Commercials too hot, Censorship and Fox

[Buccaneer]

Ever since Janet Jackson's infamous “wardrobe malfunction" during the 2004 Super Bowl halftime show, citizens and children’s advocacy organizations have called upon the FCC, broadcasters and even Congress to re-examine television content and the guidelines that rate it.

But one type of programming that is viewed by all audiences at all hours on every network has continued to escape regulation: commercials.

From Paris Hilton's spicy burger ad to the ever-proliferating erectile dysfunction commercials, many parents have not been happy with recent television ads. And now, domain registering Web site GoDaddy.com is fighting to reprise its controversial 2005 Super Bowl ad during this year's upcoming game.

"Perhaps parents ought to have special radar during the Super Bowl these days, given its fame for showcasing the most avant garde advertising techniques," Sen. Mark Pryor, D-Ark., said at the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation open forum on decency on Nov. 29. A full-scale hearing on the subject is scheduled for Jan. 19.

Pryor continued, “I have a 10-year-old and 11-year-old at home, and my wife and I are scared to death for them to turn on the television without us in the room.”

In last year's controversial GoDaddy ad (click here to see the commercial), a young woman appears before a faux government hearing on broadcast decency and asks permission for her commercial to air during the Super Bowl. She's clad in tight jeans with GoDaddy.com across her rear and an even smaller, tighter white tank-top with GoDaddy.com across her chest.

During the commercial — which was pulled after its first airing — she begins jumping around cheerleader-style, causing a Jackson-style "wardrobe malfunction" as a shirt strap slips off.

Jon Nesvig, FOX's president of advertising sales, explained the incident in a statement:

"When the GoDaddy.com spot aired in the first half, it became obvious to us that its content was very much out of step with the tenor set by the other ads and programming broadcast by FOX on Super Bowl Sunday, so FOX made the decision to drop its repeat airing."

The second airing, scheduled for the last 2 minutes of the game, was replaced by a promo for "The Simpsons."

According to GoDaddy.com President Bob Parsons' personal blog, the company has agreed to purchase a 30-second spot in this year's game on Feb. 5, but none of its submissions so far has passed ABC's Standards and Practices department.

But Parsons promises the finished product will be true to the company's style.

"It will be 'GoDaddy-esque.' In order to be 'GoDaddy-esque,' a commercial must be edgy, hot, slightly tasteless and just a touch inappropriate," he said on his Web site.

The E-Word

Also at the November decency forum, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., described himself in a statement as “a parent who has had to sit through uncomfortable Cialis commercials while watching television with my 7- and 4-year-old daughters.”

The ad Obama cited, for the erectile dysfunction medication Cialis, features snuggly moments between couples of all ages to the tune of The Ronnettes’ “Be My Baby.” And FDA regulations require medical ads to specify risks verbally, resulting in somewhat embarrassing dialogue.

"Cialis is only for men healthy enough for sexual activity ... erections lasting longer than four hours, though rare, require immediate medical help,” the ad warns.

Obama is not alone in his discomfort over commericals like these.

“There I was, watching football," wrote Tim Whyte, general manager of the Santa Clarita, Calif., newspaper The Signal, "and up pops a commercial for an erectile dysfunction drug. It’s not that the Levitra ad offended me. It didn’t. But cripes — sometimes my kid watches football with me.”

Whyte added, “Biggest problem was, just a few seconds into the commercial, she dropped the E-bomb: ‘Levitra,’ she said, ‘gives you that “strong, lasting erection” you’ve been looking for.’ OK parents, raise your hand if that line sends you into a panic.”

On Monday, the NFL announced that it would end its 3-year-old sponsorship deal with Levitra when it expires in March because "the ads shifted from men's health to a performance, lifestyle issue." NFL spokesman Brian McCarthy added the noticeable change made the organization uncomfortable.

Advertising guidelines adopted by the drug companies last year say ads should be targeted to avoid audiences for whom the message is inappropriate, a move seen as an effort to limit children's exposure to erectile dysfunction commercials.

