merchant@dartvax.UUCP (Peter Merchant) (08/20/84)
{ I like big...things. }
You may be able to lock out your cable channel, but many video
programs are moving off cable and onto the networks or into
syndication.
NBCs "Friday Night Videos" is the forerunner and brought the
concept of a "video" to a mass audience. Also, for those of
you who truly dispair of it, NBC has begun broadcasting "Friday
Night Videos" over their satellite to radio stations. Thus,
check with your local NBC affiliate and you may be pleased to
discover that you can get it in stereo.
ABC has recently entered the competition with "ABC Rocks", a
very weak half-hour attempt to pull viewers from Friday Night
Videos. I saw it when it first debuted, right after ABC
Nightlines on the spot and hard nosed look at The Jacksons.
No word of stereo simulcasts. It also seems to have disappeared
from our local viewing area, at least as far as I can see.
There are also many other video programs in syndication. I'm
afraid you are going to have to protect your young child some
other way, possibly by throwing your TV set out the window and
reading.
As for the "morality" question, I have to agree that it is not up
to the television networks/cable networks to protect the children
of today as much as it is the parents responsibility. As it is,
though, MTV realises that it is in it's better interests to avoid
the "questionable" portion of many videos. After all, if MTV started
showing bloodshed, mayhem, violence, sex, and other yucky things,
parents will start complaining to the local cable carriers/network
affiliates/local stations. And usually the non-cable people are
very worried about public opinion of their station because that
amounts to ratings. MTV is concerned because if they get too nasty,
they may find local cable carriers getting rid of them. And that
means lack of bucks.
Oh! By the way, MTV may soon have a "competitor" of sorts. Ted
Turner has decided to go into the video cable biz. His video channel
will be a more "Adult Contemporary" format, with the mellower stuff
that you don't usually see on MTV.
--
Peter Merchantdvw@hopd3.UUCP (D. V. Wilkerson) (08/23/84)
Well, Ted Turner's "Adult Contemporary" format is being challenged by MTV. According to a report on Entertainment Tonight, MTV is coming out with its own channel of music for 25-49 year olds (I hate when they make these assumptions. I like MTV's music and will probably dislike the "older" format and I fall in the target age range. Silly.). Probably lots of Air Supply, and Olivia Neutron-Bomb. Ecch. Turn up the bass on the Quiet Riot, please. Diane Wilkerson ..!hopd3!dvw
gregbo@hou2e.UUCP (08/24/84)
> As for the "morality" question, I have to agree that it is not up > to the television networks/cable networks to protect the children > of today as much as it is the parents responsibility. As it is, > though, MTV realises that it is in it's better interests to avoid > the "questionable" portion of many videos. After all, if MTV started > showing bloodshed, mayhem, violence, sex, and other yucky things, > parents will start complaining to the local cable carriers/network > affiliates/local stations. And usually the non-cable people are > very worried about public opinion of their station because that > amounts to ratings. MTV is concerned because if they get too nasty, > they may find local cable carriers getting rid of them. And that > means lack of bucks. I don't know if this is true anymore, but last fall & winter when the Rolling Stones' "Undercover of the Night" video first came out, MTV showed the violent version, including pictures of people getting shot. I remember that towards the end of this song's popularity, they showed an edited version replacing the violent scenes with scenes of the Stones playing in concert. -- Hug me till you drug me, honey! Greg Skinner (gregbo) {allegra,cbosgd,ihnp4}!hou2e!gregbo
ong@eneevax.UUCP (Chong Ong) (08/26/84)
Rather than spending time debating the effects of video on children, an alternative solution is to have no TV at home. Granted many people can't live without a TV set in the house, but I've survived for eight months now without a TV set. Anyone else like to try?
barryg@sdcrdcf.UUCP (08/26/84)
Having no TV is no big deal - my parents have *never* had one, more out of
apathy and better thing to send money on that anything else. Thus I never
had TV available easily until I was about 19. Easy! Does wonders for
the mind - the only thing is that you tend to read mindless books in the same
way that you might watch mindless TV. Were I a parent (Ghod forbid) I suspect
that I would have TV and let kids watch what they want (censorship is bad,
per se!) as long as I was around (not as a censor, but to perhaps explain
some things).
--Ian G. Batten, B'ham University, England.
--
Barry Gold/Lee Gold
usenet: {decvax!allegra|ihnp4}!sdcrdcf!ucla-s!lcc!barry
Arpanet: barry@BNLmsw@browngr.UUCP (Mark Wachsler) (08/31/84)
No TV at home! What a wonderful idea! It's nice to know someone else has a sane approach to TV! Mark "I hate TV" Wachsler brunix!msw