SCREEN-L Archives

July 1997, Week 4

SCREEN-L@LISTSERV.UA.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Mime-Version:
1.0
Sender:
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Blake Thompson <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 23 Jul 1997 19:11:15 -0600
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
7bit
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Reply-To:
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (58 lines)
> >How can sex and violence be limites?
 
The better question here is, "Should sex and violence be limited?"  But
even before asking that, one must define 'sex and violence.'  An article
in the Atlantic Monthly, May 97, discusses an organization that counts
instances of violence.  It's definition of terms is highly controversial
because by their reckoning, the Laugh-In 25th anniversary special was
"very violent" due to numerous pratfalls and slapstick.  At any rate, the
article may help you consider these issues.
 
 
>
> >Could tv stations be forced to put programs on late at night?
>
 
 
Legally, yes.  The FCC could make all manner of regulations to regulate
content on television.  But doing so would be politically unpopular with
viewers and, more importantly, advertisers with big cash and political
influence.
 
 
>
> >Which is a better approach to limiting tv violence?
> >1. v-chip or laws to limit violence on tv of
> >2. commitment on the part of the parents to morally guide the children
> >on their selection of tv programs.
>
 
 
The second option here would not so much 'limit' tv violence; it
instead puts the responsibility of limiting the access of children to tv
violence upon parents, rather than legislators or regulators.  This is by
far the most sensible route.  One of the factors
the Supreme Court discusses at length in the recent internet case was
parental conrol over access.  The Court noted that past rulings on
regulating the access of children from pornography allowed parents to
decide what the child may and may not see.  Regarding tv, parents
ultimately are the ones whether their 16-yr-old gets to watch
the Playboy Channel or Faces of Death or whatever.  Using v-chip
technology -- or Web Site blocking technology -- is a tool to be used
by the parent to enforce the decision, but gov't should stay out of the
decision itself.
 
 
Blake Thompson
[log in to unmask]
 
 
--
Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend; inside of a dog,
it's too dark to read.
        -Groucho Marx
 
----
Online resources for film/TV studies may be found at ScreenSite 
http://www.sa.ua.edu/screensite

ATOM RSS1 RSS2