According to the Parents Television Council, a group that aims to prevent children's exposure to gratuitous sex and violence on TV, a lot of parents have expressed concern about the various ads for ED drugs.

Too Hot for Kids?

The Council was also outraged in May when the now-infamous Carl's Jr./Hardee's ad — featuring Paris Hilton in a skimpy swimsuit and spike heels seductively washing a Bentley — aired during an 8 p.m. broadcast of "American Idol."

"At this crucial time when broadcasters are under increased scrutiny by millions of parents who are fed up with current television content, we would think that the awareness would extend to advertisers," the Council said in a statement.

"Instead, Carl's Jr./Hardee's have done the opposite and are forcing American families to digest their filth. This is the ultimate example of corporate irresponsibility."

Some Hardee’s franchises in the South refused to allow the ad to air in their markets after heavy campaigning from the PTC. But Hardee's and Carl's Jr.'s parent company CKE defended the commericial.

"It was designed to be a racy ad, but we don't consider it pornographic," said Brad Haley, a marketing vice president for the Carl's Jr. and Hardee's chains, adding the appeal of using Hilton was the very fact that she’d create a stir.

Some business writers also came out in support of CKE.

“Despite protests from parent watchdog groups, like The Parents Television Council, this is just plain smart marketing in today's world,” David Kiley wrote in a May column for Businessweek online titled “Carl’s Jr’s Paris Hilton Ad Spicy and Smart.”

He adds, “Let's not be too serious about our hamburgers, shall we? (Though I do advocate keeping fast food ads off juvenile TV like Nickelodeon)."

Ads Hit 'Close to Home'

But product ads are not the only issue. Some parents also have a problem with commercials for adult-oriented TV shows.

“Networks may be putting the shows on later in the evening, but they are advertising those programs throughout the day," Melissa Caldwell, director of research and publications for the Parents Television Council, told FOXNews.com.

“I’ve been watching CBS lately at home, and at 8 p.m. they were advertising "Close to Home," a recent episode about married women who were call girls. I mean, who cares if the show itself gets a TV-14 rating if you’re watching a show with your kids and the ad for it pops up?”

Click here to learn more about TV ratings.

According to the FCC, "indecent" or "profane" programming is illegal to broadcast during certain times of day — between 6 a.m. and 10 p.m. — where there is a reasonable chance children may see it.

Obama also addressed program ads at November's decency hearing:

“Deliver promos and advertising appropriate to the show they accompany. Broadcasters should ensure that promos for horror movies and for provocative shows such as 'Las Vegas' are not being shown in the middle of a cartoon or a family sitcom with a more restrictive rating.”

Concerned parents do have recourse, though. Just like the outrage over the GoDaddy and Hilton ads caused them to be scaled back, other ads have also been yanked.

“There was a JC Penney ad a couple of years ago, a back-to-school shopping ad with a teenage girl coming downstairs, and her mother says, ‘you’re not going out of the house looking like that.’ The girl pulls her pants down til they’re sitting even lower on her hips. A lot of people contacted JC Penney and they decided to pull that ad, so sometimes that works, sometimes they are responsive to consumers,” said PTC’s Caldwell.

But others say responsibility lies with the media.

Christy Glaubke, associate director of the Children and Media Program for Children Now, told FOX News, “It’s really about the broadcasters and the cable companies taking responsibility, and being considerate about what they’re broadcasting and when."

There's a lot of stuff in this article. Apart from certain Democrats calling for censorship, I got a big kick out of this

it became obvious to us that its content was very much out of step with the tenor set by the other ads and programming broadcast by FOX on Super Bowl Sunday

Isn't that, like, pot calling the kettle black?

[Dutch]

I agree with these guys to a certain extent. I mean, I can control what my kids watch, but I can't control what commercials they see. However, my personal feeling is that my kids can handle it.

But commercials, especially unregulated, does throw a wrench into the philodophy of "Parents should regulate what their kids watch, not government." Which I believe is how it should be. While I can and do control what TV is appropraite for my kids, I can't control what commercials my kids watch.

