Sex on TV’s ‘Family Hour’ Has Increased, Study Finds

As the television industry puts the finishing touches on a controversial TV ratings system, a children’s advocacy group reported a sharp increase in sexual content during the prime-time hours when children are most apt to be watching.

The report, “Sex, Kids and the Family Hour,” also found that parents are as concerned about the sex their children see on television as the violence. The study was issued Wednesday by the children’s advocacy group Children Now and the philanthropic Kaiser Family Foundation, a week before an industry group is to unveil plans for a ratings system intended to provide parents more information in deciding what their children watch.

The three-pronged study included a telephone survey of parents, focus groups with children and analysis of sexual content from 8-9 p.m.--once designated as “the family hour,” a safe haven for programs deemed acceptable for children.

Beyond suggesting the need to reinstate sterner content guidelines in those earlier hours, the report seems to support the case for a content-based TV ratings system that would specify levels of sex, violence and language in greater detail than the system being devised by a group led by Motion Picture Assn. of America Chairman Jack Valenti.

The Valenti plan, which will be officially released next Thursday, is expected to establish parental-guidance brackets predicated on age. That approach has already drawn considerable fire based on details leaked to the press.

“[The study] reinforces the need for a content-based ratings system,” said Children Now media director Vicky Rideout, who hopes to present the report to TV industry leaders next spring.

Valenti declined comment on the Children Now/Kaiser study, one of the first to focus directly on sexual content in TV programs. The initial drive to rate programs stemmed primarily from concerns about violence, though the age-based ratings system on the table would take sex into account as well.

Comparing a three-week period in 1996 to weeks in 1986 and 1976, the survey cited a substantial increase in sexual content, defined as “talk about sex” and “sexual behavior.”

Three-quarters of the programs in the 8 o’clock hour contained at least some sexual material during the monitoring period this year, compared to 65% in 1986 and 43% in 1976.

In addition, 43% of parents surveyed said they worry “a great deal” about sexual content that children see on television, compared to 39% who put violence in that category. (A higher percentage did say they worry “somewhat” about violence.)

Part of the heightened concern about sex may stem from a shift in scheduling practices by the major networks, which have put more adult-oriented sitcoms such as “Friends” and “Roseanne,” as well as prime-time soap operas such as “Melrose Place,” in the 8 p.m. hour. By contrast, crime dramas tend to be broadcast later in the evening.

“I think it’s fair to say messages involving sex are likely to be more prevalent [than violence] in the family hour,” said Dale Kunkel, a communications professor at UC Santa Barbara, who oversaw the analysis.

The fact that parents placed as much emphasis on sex as violence, he said, “is a striking finding. It reflects that this is an important and sensitive topic that parents have to deal with, and [how] pervasive it is.”

The findings present a mixed bag that doesn’t entirely indict television. Most of the sexual behavior cited was deemed “relatively modest,” involving flirting or kissing. Many adults who were polled also felt that television often deals with sexual situations responsibly and presents parents with opportunities to discuss certain issues with their children.

“Television is an effective, proven communicator with young people” and can be an ally to parents in addressing such issues, Rideout said. She added, however, that TV also contains considerable sexual content, “very little of which makes any reference to the risk or responsibility of sexual activity.”

Though some network officials withheld comment until they could analyze the study, NBC attacked the categorizations used and said the timing was politically motivated to influence the ratings system, which Rideout denied.

“This is a totally misleading study based on unbelievably flawed counting methodology,” said NBC Executive Vice President and General Counsel Rick Cotton, who objected to what qualified as “sexual interaction.”

“If you ask someone, ‘Are you concerned about sexual content?,’ it’s hard to imagine anybody who’s not going to respond to those code words,” Cotton said. “If you ask about flirting and kissing, I think you’re going to get a different result.”

Several mitigating factors did emerge from the analysis. In the vast majority of cases, characters interacting in a sexual way had an established relationship, and when teenage characters were involved, scenes were more modest and more apt to carry messages about sexual responsibility. Overall, though, just 9% of sexual scenes presented such messages.

Said CBS spokesman Chris Ender: “Social attitudes toward sexuality have changed, but we believe we’re responsible . . . and that what we run at 8 o’clock is programming that the entire family can watch together.”

Randomly surveying more than 400 adults, researchers found many parents to be uncomfortable about levels of sexual content in network TV programming. More than 70% of respondents said there is not enough programming that is appropriate for children.

Prime-time network viewing by children has dropped, though it remains unclear how much of that is because of viewing alternatives such as the cable network Nickelodeon.

Nearly a third of the adults responding said TV portrays sexual content responsibly, and another third said television does so at least some of the time. A third felt television “hardly ever” depicts sexual content in a useful manner.

The focus groups with children showed that many of them understand jokes about sex, contrary to the argument that sexual innuendo goes over their heads. Parents did see value, however, in TV’s role as a teacher and a means of broaching difficult issues with their children.

Television industry officials have maintained that the notion of a family hour is outdated, citing both the proliferation of channels thanks to cable and changes in viewing habits brought about by an increase in homes with more than one TV set.

According to network research, those factors have created a dynamic in which fewer parents watch TV with their children, a finding the study supported. About two-thirds of parents said they watch television with their children “at most, half the time.”

Broadcasters thus present a picture of children watching Nickelodeon or videos in one room while their parents tune in “Friends” or “Melrose Place” in another.

Reinstating the family hour has found bipartisan political support; however, more than half of the parents polled in the latest survey were unfamiliar with the term, though a vast majority favored the concept after it was explained to them.