Clinton Backs Device to Block Adult TV Fare

President Clinton, saying that he is seeking practical measures to curb offensive material in entertainment, announced Monday that he supports requiring television sets to carry a device that could block adult programs and urged Hollywood to undertake “voluntary initiatives” to improve programming.

Speaking to a conference on entertainment and family values, Clinton staked out a position in calibrated contrast to that of Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole (R-Kan.), who is seeking the GOP presidential nomination. In May, Dole denounced the industry for producing “nightmares of depravity.”

The President said that he, too, believes “there’s too much indiscriminate violence, too much indiscriminate sex and too much . . . callous degradation of women” on television.

Yet simply denouncing Hollywood is not productive, said Clinton, who, unlike Dole, has urged cooperation with, rather than condemnation of, the entertainment industry. “The question is . . . what are we all going to do about that?” he said.

Clinton said that he believes offensive content on television can be brought under control through voluntary restraints on the part of the industry, plus technological advances, such as the “v-chip,” a device that would allow parents to block adult-rated programming.

“We need a systematic debate there about what we don’t do and what we do do in our regular programming,” the President said.

“If we’re going to change American culture, we have to somehow change the media culture--and we have to do it without finger-pointing.”

Clinton has long criticized the entertainment industry for excessive violent and sexual content, especially in television programs watched by children. But he has carefully sidestepped confrontation and sought to address the issue through cooperation with the industry--hoping, in effect, to achieve results with honey instead of vinegar.

Indeed, speaking Monday after some members of a panel of experts had been harshly critical of television producers, Clinton went out of his way to praise purveyors of children’s programming, including the Fox television network, which also carries some of the steamiest adult programs.

Clinton, like most prominent Democrats, has long relied on Hollywood for major campaign contributions. During the four years from 1991 through 1994, top entertainment industry figures gave almost $6 million to Clinton and other Democrats--and less than $1 million to Republicans.

The President offered no specific suggestions on how the industry might undertake voluntary efforts to curb violence and sexual content, but his remarks served notice that Democrats as well as Republicans intend to keep pressure on the issue.

But Clinton did endorse two specific measures: He renewed his support for continued federal funding of the Public Broadcasting System, and he announced, for the first time, his backing for the v-chip measure before Congress.

Under the v-chip proposal, every new television set would include a device allowing parents--or anyone else--to block programs with adult content. Broadcasters and cable systems would be required to institute a rating system similar to the one used for feature films. Adult-rated programs would carry an inaudible signal that would trigger the v-chip to black out the screen.

Entertainment executives have opposed the v-chip as an unwarranted intrusion on broadcasting freedom. But Clinton rejected that complaint.

“This is not censorship; this is parental responsibility,” he said.

The Senate passed the proposal last month as part of a massive telecommunications bill--over the opposition of Dole, who complained that the v-chip law was a step toward “government control of what we see here on television.” The House has not yet considered the proposal.

“If only 2% of the families in America used the v-chip actively, then all of a sudden the market calculation for all producers would change dramatically,” Vice President Al Gore said. “They would have to calculate how many viewers they would lose if they crossed a certain boundary line.”

Most panelists at the meeting, an annual conference on family issues over which Gore has presided for the last three years, also supported the v-chip idea.

Indeed, one prominent media scholar, Neil Postman of New York University, advocated going further. Noting that the average American child sees 650,000 television commercials by age 20, Postman suggested “a v-chip where a parent could just cancel out all of the commercials.” Clinton, Gore and a dozen assembled entertainment and advertising executives responded with decidedly nervous laughter.

One speaker was actor Tom Selleck, who said that the industry should welcome a chance to act more responsibly. “We all too often circle the wagons and holler censorship. Hollywood’s caring parents . . . need to engage in the debate.”

Jack Valenti, chairman of the Motion Picture Assn., admitted that the movie industry has produced “programs that are meretricious, tawdry, profane.” But he argued that no regulations could work unless parents fortify their children with lessons on values.

“I don’t agree,” Gore said, arguing that restraint by the industry could be helpful even for children who are not taught values in the home.

But that was a rare moment of confrontation in a session devoted more to a search for common ground.

“We’re not trying to put the rap on the media for violence, for drug abuse, for premature sexual activity . . . “ Gore said. “There are lots of good, positive benefits that come from the media.”

* CENSOR-CHIP: A look at the ‘v-chip.’ D1