[WVUFAN]

Parents throw a fit over Candice Michelle dancing in a Go-Daddy ad, completely clothed, but no one seems to care if their kids see alcohol use promoted during football. See, that's ok.

People are stupid.

[NoMyths]

Originally Posted by WVUFAN

Parents throw a fit over Candice Michelle dancing in a Go-Daddy ad, completely clothed, but no one seems to care if their kids see alcohol use promoted during football. See, that's ok.

People are stupid.

Alcohol & Violence = Good
Sex = Bad
Janet Jackson = Ugly

[Cringer]

I will say this whole thing is bullshit for one reason....

election year is coming.

There has not been ONE single fine by the FCC this last year. Expect for a crack down to come as the elections start to get closer.

I hate politicians.

[NoMyths]

Originally Posted by Cringer

I will say this whole thing is bullshit for one reason....

election year is coming.

There has not been ONE single fine by the FCC this last year. Expect for a crack down to come as the elections start to get closer.

I hate politicians.

If it didn't work, they wouldn't campaign on the issue. Hard to blame politicians entirely when so much of their bases make it necessary to take such positions.

[Coder]

I was going to go ballistics over this little article, but then I read WVUFan's post and he expressed it much better... and without profanity.

Originally Posted by WVUFAN

Parents throw a fit over Candice Michelle dancing in a Go-Daddy ad, completely clothed, but no one seems to care if their kids see alcohol use promoted during football. See, that's ok.

People are stupid.

How about people in general start "de-dramatizing" the whole sex-issue instead of blowing it up as being so forbidden and such a big no-no... just because we're allowed to show bare breasts on TV here in Sweden doesn't mean we run around humping everyone and everything.

[Cringer]

Originally Posted by NoMyths

If it didn't work, they wouldn't campaign on the issue. Hard to blame politicians entirely when so much of their bases make it necessary to take such positions.

I am not blaming them for speaking out against this stuff in general, I just find them full of crap because they do it pretty much just to get re-elected, no one cared that much in 2005 because it wasn't an election year.

[Cringer]

Originally Posted by Coder

... just because we're allowed to show bare breasts on TV here in Sweden doesn't mean we run around humping everyone and everything.

Damn. So much for moving there.

[Jon]

I don't necessarily think Obama's doing it to get reelected. He's not up for reelection this year. He was elected in 2004.

[ISiddiqui]

Isn't there any small government people left in Washington? Ok, dumb question, I know they've all been taken out back and shot.

It seems wierd to say that networks should promote shows later in the evening during a 'family sitcom' at 8 PM. I mean, it's primetime. Advertising for a show later in the evening is what networks have always done. I mean they want to get you watching those episodes and what better than to advertise during more popular shows during the first hour of primetime. And not like these family sitcoms are all wholesome.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by WVUFAN

Parents throw a fit over Candice Michelle dancing in a Go-Daddy ad, completely clothed, but no one seems to care if their kids see alcohol use promoted during football. See, that's ok.

I care. And I think I've said my piece on this topic before: ads should be under the same guidelines as the shows they are broadcast during. If a TV-G show wants to show TV-14 ads, then the show should be TV-14, too. Just don't pretend you've got a family show and then throw in adults-only ads.

[Cringer]

Originally Posted by Jon

I don't necessarily think Obama's doing it to get reelected. He's not up for reelection this year. He was elected in 2004.

No, but in an election that the democrats think is pretty important for them, he is a good guy to have leading the charge to help make the party look good. I don't doubt that these things truely offend him, as they do others. I just think the timing of these things are not a coincidence.

[Coder]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

I care. And I think I've said my piece on this topic before: ads should be under the same guidelines as the shows they are broadcast during. If a TV-G show wants to show TV-14 ads, then the show should be TV-14, too. Just don't pretend you've got a family show and then throw in adults-only ads.

