It’s not a new question, but it’s being asked with added urgency now that a report suggesting the FCC should and could regulate TV violence as closely as it does indecency, is believed to be circulating around the organization’s top brass. The report is said to support the claim that violence on television has an impact on children’s real-life behavior, and it supposedly argues that cable channels, as well as the broadcast networks, need proper policing during the hours when kids are most likely to be watching. If the FCC votes to take the report to Congress, you can expect the networks to pipe up (and to hear the phrase "slippery slope" a lot), but for now, they appear to be mum.
In what may not be a coincidence 24’s creators have announced that they’re cutting back on torture. Executive producer Howard Gordon tells The Philadelphia Inquirer, "What was once an extraordinary or exceptional moment is starting to feel a little trite. The idea of physical coercion or torture is no longer a novelty or surprise. It’s not something that we, as writers, want to use as a crutch. We’d like to find other ways for Jack to get information out of suspects….Our appetite has decreased. Personally, I think the audience may be tiring of it as well. My wife says it’s too much."
Interesting that 24’s producers should decide torture is a cliché the same week that the FCC threatens federal oversight of TV violence, not to mention the same week that the show has been targeted by complaints — from both human rights activists and top military brass — that the show’s torture scenes are influencing the behavior of U.S. interrogators. What do you think, PopWatchers? Does this mean TV can be trusted to police itself? If networks promise to tone down violence of their own accord, will that keep the government from intervening? Should the FCC step in anyway? Or Is it solely the parents’ responsibilty to shield their children from violent TV by learning to program their V-chips and blocking shows?
Comments (1-30) of 32 Add your comment
That’s why there are things like parental blocks. As long as the violence serves the story, I want to see it. I’m an adult. It’s MY decision. Not the FCC’s.
The FCC has no business regulating on-air content, and they certainly have no business regulating cable channels. This same administration was more than willing last year to have people appear on a panel with members of the 24 cast and crew when there was an opportunity to use the show to their own benefits. Now, they whine. There will always be individuals who cannot tell the difference between fiction fact — sometimes they even get to hold high office. I don’t think that the majority of us need to have our choices diluted because of those who want to lead fantasy existences.
Last time I checked, my TV came with a remote so I could regulate what I watch. I don’t like torture and violence, so I choose not to watch those shows (or hide under a blanket depending on the show).
Big Brother is getting very pushy!
I think its ridiculous when I watch Heroes and they should the cheerleader on an autopsy table with her chest ripped open and pinned back but God forbid if they showed a side boob shot of Nikki/Jessica.
In Europe violence and nudity is acceptable on public and cable television because kids don’t stay up that late, and if they did I am sure that their parents explain the difference between fantasty and reality. We don’t and if we do the percentage is very slim. I loved Little House on the Prarie, but if the FCC is going to make that type of show the standard, then I’ll just take out more books from the local library. Grow some cahones you guys!
What if, instead of having to affirmatively choose to block programs with violent content, individuals had to opt in? I’d like to see all televisions sold with V-chips enabled to block violent or adult programming. People could certainly freely choose to access certain shows, but the default would be blocked. Would this be a good way to ensure that kids don’t inadvertently see violent programming while leaving programming choices to the discretion of the market and individuals? (Caveat: of course some people will unblock everything and some kids will see violent shows. But there would be fewer of them than there are now, I think.)
The Vice-president doesn’t have a problem with torture.
If the fcc tries to get involved, that would be Jack Baur’s target next season. I don’t like the new tv violence, but I like this governments intervention even less.
I’m not a big fan of censorship, but if the FCC is going to be involved in deciding what’s allowed to be shown on TV, I would prefer they focus on violence rather than sex and language.
I am really sick about all this complaining about torture. I don’t enjoy watching it at all, so I turn my head or the channel when it comes on Lost or 24. Because these shows are GOOD. No one cries or complains when a horror movie comes out every week that involves tearing out eyeballs or tongues or setting up elaborate traps to kill people in the most painful way possible. Because they’re BAD. 24 just quite rightly won the Emmy for Best Drama, after Lost did a year ago. If you don’t like it, don’t watch! Why do people love to get offended? I am happy that 24 decided to change because they think it serves the story. I hope that is the real reason why. They certainly have earned that choice after 6 years.
