Authors:
Michael Medved
Source:
USA Today; 04/19/2005
Section: News, Pg. 13a
"In the midst of ongoing debate about media standards, the general public seems unable to decide whether we should fear too much censorship -- or too little." (para 1)
"In a poll for its recent cover story "Has TV Gone Too Far?" Time magazine reported that 66% felt that officials had "overreacted" to Janet Jackson's "wardrobe malfunction" at the 2004 Super Bowl. Nevertheless, a clear majority of all respondents said there's still too much violence, profanity and sex on television, and more than half believe the Federal Communications Commission "should be stricter." " (para 2)
"Such examples highlight the need for significant revisions in the rating system, while pointing the way to a moderate reform to address concerns of worried families without raising fears of censorship. The PG-13 category needs rethinking and relabeling, since the typical PG-13 release now contains enough sexual content and rough language to have earned an R-rating 10 years ago. It's also problematic that many moviegoers, including 6-year-olds, can buy tickets to PG-13 fare without challenge." (para 8)
"As Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., has repeatedly suggested (echoing my own recommendation to the House Judiciary Committee in 1999), we could all benefit from a "universal ratings system" with broadcast TV, cable, movies, video games and music CDs all categorized according to the same formula. The right scheme should follow the movie system of G, PG, R-13 (replacing PG-13), R and NC-17. Applying these recognizable and voluntary designations across the board could help inform the public, making for more savvy, vigilant consumers of every sort of entertainment offering." (para 12)
good source. This brings up the issue of television and radio ratings and how they differ from movie ratings making it very confusing to decide what is good or not.
Sunday, March 25, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment