Panel Gives Reno Ways to Curb Violence on Television

WASHINGTON —  A citizens panel gave Atty. Gen. Janet Reno a series of recommendations Wednesday aimed at curbing violence on television, including a proposed ban on broadcasts containing “gratuitous” violence between 6 a.m. and 10 p.m.

The panel, a coalition of groups that includes the American Medical Assn. and the National Parent-Teacher Assn., said it prefers voluntary limits by the industry to curb violent TV programming that could have an adverse effect on children. But if the industry “refuses to cooperate,” the panel said, the government should intervene.

The recommendations come at a time when Administration officials have joined a growing chorus of lawmakers who say that television violence is harming the country’s children.

In October, Reno told a Senate panel that “government action will be imperative” if the entertainment industry did not take voluntary steps to reduce television violence. The recommendations could add momentum to efforts by lawmakers to write new restrictions into law. This year, nine bills were introduced in Congress to curb television violence.

The panel, known as the Citizens Task Force, recommended that the entertainment industry adopt voluntary restrictions on violent programming during the hours between 6 a.m. and 10 p.m., but called for the Federal Communications Commission to impose mandatory regulations if the industry failed to act voluntarily.

It also recommended that the manufacturers of television sets routinely install electronic blocking devices to enable parents to screen out shows they do not want their children to watch.

The recommendations were prepared in response to a request by Reno, who met with Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), a founder of the group, and task force members last month, spokesmen for Reno and Conrad said. Speaking at a press conference on Capitol Hill Wednesday, members of the group hailed the recommendations as a step forward in their struggle.

“There is too much murder, too much mayhem, too much violence and too many glamorous, glorified views of violence on American television,” Conrad said. “The time for studies is over. The time for debate is over. It is time to act.”

Other recommendations include televised warnings to alert viewers to violent programming before and during the shows, a system for rating TV violence, FCC hearings to discuss the issue of television violence and children’s programming that provides “a real alternative to television violence.”

The panel also called for a ban on violent programming in prisons, the convening of a White House conference on violence that would include discussion of media violence and continued discussions within the industry aimed at changing programming.

Entertainment industry officials and civil liberties groups remain opposed to the type of government intervention called for by the group. The press conference sparked another round of argument between advocates of programming regulations and industry officials.

During his remarks, Conrad cited examples of television programs that he said showcased violence, such as the portrayal of an electrocution in an upcoming NBC show “Witness to the Execution,” and of gun violence in an elementary school in a recent CBS show.

Network officials immediately responded, saying that Conrad’s characterizations of their programming were distorted and exemplified the dangers when the government is allowed to define acceptable programming.

“The recent attacks on ‘Witness to the Execution’ are a gross misrepresentation of the film, and they further demonstrate the inherent dangers of the current debate about media violence,” NBC spokeswoman Judy Smith said. “This incident only underscores the bias underlying this debate, and the corrosive atmosphere of censorship that is being created.”

Civil liberties groups say the proposals for government involvement would violate 1st Amendment free speech protections.

“The idea of government officials combing television programs (to determine) when violence is gratuitous or not has all the elements of low comedy,” said Robert Peck, legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union. “To me, there’s no way that a law is going to come up with a definition of gratuitous, dramatized violence that will satisfy the Constitution’s requirement that laws be specific.”

The problem of curbing television violence is a false issue that diverts attention from the real causes of violence, Peck said.

“If we’re serious about doing something about violence in the streets . . . we’ll focus on why young people feel alienated from society, and that’s because of illiteracy and unemployment and drug dependency,” he said.