This is a joke. We as a society should not be punished or limited based on a select few. If someone cant distinguish between right and wrong they will pay for it…its not televisions fault. If others are crying over it…its simple. TURN IT OFF. We have freedom of choice…allow us to use it.
It’s definitely the parents responsibility to control what their children watch (as much as possible). Some parents don’t want to do their job though so they leave it up to others to do it for them.
The drill scene in 24 wasn’t THAT bad. It’s not any different than seeing a 25 foot tapeworm being taken out of an awake patient.
This is stupid. I have a 1 yr old nephew that I babysit and if he’s here when 24 is on, then we turn on the Tivo and shut off the TV. I don’t need the FCC or the producers of 24 to edit what my nephew sees- that’s my job. Torture is necessary for this show to work and the average 24 viewer goes in it knowing this. I am grateful to the FCC when they try to protect me from Janet Jackson exposing herself on the Superbowl, because that’s not what I sign up for when I watch a football game. But come on FCC- torture on 24 is no surprise.
Huh? Just NOW the powers that be are realizing that there are violent, gory, and bloody shows on tv? Haven’t they WATCHED any tv in the past 15 years, the era of the crime procedural? Haven’t they ever seen an episode of NYPD Blue, the three Law and Orders, the three CSIs, Criminal Minds, The Shield, or the Sopranos? Apparently not. I’m also loving the fact that the show that they’re holding up as the prime example of gratuitious violence on tv is 24. The only thing that separates 24 from it’s tamer counterparts is it’s willingness to SHOW a gruesome act in action. I know they’re zeroing in on graphic acts, but ultimately, isn’t an assault or a murder on a show still an assault or a murder? Does the visual depiction really make THAT much of a difference? Isn’t it the STORY that matters? It’s facinating that some of our most violent shows, like 24, The Sopranos, and Rome, just happen to be well-written as well. And do their fans tune in solely to get a “blood rush”? I don’t think so.
Stupid FCC. I think it is completely a parental responsibility to regulate what their kids watch on TV! As for me, I’m an adult and should be able to watch whatever I want. Besides, I firmly believe TV can self-regulate because it will only show what is profitable – ie, what people are watching. So, if there’s something that the majority of people think is bad, it will be taken off the air quickly because it’s not profitable.
no
no
no
Come on people can turn off their tv’s.
No. I’m an adult, a responsible, creative, imaginative adult. I can handle the violence and see it as entertainment. If the FCC fears that people are so ill equiped to handle television programs, maybe it should take away the tv’s from those who object (clearly those people are lacking in intelligence.) But once the FCC goes down this macarthistic road, there’s not stopping it.
I do not believe the FCC should even exist in the first place. As a teenager, I am full aware that if a show is too violent or indecent for me, it is my privilege to either continue to watch that show or to change the channel. If a parent is not willing to care enough to mandate their own rules about TV without the government stepping in, shouldn’t they be doing a better job of raising their children?
First and foremost it’s our responsiblity as parents to monitor what our children watch and don’t watch and it’s our responsiblity to make sure our children know the difference between reality and fiction.
My suggestion: If you don’t like whats on – turn the channel because last time I checked there’s hundreds to choose from if you have cable or satelite – or there’s always the simple solution – Turn it off. Bottom line is that as parents/viewers you have control of the remote – not the FCC or the government.
On a curious note I would like to read this “report” to see how the FCC defines “increasing violent programming that is harmful to children” and see how they are suggesting it be regulated in a constitutional manner. I’d also be curious as to how their regulations would affect news media, documentaries, etc.
I’m glad the 24 producers cut down torture because of it being overly cliche on the show (which it was) instead of submitting to the FCC/boycotter’s wishes.
