TV Industry to Use Ratings Before Regulatory Review

The television industry, dogged by growing public criticism of the TV ratings system that it will unveil today, plans to put its scheme into practice next month even before government regulators have had time to finish reviewing it.

A spokeswoman for the Motion Picture Assn. of America, which coordinated development of the system, said that the four major television networks would announce each show’s rating immediately before its broadcast. Ratings also will be included in TV Guide and other publications that preview television shows.

By quickly implementing the ratings system, which will advise parents that particular shows are deemed inappropriate for some or all children, the industry hopes to head off interference with its effort to police itself.

But the aggressive strategy chosen by MPAA Chairman Jack Valenti and other entertainment executives could set the stage for a political showdown with a spectrum of critics, from the conservative Traditional Values Coalition to the liberal Center for Media Education, which want information made public in advance about the level of sex, violence and bad language on individual shows.

“Nobody was invited to the table when Jack Valenti had his committee. Now we have to fight from the fringes,” said Steven Isaac, a spokesman for the conservative Colorado Springs watchdog group, Focus on the Family. “The broadness of these ratings categories is very disturbing to a lot of parents.”

Television industry officials on Wednesday shared details of the plan with the staff of the Federal Communications Commission, which under the landmark telecommunications reform law enacted in February has authority to review the ratings system.

Under the industry plan, producers will assign their own shows one of four ratings: TV-G (for general audiences), TV-PG (parental guidance suggested), TV-14 (may be inappropriate for children under 14) and TV-M (adults).

Critics contended that the four categories are so broad as to be almost meaningless and are designed to appease advertisers worried that shows rated high in sexual content or violence would lose large chunks of their audience.

Some industry sources had expected criticism of the industry plan to dissipate after President Clinton’s expression of strong support for it last week. The president said that any ratings plan should be given at least a 10-month trial.

But during a meeting Wednesday with Vice President Al Gore, representatives of half a dozen citizens’ groups expressed what a White House source described as “strong views” that Clinton should take a more critical look at the industry’s ratings scheme.

“The vice president assured us that the White House neither endorses nor condemns the TV ratings system,” said Kathryn Montgomery, president of the Center for Media Education, a Washington communications advocacy group. But, she said, “there will be an open process at the FCC for debate and comment on this issue.”

A White House source said Wednesday that the administration won small concessions from the TV industry, including a promise to review the ratings system quickly and regularly and to include more outside representation on an industry advisory panel that will spot-check the accuracy of the ratings assigned by television show producers.

But for the most part, the White House indicated, resolution of the issue is largely up to the FCC.

“They are an independent agency, and they have a role under the telecom law in reviewing this decision,” said one White House official. “Their views and parents’ views are the ones that ought to count here.”

The FCC will open the industry ratings scheme to a 30-day public comment period, after which it probably will take several weeks to compile the comments.

The review process thus will extend at least into February--after the ratings system already is in use.

One knowledgeable source predicted that the broadcasters would show some flexibility on their system. “The networks will listen to public opinion, as will the FCC,” this source said.

Tony Podesta, executive secretary of the industry committee that developed the ratings scheme, said it was the best the industry could do.

“But we’re not suggesting these are sacred tablets,” he said. “If there’s an orchestrated outcry [from Washington lobbyists], I don’t see our changing the system. But we’d be foolish not to listen to people’s complaints, if they have them, after they’ve had time to use and understand the system in their homes.”

“I think many people view the industry’s ratings plan as a first negotiating position,” said Nick Allard, a Washington lawyer who is a close confidant of FCC Chairman Reed Hundt. “It’s just an opening ploy.”

Under this year’s telecommunications law, the FCC lacks the authority to modify the ratings plan developed by the television industry. The commission can take it or leave it. If it finds the industry plan inadequate, it must construct its own.

But, some experts said, the FCC has much broader authority over manufacturers of television sets. The telecommunications act gives manufacturers until February 1998 to install devices in their sets that can electronically sense the TV ratings and let parents block those they do not want their children to watch.

The FCC, according to these experts, could require the electronic device--known as the V-chip--to only recognize ratings of a certain type. Or, it could insist that the V-chips recognize ratings not only by the shows’ producers but also by other groups that developed their own independent ratings systems.

“The FCC has the authority under the statute to mandate a standard which TV manufacturers must follow,” said David Moulton, an aide to Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.). “This underlines the importance of ensuring that the technology that is built into the TV sets is flexible enough to change over time. . . . “

Times staff writer Jane Hall contributed to this story.