Pressing the Flesh in the Ratings War

There was a time when a dismissive, rhyming reference to TV as a certain kind of “tube” highlighted the medium’s perceived role in dumbing-down society, hypnotizing the masses with eyeglass-inducing pabulum.

Like so much in the modern media, however, subtlety has given way to a more blunt and literal translation.

Skin, in case you haven’t noticed, is in these days in a big way, including the confines of prime-time television. Not that it was ever out, mind you, for anyone who remembers the “jiggle” shows of the 1970s or, before that, Barbara Eden’s famous midriff (and, bowing to the now-quaint standards of the day, carefully obscured navel) on “I Dream of Jeannie.” It’s just that any pretext of dressing up this fascination with dressing down appears to have been dropped.

Consider the Playboy Playmate edition of “Fear Factor” coinciding with this month’s rating sweeps, ABC’s prime-time “Victoria’s Secret Fashion Show” during the November sweeps, Fox’s planned “Who Wants to Pose for Playboy?” pageant for the upcoming May sweeps (see a theme here yet?) and Fox’s “Temptation Island 2,” which quietly sinks into the Nielsen sunset this week despite a steady dose of cleavage plus some honest-to-gosh sex. Even last week’s “Friends” got into the act, with Monica celebrating Valentine’s Day by modeling lingerie and bringing home a porn video for her appreciative husband, Chandler.

Much has been written about vigorous cost-saving initiatives at the major networks, but the influx of women parading around in underwear can’t be blamed on cutbacks in the wardrobe budget.

Obvious as they might seem, the real reasons are more layered and complex, beginning with a mainstreaming of pornography (so much so that PBS’ “Frontline” weighed in on the topic last week) as well as material that doesn’t quite rise to that level. In concert with this, shows eager to appear irreverent have reacted to complaints about the media’s objectification of women by flouting such criticism, from Comedy Central’s “The Man Show,” with its “girls on trampolines” feature; to Howard Stern’s radio and E! TV program, showcasing strippers, porn stars and the Internet’s sundry “pinup” divas, offering easily download-able companions for the very lonely.

Helping fuel this anti-feminist backlash is the greater viability of programs targeting narrow audiences as the viewing pie is sliced into smaller segments. In short, an inexpensive series like “The Man Show” can endure with a relatively small audience, providing that its viewers fall into a demographically desirable age bracket prone to drinking lots of beer, playing video games and wearing Nikes.

Cable channels, which lack the lofty circulation of the major networks, have glommed onto this strategy as a means of garnering attention, giving rise to E!’s “Vegas Showgirls” or A&E;’s “Inside the Playboy Mansion,” which repeats this Friday. Notably, an event at the Playboy Mansion to promote the A&E; special dutifully brought out camera crews from several local TV stations, unable to resist the lure of playmate flesh as a tease for their 10 o’clock newscasts. And while A&E; hasn’t abandoned stately costume dramas, the network would be hard-pressed to generate such publicity had it not temporarily dispensed with the costumes.

If all this points toward a shift in attitudes, it’s more evolutionary than revolutionary. For while such judgments are admittedly subjective, prime-time television is more “dirty” than truly vulgar, its treatment of sexuality (with the exception of a few high-minded dramas) rife with the sort of innuendo-laden material aimed at 12-year-old boys. The new wrinkle, if it amounts to one, is an emphasis on appealing to those boys’ older brothers and fathers with a slightly more titillating approach.

Granted, some of these programs have fallen on their face ratings-wise, including the much-ballyhooed “Fear Factor” versus the Super Bowl halftime and post-game shows. Sadly, the highlight was watching host Joe Rogan plead with the reluctant playmates to plunge into ice-cold water for a swimming stunt, reminding you of every pathetic fraternity boy you’ve seen in a bar near closing time.

Still, given the pervasiveness of such fare, it’s hard to determine if viewers were outraged or simply blase because, frankly, they can find better, more revealing displays elsewhere. After all, beyond the actual porn available to most satellite and cable subscribers (no brown paper bags required), pay channels dole out plenty of gratuitous nudity after 11 p.m., even if they seek to cultivate Emmy Awards earlier in the evening.

None of this sits particularly well with self-appointed guardians of morality, who sought to eradicate smut from the airwaves under the guise of forcing networks to label programs with content ratings, such as TV-14 or TV-MA. After much hemming, hawing and indignant talk about undermining the Constitution, the networks complied--and now find themselves able to put on pretty much what they want to the extent that advertisers (who keep pushing the boundaries of taste themselves) will tolerate it, politely telling critics, “We warned you, so change channels or turn off the set.”

Welcome to the world of unintended consequences, or so much for the best-laid plans of mice and ministers. No wonder watchdog groups were fed up enough to petition the Federal Communications Commission, contending that the Fox series “Boston Public,” set in a high school, violates indecency guidelines.

Not to rain on their parade, but commission chairman Michael Powell has made clear that he prefers marketplace solutions over government intervention, so the odds of the FCC springing into action are about as likely as Venezuela, with its four competitors, sweeping the Winter Olympics.

In the face of all this half-naked evidence, it’s easy to criticize programmers for crass cynicism, until you realize how often their baser impulses have been rewarded. To that extent, viewers who reliably show up for showgirls (and we know who we are) bear complicity for the fact that we get playmate “Fear Factor” at halftime instead of “Masterpiece Theatre.”

As for those seeking to pressure or shame broadcasters into exercising greater restraint, the networks may cloak themselves in freedom and apple pie, but the bare, no-frills response would read as follows: “Hey, times are tough. We will when you do.”

*

Brian Lowry’s column appears Wednesdays. He can be reached at brian.lowry@latimes.com.