With that said, ever since Janet Jackson’s Superbowl incident, the FCC’s gotten crazy. Granted the nipple exposure isn’t exactly what anyone expects watching a Superbowl halftime show, but they used it as an excuse to censor as much TV/radio as possible afterward. Many people working behind [regular] radio these days admit to how much tougher it is now compared to a few years ago. They’re too worried about not uttering anything that’ll offend the FCC. The most notable victim was Howard Stern, who had to move his show to Sirius sattelite radio because of them.
After all that, why would anyone want them to regulate TV?
The FCC will regulate completely fictional acts of violence on television, but child molesters can freely roam this country in search of victims, can even live NEXT DOOR in some states. I say the government should look into regulating reality before they attempt to do so with fantasy.
This a free country supposedly! The government should not determine what people can watch. The people need to make that determination. It’s an easy choice…watch or do not watch. The government should not be doing a parent’s job. Parents need to do their own parenting. If you do not like what’s on TV, read to your kids. Censorship is simply unaaceptable.
Well, child molesters have to live next to someone, but that’s another story.
I agree with the people here. People should be able to turn off their TV if they don’t want to watch. I don’t want to hear excuses of not home, without knowledge, etc. If your kid is old enough to watch TV at night when the majority of these shows are on, they should be old enough to engage in a discussion about reality and proper societal behavior and values and laws.
I have the FCC’s cure: media literacy. Funny how 2 episodes of Buffy were pulled from air because a “higher power” was terrified that their topics would only further the events of Columbine. Both episodes aired later that summer when the school year had ended. If the war ever ends and torture becomes a mute point, will violence on 24 be acceptable because it can’t be replicated? Whether there is a vampire slayer killing demons, or an man torturing his brother by putting a plastic bag over his head, those afraid of free speech will always find a scapegoat to point their finger towards and say: “how is the media responsible” when the events occur in reality. The truth: they rarely find the time to point the finger at society. 24 didn’t create government torture, and the idea that it propagates it is insulting to society as a whole (although those who believe that merely insult their own intelligence). If society is disturbed by 24, they should spend more time wondering why scenes o
…If society is disturbed by 24, they should spend more time wondering why scenes of immense torture which are supposedly “too realistic,” are actually being allowed to occur in the REAL WORLD.
“Child molesters have to live next to someone”???????????? Do you want one for YOUR next door neighbor?
I think that it would be fair to assume that U.S. interrogators know the difference between television and reality. If, as some are claiming, such individuals model their behavior on what Jack Bauer, or any other TV character, does, then we have a problem. The issue would then not be “What is wrong with TV, that makes it so corrupting?” but rather “What is wrong with us, that we cannot separate fact from fiction?” As far as I’m concerned, censoring television in order to baby our military personnel is as ridiculous as banning Harry Potter to prevent the spread of witchcraft.
I remember (giving my age away here) tv’s groundbreaking moments and how eventually they chaptered in the modern era. What make them moments are that they were never done before. Here are some of the biggest ones; ‘All In The Family’ and political/social humor as a mid-season replacement, ‘Quincy’ dealing with the sex/murder of a child, ‘Magnum’ murders a bad guy. No big deal now, huh?
To yawn:
You misinterpreted what dipsy stated. She (he?) said that since most undiscovered (and some discovered) child molestors end up living like normal people somewhere, that means by default living standards, there’s a good chance they’re someone’s next door neighbors. Dipsy’s not saying it’s a good thing, but that’s a believable scenario.
Still, what does this have to do with the FCC? There’s little reason why you should be pushing your political agenda against pedophiles towards the FCC, who have no control over that kind of thing. Complain to your local government or the federal government, but not the FCC. I’m not knocking your opinion, but this is the wrong topic for such a discussion.
To t3hdow:My point is that the government should concern themselves with real threats to our society, not fictionally depicted ones. You misinterpreted MY comments,and BTW this is still a free country and we still have free speech,therefore I am merely exercising my right to state my uncensored opinion in a public forum while I still have that right.