educational and informative programming.

On both counts, the industry’s performance was dismal. Despite growing concerns about the amount and type of violence foisted upon children, Annenberg found violent content actually increased last year. Worse, most of the increase was in the “FV” (fantasy violence) category, depictions that do not convey the real-life consequences of violence. Worse still, most of that programming was targeted at the highly impressionable 5 to 11 age group.

Further, parents who expected to find ample warning in television listings were betrayed by the industry’s self-serving attempt at self-regulation. Annenberg found that three-quarters of the children’s programs that contained three or more violent scenes per half hour were not given the FV rating.

From a business perspective, the industry has good reason not to label its violent offerings as such. The next generation of sets will come equipped with the v-chip, a device by which parents can block FV programs. Clearly, the industry does not want to block its own programs out of American homes and fudging on the ratings is a lot easier than offering better programs.

Annenberg also found that, while the industry was meeting and often exceeding the Federal Communications Commission’s new rule requiring at least three daytime hours of educational and informative programming, barely 25 percent of programs the industry labelled E/I provided even a minimal amount of enlightenment. In other words, there still are plenty of TV executives who believe “The Flintstones,” in addition to being somewhat amusing, serves as a good introductory course in anthropology.

The study also found that programming aimed at teens has increased. That would be good if those programs focused upon helping teens understand the conflicts, stress and uncertainties of that difficult age. That would be bad if those programs merely filled the airwaves with more violence, harsh language and sexual innuendo. Guess which?

For years, the television industry, enjoying the benefits of using bargain-priced public airwaves, has resisted any attempt by government to regulate content, saying the private sector can protect the public interest. So which network is the only one to get a passing grade (straight A’s, no less) from Annenberg? Not NBC, CBS, ABC or Fox — it’s PBS, the only broadcaster that, due to its government support and fund-raising campaigns, is directly answerable to the public.

It’s easy to say children watch too much TV and, anyway, parents should supervise them better. And that would be a valid point if the problem was with kids staying up to watch shoot-em-up skin flicks on late-night cable. The problem here, though, is with programming specifically developed for and marketed to kids, and then intentionally mislabelled. In the real world, businesses that successfully regulate themselves do it with honesty and diligence. They don’t do it way in TV Land.