What IS an adult-only ad? What's the drama all about? I've seen the ad in question and there's more skin in 99% of the videos they show on MTV every day.. Is it the fact that she's got boobies that's anti-family? The simple fact is that kids have seen boobies all their lives! There's no difference between mommy's boobies and someone else's boobies.

Having spent two years of my life in Georgia, I've grown to love the country and the people, but this issue you have about sexuality and skin is just laughable.

Like I mentioned above, there are no special restrictions on what can be shown on television here, and we're still not perverted sex-maniacs (at least not all of us).

I'd be much more worried having my kids watch people running around with guns on TV than letting them see some girl in a t-shirt dance around a little.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by Coder

What IS an adult-only ad? What's the drama all about? I've seen the ad in question and there's more skin in 99% of the videos they show on MTV every day.. Is it the fact that she's got boobies that's anti-family? The simple fact is that kids have seen boobies all their lives! There's no difference between mommy's boobies and someone else's boobies.

Having spent two years of my life in Georgia, I've grown to love the country and the people, but this issue you have about sexuality and skin is just laughable.

Like I mentioned above, there are no special restrictions on what can be shown on television here, and we're still not perverted sex-maniacs (at least not all of us).

I'd be much more worried having my kids watch people running around with guns on TV than letting them see some girl in a t-shirt dance around a little.

I'm not specifically complaining about the GoDaddy ad. But there are ads shown regularly that go well beyond the show they are attached to. My last set of gripes was CBS showing some pretty violent CSI ads during Sunday afternoon football. My daughter caught a glimpse of one (a woman being bludgeoned from behind) and freaked out. No more Sunday afternoon football on CBS for me if she's around...

This trend started in movie theaters a few years ago, where they started showing some pretty intense movie ads (especially for horror or suspense movies) during much more lighthearted movies.

The point is, I no longer can just decide what to watch with my kids based on the content of the show. I now have to be aware of the content of the ads shown during that show. And since you have no way to know ahead of time what the content of those ads will be (since they may well be new ads, and there is no rating system for the ads), the alternative is to simply not watch TV at all.

So Madison Avenue is driving families away from the TV. I know many will argue that's a good thing, and if so fine. But if you're going to put a rating system in, why let 1/3 of the content violate that rating?

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by Cringer

No, but in an election that the democrats think is pretty important for them, he is a good guy to have leading the charge to help make the party look good. I don't doubt that these things truely offend him, as they do others. I just think the timing of these things are not a coincidence.

Just because Obama's the only senator mentioned in the article doesn't mean this is an issue only the democrats are pushing.

If you (Buccaneer, Cringer, etc...) think Republican Senators won't also push the "decency" issue, especially as it regards Hollywood, in the upcoming midterm elections, you're going to be very, very surprised.

Let's keep the partisanship out of it, OK? Politicians of any stripe are going to congregate on this topic like maggots on a dead chicken.

[rexallllsc]

Originally Posted by WVUFAN

Parents throw a fit over Candice Michelle dancing in a Go-Daddy ad, completely clothed, but no one seems to care if their kids see alcohol use promoted during football. See, that's ok.

People are stupid.

Or the extreme amounts of violence portrayed on TV.

But a boob is EVIL!

[Cringer]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

Just because Obama's the only senator mentioned in the article doesn't mean this is an issue only the democrats are pushing.

If you (Buccaneer, Cringer, etc...) think Republican Senators won't also push the "decency" issue, especially as it regards Hollywood, in the upcoming midterm elections, you're going to be very, very surprised.

Let's keep the partisanship out of it, OK? Politicians of any stripe are going to congregate on this topic like maggots on a dead chicken.

I am not making it partisan. My original post ended with this...

I hate politicians.

The Republicans will be jumping on this every bit as much, I have no doubts about that. I had refered to Obama and the Democrats because Jon had pointed out to me Obama is not up for re-election this year.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

I'm not specifically complaining about the GoDaddy ad. But there are ads shown regularly that go well beyond the show they are attached to. My last set of gripes was CBS showing some pretty violent CSI ads during Sunday afternoon football. My daughter caught a glimpse of one (a woman being bludgeoned from behind) and freaked out. No more Sunday afternoon football on CBS for me if she's around...

