TV Violence Summit: A War of Words : Television: Industry resists censorship and demands a definition of ‘violence,’ but one executive producer claims colleagues are already feeling a ‘big chill’ effect.

As the TV industry’s ballyhooed “summit meeting” on violence in entertainment programming wound down Monday at the Beverly Hilton, focusing on a subject that has swirled into a heated national debate, the kind of emotional moment that often crystallizes such an event finally took place.

Dr. Carole Lieberman, chair of the National Coalition on Television Violence, a citizen’s watchdog group, was calling the TV industry to the carpet for not caring enough about impressionable children. Suddenly, independent producer Edgar J. Scherick jumped to his feet in the crowd and shouted angrily: “Lady, who authorized you to condemn us?”

The audience burst into applause, and when the conference ended a few minutes later, people formed a long line to shake Scherick’s hand.

“You spoke for all of us,” one woman told him with a beaming smile.

The moment seemed to encapsulate the frustration of an industry that has been under attack for months and demonstrated the difficulty of trying to reach accord on such a volatile issue.

Although there was plenty of verbal sparring and heated dialogue throughout the day, the issues that dominated the discussion, which was meant to be educational, were nothing new to most of the 600 or so television people in attendance.

“I’ve heard all this stuff before,” shrugged Stephen J. Cannell, producer of such action series as “Hunter,” “The A-Team” and the current “Renegade.”

Under pressure from Congress, which is threatening to force a reduction in TV violence if the industry does not act on its own, industry executives gathered with researchers and anti-violence activists in what was billed as an unprecedented meeting to figure out how to deal with TV violence. But when a panel of researchers finally presented their findings--the same findings Congress has been citing to press its case--there did not seem to be much impact.

“I’m afraid we’re having no effect,” a frustrated Dr. Leonard Eron, research scientist and professor of psychology at the University of Michigan, said after his morning panel session with three other colleagues.

There were occasional snickers in the crowd and heads shaking in disbelief during portions of the researchers’ presentation--specifically when suggestions were made that children cannot always distinguish between cartoon violence and real violence.

“I feel people (TV industry executives) are being very defensive here,” Eron said with a sigh. “A number of people are denying the tremendous effect (of viewing violence). They all agree with each other. We’re not going to get anywhere if people are going to explain it away.”

From the industry executives, there was a similar sense of frustration that the researchers were not distinguishing between the types of programming they were calling violent.

“I was dismayed this morning to hear researchers lump in theatrical movies like ‘I Spit on Your Grave’ with TV movies,” said Ted Harbert, president of ABC Entertainment. Harbert maintained that the broadcast networks have already cut down on gratuitous violence. They have also adopted voluntary guidelines and agreed to affix parental advisory warnings to programs that they deem to contain a heavy dose of violence.

Citing a study released last week showing that TV violence on ABC, CBS and NBC has dropped, Harbert said: “Part of me wishes this forum were held 10 years ago, when there were so many cop dramas with chase scenes and shootouts. There’s just less violent programming today.”

Geraldine Laybourne, a conference panelist and president of the children’s cable channel Nickelodeon, noted the challenge in bringing two such disparate groups together: “It’s very difficult for academics, who spend their whole life studying an issue, to present to businessmen, who have a thousand details on their mind,” she said. “It’s very hard to get the academic and television community to hear each other.”

Indeed, many of those expecting to learn something new at the conference said they didn’t.

“The four experts could not agree on what TV violence is,” said Don Ohlmeyer, president of NBC, West Coast. “Everyone’s against TV violence. I’m against TV violence. But what is it?”

“For me, there’s not a whole lot of new information here,” said Kerry McCluggage, chairman of Paramount Pictures Television Group. “But for the industry, it’s the important beginning of a process.”

The TV industry had regarded the violence conference, hosted by the National Council for Families & Television (NCFT), as a consciousness-raising effort.

But Sen. Paul Simon (D-Ill.) upped the stakes when he dropped a bombshell during his keynote luncheon speech, calling for the formation of an independent Advisory Office on Television Violence to develop a uniform set of standards on violence and report to the industry on an ongoing basis about how it is meeting those standards. He gave the industry 60 days to “show some movement” in creating such a “monitoring group,” or else risk legislative action from Congress.

“This whole thing is frightening,” Greg Meidel, president of Twentieth Television, said after the luncheon. “That timetable is unrealistic. It’s not fair that the four networks and syndication should be forced to respond to something from the clear blue sky like that. The networks should be given credit for the changes that have been made.”

Simon’s announcement even came as a surprise to the event’s organizers. NCFT vice chair Geoff Cowan, a public-interest lawyer and lecturer on mass media and law at UCLA, expressed skepticism over a violence monitoring group, saying that it’s too reminiscent of the Hays Code, an industry-imposed set of moral guidelines that governed Hollywood filmmakers from 1934 through 1968.

“I think a single industry panel could become too powerful and a form of censorship on its own,” he said.

There was a feeling among some that Simon’s strong words were merely a tactic to keep Hollywood from dropping the ball on TV violence, as critics say has happened whenever controversy about the issue has flared in the past.

“I think already a lot has been done and his concern is that now it will stop,” said Howard Stringer, president of the CBS Broadcast Group. “Ultimately, Simon is telling us, ‘I have come to you on your terms, now deal with it in your way.’ ”

When asked if his strong words Monday were meant to put a scare in Hollywood, Simon responded: “I do have a concern that this next year we’ll have better programming, and then in a year we’ll go back to the old ways. What I’m trying to do is see that we have a sustained effort and interest in this issue.”

There were clear signs Monday that Hollywood ways are indeed changing. Executive producer Leonard Hill referred to a “big chill” effect among his peers because they have been turned down by the networks recently when pitching projects that might carry a parental advisory label. Networks executives confirmed that they are ordering fewer crime-based TV movies.