TV Ratings Likely to Be More Precise on Age Than MPAA

The entertainment industry group charged with devising a ratings system for television is planning to create several more age-based categories than the familiar movie ratings code on which it is being modeled, executives involved in the discussions say.

While no precise definition of categories has been reached, sources say the TV ratings system will probably divide the PG and PG-13 classifications for theatrical films into narrower gradings (PG-4, PG-8 and PG-11, for example)--indicating a warning to parents that shows might contain material unsuitable for children 4 and younger, 8 and younger and so on.

How many categories there will be remains to be determined by the group over the next several months. It expects to consult child-development specialists on topics such as the ages at which children can differentiate between fantasy and reality, although executives emphasize that the industry will make the final decisions on devising and administering the ratings system.

Broadcasters say they believe that most of what is on the major networks now would be rated G, PG or PG-13 under the Motion Picture Assn. of America guidelines. Splitting into more categories would provide more information for viewers and, executives theorize, would keep parents from blocking out virtually everything on television that wasn’t G or PG.

This outline emerges from the first confidential meetings of an implementation committee that will be meeting about every two weeks to create the industry’s first ratings system--agreed to only after Congress and President Clinton enacted legislation mandating the inclusion of a computer device in TV sets, the so-called V-chip, that could be used to block out objectionable programming. The industry was faced with developing a ratings system for the V-chip itself or accepting one created by the government.

*

The working group, composed of about 20 representatives from the broadcast networks, cable television and Hollywood studios, has met twice since the Feb. 29 White House summit at which entertainment moguls promised Clinton they would have the ratings ready by January.

After some discussion about whether to include cartoons and talk shows, the group has reached consensus that TV distributors will rate everything except news and sports. Defining exactly what constitutes news programming, however, will be problematic.

“We’ve agreed to rate soap operas and entertainment talk shows as well as prime-time programming,” Jack Valenti, the president of the MPAA, said in an interview this week. “But is ‘Hard Copy’ news? And what about a newsmagazine such as ‘Dateline NBC’? That’s one of the questions we’ll have to deal with.”

Valenti, who is spearheading the industry’s effort and is seeking to build consensus around the points on which executives can agree, said that the working group will look at a ratings system currently being tested in Canada. But it is unlikely to recommend the Canadian system, which includes categories for sex, violence and language, with numerical gradations in each.

Whatever categories the group comes up with, however, defining what action or behavior results in a specific rating will be its most difficult work. Issues that have to be resolved include differentiating between cartoon violence and actual violence, or between the sexual activity in daytime soap operas and the sexual remarks that many parents find offensive in sitcoms at 8 p.m.

“Soap operas are probably going to get a fairly negative rating because of their sexual content,” said one executive involved in the talks. “But we haven’t gotten to the point of saying what kind of rating ‘Friends’ [NBC’s popular comedy] would get or how you’d rate double-entendre remarks on ‘Cybill’ [the CBS comedy]. And we haven’t talked about context--how you deal with the blood on ‘ER’ or the content of a film like ‘Schindler’s List.’ ”

That’s exactly what worries “Law & Order” executive producer Dick Wolf and other critics of the TV ratings concept. “ ‘Law & Order’ lost $800,000 in ad revenue when we dealt with the bombing of an abortion clinic on the show,” Wolf said. “This will hurt all of the 10 o’clock dramas--’ER,’ ‘Chicago Hope’ and others--because advertisers will simply shun the worst-rated shows, regardless of content.”

Broadcasters share Wolf’s concern about the potential stigmatizing effect of labels. “We are going to have to educate advertisers about the ratings system once it is adopted,” said NBC senior vice president Rosalyn Weinman.

But Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), the original sponsor of the V-chip bill, questioned the chilling effect of ratings. “If producers decide to take out a few extra swear words or a few seconds of nudity or a few bullets, how does that harm the artistic integrity of their product?” he asked in an interview.

While the initial meetings have been cordial, executives said, the networks have to keep a wary eye on their competitors as they develop the ratings. Each company will be responsible for rating its own shows once the common classifications are agreed upon.

“There’s some concern that Fox will push the envelope,” one network executive said. “NBC isn’t going to want ‘Friends’ to have the same rating as ‘Melrose Place.’ ”

Wolf and other Hollywood producers are upset that the implementation committee does not have producers on it. “The White House summit was the ‘Billionaire Boys Club,’ ” Wolf said, referring to the movie-studio chiefs and network presidents who met with Clinton. “There was nobody there who actually produces television.”

The Caucus for Producers, Writers and Directors, an organization that represents many of the top behind-the-scenes talents in the industry, also is upset about the lack of involvement of its members and has asked for a meeting with Valenti. “This is a sham,” caucus executive director David Levy said in an interview. “It’s not going to do anything to improve the quality of programming on television.”

Valenti said the industry group will seek some input from producers in coming weeks. But he noted, “The ratings are going to be done by the networks; the producers are not going to rate the shows.”

Before the meetings began, several broadcast executives said they expected cable television networks to resist having an R rating attached to their shows. But Viacom senior vice president Winston H. Cox, the cable industry’s point man on ratings, said in an interview: “The premium cable channels already show uncut theatrical films which get an R rating. I don’t think there’s great anxiety among the pay services about an R. Frankly, it’s in our interest--more than in broadcasters’--to advise parents about programming content. Our surveys show that finding their child has seen an unsuitable show is one of the reasons people cancel their pay-TV channel.”