Criticism Grows at Direction of TV Ratings Plan

Even before the TV industry has finished devising its first ratings system, pressure mounted on Tuesday from critics who favor an approach that gives parents more information about how much sex, violence and coarse language each program contains.

Several children’s advocates met in Washington with ratings committee chairman Jack Valenti and made it clear they are not happy with the direction of the ratings, which will be announced on Dec. 19. Valenti has said the committee wants to keep the system as simple and “family-friendly” as possible, but committee insiders suggested that some minor adjustments may be made to deal with the criticism.

“The TV industry has chosen to disregard the almost unanimous recommendation of researchers and children’s TV advocates,” Dale Kunkel, a professor of communications at UC Santa Barbara, said in an interview after the meeting with Valenti. “Parents want descriptive information about the content of shows.”

“Where’s the ‘V’ for violence?” Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) asked in a separate interview, saying that he is “very concerned” about the industry’s reported plans to rate shows only according to their appropriateness for children of various ages, modeled on the labels used by the Motion Picture Assn. of America.

“The industry is supposed to be developing a TV-ratings system that allows parents to screen out shows that are considered too violent,” said Markey, the original sponsor of the legislation that prompted the industry to develop a ratings code. “At a minimum, the TV ratings system should give parents violence ratings they can use.”

The industry committee is close to settling on a ratings system that will provide five or six categories. Although the final decision has not been made, sources said the categories are likely to be G (for general audiences), PG (parental guidance suggested), either PG-7 or PG-8 (may be inappropriate for children under 7 or 8 years old), PG-13 and PG-17.

Beginning early next year, TV networks, stations and cable outlets will display the ratings on the air and in print materials about their programs. Each distributor will decide what the ratings on its fare should be. In 1998, TV sets will be available that will enable parents to block out all programs with a rating they consider inappropriate for their children.

Markey, children’s TV advocates and some parents groups favor a ratings system that, like one that has been tested in Canada, uses a numerical system to provide specific information about the sex, language and violence in each program.

American TV executives have said that such a system in this country would be unwieldy. But a recent survey by the National Parent Teachers Assn. found that 80% of the parents questioned said they wanted TV ratings to give them specific content information.

Valenti, who also is chairman of the MPAA, met with Kunkel, communications researcher George Gerbner and several other children’s TV advocates but gave them no indication that the committee was considering adding any content information to the ratings categories.

But other committee members who asked not to be identified indicated that the critics might get more of what they want from the TV-ratings system--although not a major deviation from the MPAA-style plan. They said the committee is discussing adding a category that would designate shows specifically designed for children and also is considering providing some general descriptive information about the parameters of each category--but not, they emphasized, about specific programs.

Valenti and other committee members noted that their work was not complete.

“There are crucial segments of the industry, including broadcast networks, movie executives, cable networks, syndicators, writers and directors, which have not signed off on a plan,” Valenti said in a prepared statement. He was not available for further comment.

“People are commenting on what we’re going to do before we’re out with our plan,” another committee source said.

Markey declined to say what action, if any, he would recommend if the industry’s voluntary system does not satisfy him and other members of Congress who pushed for the ratings code.