Originally Posted 06/20/08 by Jeff Harris
We, as a country and a world, are about to enter a new era of entertainment with the transition to digital television. Some countries have eased in the new technology for a while now. The United Kingdom, for example, has services like Freeview and Freesat availiable throughout the countries. PBS and ION have both churned out secondary digital channels in addition to their main feeds. New secondary channels like the classic television-oriented Retro Television Network and the all-anime channel Funimation are also gaining households and places on the over-the-air dial. However, for some odd reason, those in charge of the media are still holding on to the same old, stagnant rules and structures. Hollywood and Washington are still being held to the same rules it had in place since the golden age of television, despite the times and the audiences changing. Some shows rerun too much, specifically the ones aimed towards younger audiences while others don't rerun at all, causing confusion in the networks as why certain shows lack a buzz after a lengthy break. Despite the upcoming transition to digital television, networks are also insistant on putting everything on broadband, which people don't readily have access to. Studios are more adaptive to creating broadband channels than creating digital subchannels. There hasn't been any real push to adapt and be reflective of the 21st century of television. We know it's going to change physically, but it'll likely remain the same as it is now.
Looking at the situation at hand, I think that it's time to lay a few new rules down about television to impact every part of the industry, from regulation to content to presentation. The old rules have to go, and I'll tell you why. As a country, we must evolve. Otherwise, the rest of the world is going to continue laughing at us.
1. The FCC Should NOT Regulate Content
The Federal Communications Commission has essentially one real duty: to license and monitor broadcast channels. By monitoring them, they should make sure they provide public services like news, community forums and roundtables, and information. This doesn't mean they should fine them every time someone gets offended by something someone said or did on a television show. Last time I checked, this is the United States, not a police state. Our goverment has no right to tell any medium what they can and can't present. We live in a democratic society, not a communist or socialist one.
Well-managed outlets aren't going to outrage the viewers because they have some self-control. Studios manage to take care of themselves as do networks. People think that the moment there's no regulation by the FCC that channels will go crazy by airing explicit sex scenes on Saturday mornings or ultraviolent, super profane gorefests in primetime, which they won't.
The FCC has better things to do with their time other than fining networks over programs that aired a decade ago like help ease in the digital transition for the country. There are going to be thousands left watching blank screens come 2009. I think they need to take care of that instead of regulating what comes from the other side of the country.
2. End the Children's Act of 1990
It's a stupid, pointless arcane law that has killed the institution of Saturday morning entertainment that generations of viewers enjoyed but also fostered in an era of complacency and laziness on the part of broadcast networks. Cable television channels and a trio of program distributors have benefited the most from the law while all the networks have suffered tremendously. The extended law, which went into effect in 1998, was the one that made three hours of educational programming mandatory on children's programming on broadcast television. That piece of legislation nearly destroyed the children's entertainment industry. Fortunately, cable outlets rescued the industry from being eradicated, and broadcast networks have been criticizing them since.
Yes, broadcast networks lament the fact that cable channels like Nickelodeon, Disney Channel, and Cartoon Network have taken over Saturday mornings blaming THEM for the decline in viewers. That's only not entirely fair but it's also untrue. Cable never became a factor on Saturday mornings until this decade. Cable channels had weekday afternoons and Sunday mornings wrapped up. They took over Saturdays because there was a need for good entertainment that broadcast networks couldn't provide. By good, I mean non-educational fun programming.
Nobody's watching the E/I blocks on broadcast television.
Kewlopolis and qubo are suffering in the ratings on CBS and NBC, respectedly. The only reason people are watching ABC is because they're pretty much airing Disney Channel reruns and placing an E/I banner qualifying them as educational, though on the surface, they aren't. Kids' WB and Fox Kids battled each other back and forth in the first couple of years of the revised law, but the success of one show, Pokemon on Kids' WB, killed Fox Kids. Actually, that was one of the reasons Fox Kids ended, but, that's another article for another time. However, Pokemon's then-producer, 4Kids Entertainment, swooped in and took over Fox's Saturday morning lineup in 2002. Five years later, they did the same at The CW, the channel that was formed with the merger of The WB (Kids' WB's home) and UPN. Kids' WB ended in May 2008 replaced with a new 4Kids block called The CW 4Kids, essentially competing against 4KidsTV on Fox. Wonder why the FCC had no qualms with that company taking over 2/5 of Saturday morning programming on broadcast television, especially since these two blocks are the broadcast blocks children are watching rather than the ones on the "traditional big three."
People think that if the Children's Act of 1990 were abolished, networks will end up airing all-news cycles, which I sincerely doubt. The networks will use the existing partnerships they have created to make more entertaining, less-constricted programming blocks. ABC has Disney on their side and they probably wouldn't change the lineup anyway. It just wouldn't have an E/I bug in the corners. NBC has found partners with Nelvana and Entertainment Rights. Qubo could be like its digital channel equivalent by airing more non E/I shows as well as actually add some diverse programming in the future. Same deal with CBS and DiC. In fact, it could actually resurrect the industry opening up new opportunities and allowing new and more familiar faces and voices to be seen and heard.
And here's the thing. Why is E/I requirement limited to Saturday mornings? More children are watching primetime television than Saturday morning programming anyway, so if they were so serious about placing educational programming for children on television, why not put a law that states that at least one of the three mandatory hours should be seen on a slot between Monday and Thursday nights? Because it's bad for business and only then will the networks complain it's a foolish requirement. It has to go in order for the industry to evolve.
3. Move the "Safe Harbor" to 9 PM in all time zones.
The one weapon the FCC and right-wing watchdog groups like the Parent's Television Council and the American Family Association have on the television industry is the Safe Harbor law. Known as "watershed hours" in international markets, the Safe Harbor law allows broadcasters to air "freer" shows between a timeslot younger audiences aren't watching television. In most international markets, the hours are between 9 PM and 6 AM. In the United States, it's between 10 PM and 6 AM.
Here's the loophole that those watchdog groups get antsy about. If a show like, say, The Shield or NYPD Blue airs at 10 PM EST, that means it's airing in the Central time zone at 9 PM. Their criticism is that the show is airing outside the Safe Harbor timeslots and that the show should be banned, fined, or taken off the air. Aside from the fact that censorship is abysmal, that criticism makes no sense and, yet, should be taken to heart. No, I'm not saying these shows should be banned, fined, or taken off the air. I'm just pointing out the ridiculousness of the 10 PM start of the Safe Harbor time slots. Networks shouldn't be punished for showing one show in a time zone that's an hour behind a time zone where it's perfectly fine to show that particular program.
The people that's typically against an adjustment of the Safe Harbor time slots are also the ones that still believe the "Family Hour" law is still in effect. They're also generally against the Safe Harbor anyway, since they feel ALL programming should be tame and family-friendly. The Safe Harbor should be extended to the 9 PM hour, giving broadcasters leeway and breathing room for their program lineups, especially for those 10 PM shows on the East Coast.
Up next, Content.