Others have mentioned it before in other threads, but you are watching a game built around violence and 250 lb men colliding with each other at fast speeds, and you are complaining about violence in your ads?!

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Others have mentioned it before in other threads, but you are watching a game built around violence and 250 lb men colliding with each other at fast speeds, and you are complaining about violence in your ads?!

And as I said in that thread (which I'm scared to repeat, since the repercussions ended up getting someone boxed for 2 days, so I'll try to be more gentle): there is a WORLD of difference between a contact sport where injuries are incidental and a woman getting bludgeoned over the back of the head. If people still cannot see, understand or at least appreciate the difference, then the gulf in this debate is too wide to cross...

[st.cronin]

I maintain that tv and movies have not enough sex, and too much violence. All the top tv shows are things like 24, Law and Order, CSI: Detroit, broken up by the occasional reality show.

MORE SEX, LESS VIOLENCE = A HEALTHIER AMERICA

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

I maintain that tv and movies have not enough sex, and too much violence. All the top tv shows are things like 24, Law and Order, CSI: Detroit, broken up by the occasional reality show.

You're just not watching enough soap operas in the middle of the afternoon

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

You're just not watching enough soap operas in the middle of the afternoon

TELEMUNDO!!!!!!

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

And as I said in that thread (which I'm scared to repeat, since the repercussions ended up getting someone boxed for 2 days, so I'll try to be more gentle): there is a WORLD of difference between a contact sport where injuries are incidental and a woman getting bludgeoned over the back of the head. If people still cannot see, understand or at least appreciate the difference, then the gulf in this debate is too wide to cross...

Then perhaps it is. I don't see much of a difference, aside from the violence being real in the NFL and fake in commercials or TV shows.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Then perhaps it is. I don't see much of a difference, aside from the violence being real in the NFL and fake in commercials or TV shows.

There is also intent and level. Guys in the NFL are rarely out to injure someone else, and almost never is someone killed.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by rexallllsc

Or the extreme amounts of violence portrayed on TV.

But a boob is EVIL!

One key difference: most violence portrayed on TV includes consequences. Emotional turmoil, hospital stays, jail time, etc. This is one reason you have to be careful with kids and cartoons: cartoon violence almost NEVER has consequences. We've had to stop letting our daughter watch the muppet show until she gets old enough for us to explain why it's NOT okay to pick up her stuffed Kermit and fling him into curtains like Miss Piggy does

By contrast, the vast majority of sex shown on TV and the movies has none of the real-life consequences. How many unwanted pregnancies, cases of venereal disease, or teenage lives ruined by someone who had to drop out of school to take care of a baby do you see on TV or in the movies?

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

There is also intent and level. Guys in the NFL are rarely out to injure someone else, and almost never is someone killed.

Yeah, neither are they in TV shows... it's FAKE, you know? Make believe?

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Yeah, neither are they in TV shows... it's FAKE, you know? Make believe?

And try explaining that to a 3 year old (and believe me, we're trying). My daughter sure seems to have different emotional reactions to football than to some of these ads we're talking about.

But TV shows and movies use more than just visual cues. They also use music to help generate the appropriate emotional response. I mean, if it's fake, why are you crying at the end of a sad movie? Have you never had an emotional reaction to a book? Become attached to a TV character?

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

And try explaining that to a 3 year old (and believe me, we're trying). My daughter sure seems to have different emotional reactions to football than to some of these ads we're talking about.

But TV shows and movies use more than just visual cues. They also use music to help generate the appropriate emotional response. I mean, if it's fake, why are you crying at the end of a sad movie? Have you never had an emotional reaction to a book? Become attached to a TV character?

I don't think I ever cried at the end of a commerical.

You can know something is fake yet development an emotional ATTACHMENT. It is nigh on impossible to be emotionally attached to a commerical.

