As Dan posted this morning, the FCC wants to be able to regulate violence on TV. They already have naughty words and naughty pictures, but they don’t currently have the power to fine evil broadcasters for showing people hurting each other.
Why does the FCC want this power? It’s because somebody has to protect our children. As everyone knows, there were no bad things in the world before the invention of television, and if children weren’t constantly exposed to images of violence or sex, the world would be restored to its prelapsarian perfection.
Ok, that’s a straw man, but my real point is, why should we all have to suffer just because parents don’t want their kids seeing bad stuff? Yeah, kids shouldn’t watch 24. I’m not sure anyone should watch it anymore, but the show has never been suitable for children. There are lots of ways parents can keep their kids from watching shows they find objectionable. They can use the V-chip, which apparently is built into all new TVs, and many cable boxes, although apparently nobody’s using it. The truth is though, even the most vigilant parents can’t stop kids from watching the content they want to watch. If we’d had a V-chip in my house when I was a kid, I would have had to show my mom how to set it up.
So if we can’t stop these wily kids from watching bad stuff, does that mean we need more regulation and fines to solve the problem? No!!!! I mean, it’s hard enough dealing with the FCC now when all they have control over is sex and bad words. What kind of artificial demarcations will we get with violence? Is it OK to show a fist-fight, but only if there’s no blood? If an on-screen explosion kills dozens of people is it safe as long as we don’t see any bodies? Can a gun be fired on camera? Do you really want the government to make these decisions for you?
And to make matters worse, they want to expand oversight to cable TV. Now, everyone knows that cable television is one step away from showing man-on-dog orgy/snuff films, and they get away with it because (and this is so sneaky) people choose to pay for the privilege to watch cable TV. Any innocent can accidentally turn on a television that is accidentally hooked up to an antenna receiving broadcast signals, so we can’t allow filth over the air, but you actually have to jump through quite a few hoops and pay a hefty fee to choose to receive cable programming. If you don’t want that stuff on your TV, you can stop paying your bill, and it will magically go away.
One potentially good thing to come out of this would be a la carte pricing. The argument is, “yeah I pay for cable, but I only want EWTN and Nickelodeon. It’s the evil cable company that makes me get all these filthy channels like FX.” I can see that point. I have about 7,000 cable channels. I probably watch 15 of them. And 5 of the ones I want to watch don’t come in at all thanks to our deadbeat cable company, Time Warner Cable. Now, if I could save some money by only paying for the 15 channels I want, that would be great news. If the cable companies are only forced into it to stave off the threat of content regulation, oh well.
You know, I just spent all this time pontificating, when The Onion has already done it so much better with satire: Study Finds Cable-TV Violence Leads To Network-TV Violence.