TV Executives Consider Adding Content Labels to Ratings

NEW YORK —  While they continue to maintain publicly that they will not make any major changes in their ratings code, television industry executives are seriously considering adding labels for sex, language and violence to mollify critics who want parents to have more information about programming content.

Motivated by continuing threats of legislation in Congress and a June 20 public hearing before the Federal Communications Commission, the industry’s point men on the ratings controversy--Motion Picture Assn. of America President Jack Valenti, National Assn. of Broadcasters President Eddie Fritts and National Cable Television Assn. President Decker Anstrom--have been meeting with children’s, parents’ and medical organizations that have criticized the TV guidelines.

The industry’s strategy for compromise, executives explained this week, is to get the advocacy groups to “sign off” on a system that would add S, V and L symbols to the existing ratings of TV-G, TV-PG, TV-14 and TV-MA, which are meant to suggest whether a program is suitable for certain age groups. The designations for sex, violence and foul language would tell parents information about why a program got a restrictive rating.

The hope is that the support of these groups would pave the way for obtaining the blessing of the ratings critics in Congress, such as Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, which oversees television.

“We’re really more concerned about Congress than the FCC hearing; it’s congressmen who are threatening further ratings legislation,” said one industry executive, who requested anonymity.

Whether the addition of S, V and L will satisfy the critics is uncertain. Many have been arguing for a system that not only includes symbols for sex, violence and language but also for levels of intensity, such as S1, S2 and S3. They also have complained that the ratings are being assigned by the programmers themselves.

Also uncertain is whether the industry can reach consensus on modifications. Sources said Ted Turner of Time Warner, Rupert Murdoch of Fox Inc. and executives at many cable networks have privately endorsed the S, V and L plan, while ABC, CBS, NBC and some of the Hollywood studios have expressed opposition.

But the prospect of legislation and the FCC’s review of the code are adding to pressure on the industry to come up with an acceptable compromise.

Saying he was dissatisfied with the industry’s response to its critics after a hearing before his committee in February, McCain recently called for a vote on a bill from Sen. Ernest F. Hollings (D-S.C.) that would force the industry either to provide content-based ratings or to restrict violent programming to hours when children are not likely to be watching. The legislation was approved 19-1, and congressional sources say it will pass in the full Senate if the networks do not make some alterations--although some broadcasters contend that the courts would find it a violation of their 1st Amendment rights.

The FCC is under orders from Congress either to approve the ratings code, which has been in place since January, or to form a panel to come up with a new one.

Valenti and other television executives have defended their system as being easier to administer and to understand than the more complicated proposals being put forth by their critics, and they have argued for time to let the public get familiar with it.