I mean, Hell, you have PG movies with simulated violence. Don't let the kid see any Harry Potter movies (before the last one, which was rated PG-13).

[sabotai]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

So Madison Avenue is driving families away from the TV. I know many will argue that's a good thing, and if so fine. But if you're going to put a rating system in, why let 1/3 of the content violate that rating?

You do bring up a good point. It'd be like buying Madden (reated E for everyone) and having a playable demo of God of War (rated M) on it.

The only issue would be that it would probably cost someone a lot of money to be able to hire enough people to view and rate all of the commercials out there, from the nationally broadcasted ones all the way to the local level commericials. Especially since the market has a constent heavy stream of new commericials.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

I don't think I ever cried at the end of a commerical.

You can know something is fake yet development an emotional ATTACHMENT. It is nigh on impossible to be emotionally attached to a commerical.

But it IS possible to have an emotional reaction to a commercial (separated from attachment). When they flash several scenes quickly with appropriate music attached, it can be scary to someone not prepared for it (like, say, a 3-year-old). Kind of like if you're walking through your house and someone jumps out and yells "boo!" when you aren't prepared for it. The length of time isn't important, it's the content. And a short reaction is a big deal to a young child.

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

I mean, Hell, you have PG movies with simulated violence. Don't let the kid see any Harry Potter movies (before the last one, which was rated PG-13).

She sure as heck won't see those until she's much older and ready for them. Harry Potter is targeted more at the Middle School crowd than the elementary / kindergarten crowd. Maybe when she's 5th or 6th grade, but it'll depend on her growth.

I'm always amazed when I watch the Little League World Series and all these 12 year olds are listing "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre" (or equivalent) as their favorite movie...

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

But it IS possible to have an emotional reaction to a commercial (separated from attachment). When they flash several scenes quickly with appropriate music attached, it can be scary to someone not prepared for it (like, say, a 3-year-old). Kind of like if you're walking through your house and someone jumps out and yells "boo!" when you aren't prepared for it. The length of time isn't important, it's the content. And a short reaction is a big deal to a young child.

I don't call jumping out of your seat because someone says "boo" to be an emotional reaction. Maybe a kid would be scared by a CSI commerical, but are you saying the kid wouldn't be scared of a very hard hit on the field, that leaves the ball carrier lying still on the ground? How is the CSI commerical worse? Especially when its quick and over, while the guy lying still is shown for over a minute... and then you have scenes of the streacher, etc.

I'm always amazed when I watch the Little League World Series and all these 12 year olds are listing "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre" (or equivalent) as their favorite movie...

I think it goes to show that kids can be more emotionally advanced that you think they can.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

I don't call jumping out of your seat because someone says "boo" to be an emotional reaction. Maybe a kid would be scared by a CSI commerical, but are you saying the kid wouldn't be scared of a very hard hit on the field, that leaves the ball carrier lying still on the ground? How is the CSI commerical worse? Especially when its quick and over, while the guy lying still is shown for over a minute... and then you have scenes of the streacher, etc.

You skipped the whole bit about presentation, including music and timing. Because based on experience watching lots of football and commercials at home with my kids int he room, I'm answering "yes" to your "are you saying the kid wouldn't be scared of a very hard hit on the field, that leaves the ball carrier lying still on the ground?" question.

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

I think it goes to show that kids can be more emotionally advanced that you think they can.

Possibly. I'll know in about 9 or 10 years

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

You skipped the whole bit about presentation, including music and timing. Because based on experience watching lots of football and commercials at home with my kids int he room, I'm answering "yes" to your "are you saying the kid wouldn't be scared of a very hard hit on the field, that leaves the ball carrier lying still on the ground?" question.

So what you are saying is the music and timing is what scares kids, and if they just played out an entire CSI theme with no music and just violence, that'd be fine?

I mean what kind of society are we in, where a hard hit that may leave someone paralyzed does nothing to a kid, but a 30 second commerical with some dramatic music and a hit to the head turns them into a wreck?!

