Making Room for the New TV Ratings System

Television networks usually spend the holiday season strategizing about how to boost their ratings with scheduling changes in January. This year, however, programmers find themselves distracted by ratings concerns of a different kind.

The unveiling of a controversial TV ratings system Thursday initiated a headlong race to implement the plan by Jan. 1, less than two weeks after that announcement.

Still, devising a ratings system may have been the easy part. Now comes the challenge of actually getting the word out through on-screen labels, information guides and, perhaps most importantly, newspaper and magazine TV listings.

Officials at the broadcast networks had already been working behind the scenes, preparing to have ratings up and running as soon as possible. That may cause headaches for newspapers, which must wrestle with whether there’s room for ratings information on TV pages already filled to near-bursting by the explosion of cable channels in recent years.

Motion Picture Assn. of America President Jack Valenti, who spearheaded development of the ratings, charged Friday that it’s unfair for newspapers to criticize the new system’s inadequacies when they themselves wouldn’t print more detailed information about the level of sex, violence and foul language in every program.

“I don’t see how editorial boards of newspapers can be editorializing against us when their own TV-listings editors have told us their newspapers won’t print something more complicated [than the MPAA-style system],” Valenti said.

TV Guide, which boasts 13 million subscribers, will editorialize in favor of the industry proposal and plans to have ratings incorporated into its listings by mid-January. Program listings are usually set 10 days to two weeks in advance.

“We were committed to running whatever ratings system was implemented,” said editor in chief Steven Reddicliffe, who acknowledged that the weekly magazine may have to add pages to get all the ratings in. Even so, from a marketing standpoint, “[providing] more information is always a plus for us.”

Major newspapers, however, are taking a more cautious approach. Not only have listings expanded due to cable, but a dramatic increase in newsprint costs has caused many papers to reduce the amount of space devoted to listings.

A spokesman for the Los Angeles Times said the paper is studying options in the matter. So is the Washington Post. Similarly, a New York Times spokeswoman said: “We’re studying the question on how we might accommodate the new rules. It’s not a change we can make overnight because our TV listings are packed tightly with a lot of information.”

“We haven’t had any editorial meetings about this yet. Frankly, we don’t know what we’re going to do,” said Karen Olson, TV editor at the Chicago Tribune, who said the paper would likely wait until after the FCC meets to review the industry-drafted system in February. “We presume we would need more space. In order to get them [ratings] in, we would need a complete redesign, and that’s not going to happen overnight.”

*

While catching newspapers off guard, the networks’ purpose in so rapidly enacting the ratings plan was two-fold: to preempt the outcry from critics opposing the system for being based on the MPAA movie ratings, instead of supplying labels specifying levels of sex, violence and language within each show; and to have the formula in place before the FCC meets to decide whether the voluntary system adopted is appropriate.

The FCC could reject the plan and try to compel the industry to seek a different method, which would likely result in a court challenge. Television executives have asked for a year to see how the system works.

For the networks, once the six rating categories were known--two specifically aimed at children’s programming, with four governing all other shows, ranging from TV-G (general) to TV-M (mature)--they were able to begin applying those categories through their broadcast standards departments, which already review all programs for content.

ABC was thus able to send out on Thursday a grid with ratings for the week of Jan. 1-7. Of 20 prime-time shows eligible for ratings (news and sports programs are exempt), 11 are rated PG (parental guidance), seven get a G and two--”NYPD Blue” and the special “Politically Incorrect”--are tagged TV-PG-14, meaning those programs may not be suitable for children under 14.

While broadcasters expect to be in full gear in early January, many cable networks are responding more slowly, gradually rolling out ratings through the month.

Meanwhile, the WB Network, employing the upstart tactics traditionally associated with fledgling networks, will apparently be the only programmer to jump the gun and have ratings in place before January. Promotion executives spent the last two weeks tailoring the advisories they normally air, featuring animated mascot Michigan J. Frog, to the new system, which will be in place beginning Sunday.

WB already markets itself as being family-friendly, so the TV-G label on shows such as “Brotherly Love” and “The Parent ‘Hood” underscores that point. In addition, the network hoped to garner some attention by being first on the block to show off the new system.

“Our unique selling point is that we are more conscious about questionable content than any other network,” said Bob Bibb, co-head of marketing, pointing out that all of the network’s TV-PG shows, including “Unhappily Ever After” and “Life With Roger,” air at 9 p.m. or later.

Networks will display the rating in the upper-left-hand corner during the first 15 seconds of each program, and again at the midway point of movies and hourlong dramas. Valenti has contended that ratings won’t be as valuable, however, unless parents can know them before the TV set is even turned on, through newspaper and magazine listings.

Networks will run public-service announcements in English and Spanish to explain the system. A toll-free number will offer a free brochure with the guidelines, and ABC will have its own number that viewers can call for information on specific programs.

Times staff writers Judith Michaelson and Jane Hall contributed to this story.

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

GENERAL CATEGORIES

Here are the six ratings categories that the television industry plans to use on entertainment programming, and the descriptions of what they are meant to designate.

TV-G: General Audience. Most parents would find this program suitable for all ages. Although this rating does not signify a program designed specifically for children, most parents may let younger children watch this program unattended. It contains little or no violence, no strong language and little or no sexual dialogue or situations.

TV-PG: Parental Guidance Suggested. This program may contain some material that some parents would find unsuitable for younger children. Many parents may want to watch it with their younger children. The theme itself may call for parental guidance. The program may contain infrequent coarse language, limited violence, some suggestive sexual dialogue and situations.

TV-14: Parents Strongly Cautioned. This program may contain some material that many parents would find unsuitable for children under 14 years of age. Parents are strongly urged to exercise greater care in monitoring this program and are cautioned against letting children under the age of 14 watch unattended. This program may contain sophisticated themes, sexual content, strong language and more intense violence.

TV-M: Mature Audiences Only. This program is specifically designed to be viewed by adults and therefore may be unsuitable for children under 17. This program may contain mature themes, profane language, graphic violence and explicit sexual content.

CHILDREN’S CATEGORIES

TV-Y: All Children. This program is designed to be appropriate for all children. Whether animated or live-action, the themes and elements in this program are specifically designed for a very young audience, including children from ages 2-6. This program is not expected to frighten young children.

TV-Y7: Directed to Older Children. This program is designed for children age 7 and above. It may be more appropriate for children who have acquired the developmental skills needed to distinguish between make-believe and reality. Themes and elements in this program may include mild physical or comedic violence, or may frighten children under the age of 7. Therefore, parents may wish to consider the suitability of this program for their very young children.