[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
In a message dated Fri, 1 Jun 2001 4:47:10 AM Eastern Daylight Time, "Joseph Pappalardo" <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
<< I don't think it's a case of either blame one or the other.is too extreme....
Of course parents DO have responsibilities.
But television does too.
To say that it's all one or all the other
But to ignore the influence that broadcasters DO have,
and to deny them any responsibilies for what they air is somewhat foolhardy. >>
Watching television is a choice. Many families place strict restrictions on the amount of television they watch and/or the content which they view. The TV is merely a life option; being a parent is not.
You mention the responsibility which TV has. Broadcast stations which are licensed by the FCC do have to prove they meet "community standards," or whatever the wording is nowadays. However, there are no such regulations for cable television stations. They are not occupying bandwith on a limited spectrum like broadcast networks. Beside, from what I understand MTV has aired a disclaimor at the beginning of the show (and maybe at the end, too). MTV should not be held responsible for the idiotic behavior of a few individuals when many more people are watching the show yet not doing these things.
This also reminds me of an instance a few years ago where a movie (it may have been "Varsity Blues" though I believe this film predates it) showed high school football players trying to be macho and lay down in the middle of the street and let cars pass on top of them. I believe someone was killed or seriously injured and eventually sued the film maker. Should the movie studio, producers, actors, etc., be responsible for one person's behavior?
Parents absolutely do have other responsibilities. However, if they give their children somewhat of a base from which to work re: common sense and morality, constant supervision and worrying about what they may be watching isn't necessary.