Television Censorship Essay, Research Paper

Television Censoring

Television is a really of import portion of the American society today. It is estimated that & # 8220 ; the mean American watches up to 6.75 hours of telecasting daily & # 8221 ; ( Flahey 35 ) . But does something that is such an influence on the American society demand to be censored? Chambers & # 8217 ; English Dictionary defines Censorship as & # 8220 ; the mandate to analyze books, movies, telecasting, or other stuff and take or stamp down what is considered obnoxious & # 8221 ; ( 50 ) . When anything goes through a procedure of censoring, a commission reviews it and deems it acceptable or unacceptable for the common spectator. Baning telecasting is an unneeded and unconstitutional manner of commanding what people see.

Many people for the censoring of telecasting argue the point that media shapes society. This means that the manner people in society act today is a direct consequence of what they observe on telecasting. Besides argued, is that Television provides a little figure of function theoretical accounts and kids who view these plans will move ill towards others, merely as they have seen on telecasting. Many believe that if telecasting is censored, society will alter along with it for the better.

However, this is non the instance at all. If telecasting is censored, society is non likely to follow in suit. For many kids, the forbidden and cryptic are more attractive, and they will endeavor towards what they can non hold or see. Therefore, it is best to let them entree to these things so that they will cognize the jobs and be more likely to avoid them.

A old instance of telecasting censoring leads me to believe that society will non alter if censoring is implemented. In the early 1980 s coffin nail advertizements were banned from telecasting in the United States. Even now many ads on Television are directed towards assisting tobacco users quit. However, the American Heart Association indicated in a 1998 study that & # 8220 ; smoke has non decreased. In fact, more than 26 million work forces ( 28.2 % ) and 23.1 million adult females ( 23.1 % ) still smoke & # 8221 ; ( AHA 2 ) . Sing as coffin nail smoke has non decreased, I am led to believe that telecasting censoring will non diminish the jobs in society.

While many argue for censoring because media forms society, others push for censoring because childs are waxy. This thought stems from the belief that kids who watch Television tend to copy the heroes or heroines they see on the plans. In fact, this point has cogency since there have been legion instances in which kids have been killed copying a telecasting super hero. This job has besides come across my life. When I was five I wanted to copy Q-Bert, a unit of ammunition hero who shot balls out of his olfactory organ. I thought he was a great function theoretical account until I spent the afternoon in the infirmary holding a mountain ash berry removed from my olfactory organ.

None the less, this statement besides contains defects. Parents who are genuinely concerned with what their kids are sing should oversee what they watch. Parents should besides be attuned to the manner their kid reacts while playing after a violent show. If they act sharply, a simple chiding will assist the kid learn that it is incorrect to move that manner. Besides, required warnings before about every plan that portray force, inappropriate linguistic communication, or gender allow parents to cognize if what their kid is watching is appropriate or non. Similarly, if the force is portrayed as incorrect, a kid will easy be able to acknowledge, by the usage of common sense, what they are sing is inappropriate for them to reenact.

Merely as people argue that childs are waxy, they besides contend that kids should non be sing grownup oriented stuff on telecasting. Dissenters feel that telecasting has no ethical motives for childs to see or take out of the show. They believe that all that is of all time seen on telecasting is bad linguistic communication, force, an

vitamin D sexual mentions. They consider kids excessively immature to be exposed to that portion of society. Many grownups are besides offended by the obscene nature of the scheduling today.

The job with this statement is that a telecasting is a merchandise bought by the spectator. Chamber & # 8217 ; s English Dictionary defines a purchase as & # 8220 ; the wilful exchange of currency for a merchandise & # 8221 ; ( 317 ) . This means that the same people who are kicking about the crud on Television are the same 1s that wilfully purchased the telecasting, leting their household to hold entree to it. One could even compare a purchase of telecasting towards that of a adult magazine ; it is apparent that both will incorporate violative stuff. Therefore, it is easy stated that if telecasting is violative, so it should non be purchased by the offended.

In many households parents may bask the violative plans that are in inquiry but still experience that it should be kept off from their kids. However, modern inventions have made it possible for parental figures to forestall their kids from sing indecorous stuff, but still let them to watch whatever they like. One manner to modulate this is the parental lock system ( PLS ) . This modern convenience allows parents to lock out channels with a secret watchword. Merely the people who know this watchword are able to entree the out channels. It is a about unfailing innovation because even if a kid discovers the secret codification it may be changed.

Similar to the PLS, the evaluation system allows parents to modulate what their kid tickers. This system was put on all telecasting plans on January of 1997. Before every Television plan, in a little black box, a evaluation is given by the US Federal Communications Commission that determines how coarse a plan is. Jeremy Craig, an expert on the issue, explains how the system works:

The box will read either G, intending it is expectable for general audiences, PG, parental counsel suggested for that plan, TV14, intending it is non suggested for kids under 14 to see that plan, or M, which is intended for audiences 18 old ages or older. ( Craig 2 )

Although this system does non needfully use to unsupervised kids, it does an first-class occupation of informing parents on which plans may incorporate points unsuitable for childs.

The most of import instance against censoring is that when something is censored, it tells parents how to raise their kid. This takes off the constitutional right of parents who do non experience obliged to forestalling their kid from sing these plans. It besides puts the power of raising kids in the custodies of the authorities. In the United States it is against the fundamental law to take this power off from any parent.

Baning telecasting is an unneeded and unconstitutional manner of commanding what people view. The statements for baning telecasting are weak, and ways to work out the proposed jobs are available to about everyone. Besides baning telecasting tells a parent how to raise their kid. It places the power of the parent in the custodies of the authorities. If person feels strongly plenty to reason for censoring, so they are besides strong plenty to modulate what their kid tickers. If censoring is in topographic point, it disallows some parents their right to promote their kids to be unfastened to different facets of life. The best manner to ban telecasting while delighting everyone is by holding personal parental censors.

Plants Cited

American Heart Association. Cigarette Smoking Statistics. Dallas: Family Publications Inc. , 1998.

& # 8220 ; Censorship. & # 8221 ; Chambers & # 8217 ; English Dictionary. 166. 1985.

Craig, Jeremy. Understanding the Ratings System. n. p. Online. 28 Oct. 1998. Available: hypertext transfer protocol: //www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Hills/6578/ratings.htm

Fahey, Valerie. & # 8220 ; Television by the Numbers. & # 8221 ; In Health, volume December/January 1992: P.35