From: To: A16.A16(kidstv) Date: 10/10/95 4:50pm Secretary:FCC Critics today are worried that violence and sex on television is warping the sence of reality of today's youth. That it is distorting and changing the morals or our young ones. This may yet be correct, or it may not. According to the U.S. News World Report, the amount of violence on television has been decreasing over the past two years. It also states that the amount of sex on the toob is increasing. In a study by Monique Ward, a postdoctoral fellow in education at UCLA, she states that among the most popular shows for ages 12 to 17(1992-93), on the average 29% of all interactions involved sex talk of some kind. Is this good or bad? Many shows like "Beverly Hills 90210" have acts of sex or violence in them, but at most times they happen for a purpose, to teach a lesson. That lesson is not go out and have sex, it is normally about safe sex or what one should do if raped. It deals with these issues in a respectful and morally correct way. I there is a problem with biolence and sex on television, the major problems are the afternoon talkshows. These programs show children that are sexually active at ten and eleven years old; Children that have sex with their sibling's partner. Watching programs like these are where kids get their ideas from. Kids can not relate with a cartoon character, but a child at home watching "Geraldo" can certainly relate to the young teenager conversing on the talk show. She started having sex at twelve and she gets on TV for it. Therefor, it must be ok. The problem lies in the afternoon television, not prime time. At night, most parents are home and watch "NYPD Blue, 90210 and Melrose Place" with their kids. It is at 3 or 4PM that the parents are not there to regulate or to watch the programs with their children and that is the time that the talk shows thrive. It seems that a solution wouold be to move talk shows to a later time or perhaps have a warning that the show may contain material unsuitable for children. Networks are listening to the cries of parents all around the country, demanding less violence and less sex. The Mtv cartoon "Beavis and Buthead" was moved to a later time because parents complained about the unnecessary violence and obscenities. There are also plenty of nice, wholesome shows for children to watch, and most of them are in the top ten every week. There is "Seinfeld" and "Friends" on Thursdays with reruns of "Seinfeld" running every night. Contrary to popular belief, the show "Roseanne" is a very family oriented show with good writing as well as morals. Shows such as "ER" and "Chicago Hope"(two personal favorites) have great acting, and the plot surrounds doctors saving peoples lives, what is more moral than that. Great new cartoons are on every weekday afternoons as well as on weekends. "Animaniacs," "The X-Men," "Loony Toons," "The Adventures of Batman and Robin," and "Gargoyles" are great examples. Warner Brothers new WB network is trying to fill the 8 to 9PM slot with family friendly programs. For example the upcoming cartoon series called "Steven Speilberg Presents Pinky and the Brain"(this show is a regular 10-12 minute skit in the "Animaniacs" cartoon). A very funny show about two lab mice(one smart and one dumb) whose objective is to take over the world. Those who still are not swayed can take heart in a neat little device called the V-Chip. Both houses of Congress have supported the legislation requiring all new TV sets be equipped with a chip enabling parents to block violent programs. It is very simple to impliment this device. The problem is deciding which shows should have a V for violence. Is violence in "M*A*S*H" the same as violence in "NYPD Blue" or "Melrose Place"? None the less, the V-Chip is still a few years away, and for now the networks don't want to cooperate. Until the chip is implemented, it is up to the parents to regulate what their children watch, as it should be. Jason Friedman jfried1@ic3.ithaca.edu CC: FCCMAIL.SMTP("massmedia@liber.ithaca.edu")