[Karlifornia]

"It will be 'GoDaddy-esque.' In order to be 'GoDaddy-esque,' a commercial must be edgy, hot, slightly tasteless and just a touch inappropriate," he said on his Web site.

lol

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

So what you are saying is the music and timing is what scares kids, and if they just played out an entire CSI theme with no music and just violence, that'd be fine?

I mean what kind of society are we in, where a hard hit that may leave someone paralyzed does nothing to a kid, but a 30 second commerical with some dramatic music and a hit to the head turns them into a wreck?!

See, I love these debates. As the discussion meanders from point to point, one person always tries to connect unconnected dots. The points I am making are:

1) Fake stuff generates emotional reactions.

2) Fake stuff can generate a stronger emotional reaction than real stuff.

3) More intense fake stuff will generate a stronger emotional reaction than less intense real stuff.

4) The time and duration of the fake stuff is not necessarily important to the reaction it generates.

And so yes, all that means that a short 30-second spot can be harder for a child to deal with than a real-time incident where someone ends up getting hurt. In your football example, you are comparing an obvious murder with the result of a play that was probably completely missed in real time. The kid may not even KNOW the guy was paralyzed until you tell them. They see a bunch of guys flying around the field, bumping into each other and getting back up, and they understand that that is play. And they know that they occasionally get "owies" while playing. And that that is different than some mean guy coming up behind mommy (all women are "mommy" at this age) and whacking her over the head.

[ISiddiqui]

You see I totally disagree with your point that some mean guy and hitting a woman over the head should be harder for a child to deal with than seeing a football player getting hit and not getting up. Owies or not, you usually get up after a few seconds. Someone lying and not moving is quite a powerful scene.

The only difference is we've socialized our kids to see football injuries as something ok on TV, as opposed to fake violence, where we jump in front of the TV and get all frazzled, making our kids thinking that that is supposed to be super scary and they react accordingly.

Oh, and if we started rating commercials, I'd imagine that the CSI ones would be TV-PG. I mean there is nothing in those commericals worse than other stuff rated TV-PG. The show displays more gore, so it goes to TV-14.

Though I doubt this is going to change anytime soon... you could mute the TV during commericals, or express your displeasure by just not watching football on CBS.

[BrianD]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

You see I totally disagree with your point that some mean guy and hitting a woman over the head should be harder for a child to deal with than seeing a football player getting hit and not getting up. Owies or not, you usually get up after a few seconds. Someone lying and not moving is quite a powerful scene.

It is quite a powerful scene for adults because they understand what is going on. If a kid sees a guy lying on the ground, they won't understand why he is on the ground. The guy may be hurt, but the kid can't see the hurt. They would also see that 99% of the time an on-field collision doesn't cause injury. They know that hitting someone over the head with blood flying will cause injury.

If you want to equate TV violence with football violence as far as child understaning goes, you'd probably have to talk about a very visible broken bone. You probably won't really notice this the first time around, but it is easy to not let the child see the slow-motion replay.

[ISiddiqui]

I'd imagine that a kid would wonder why the guy isn't moving around and why everyone is huddled around him. I'd think he'd be able to pick out from the seriousness of everyone at the game, that something wrong just happened.

I'd also believe that the kids would realize something was wrong from the attitude of their dad, who may be really quiet and solemn at that point. I really believe that a lot of the reason kids get 'scared' at CSI commericials is because their parents are in a state of panic about changing the channel or something.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

I'd imagine that a kid would wonder why the guy isn't moving around and why everyone is huddled around him. I'd think he'd be able to pick out from the seriousness of everyone at the game, that something wrong just happened.

Actually, the kid would get bored because nothing is happening and walk away. Or I would divert their attention from the screen since there is plenty of warning.

But this happens, what, maybe once every couple of weeks in an NFL broadcast? Most of the time guys collide, get up, shake it off, and move on.

To kids most of this is nothing. And you're talking about a very infrequent incident. You're talking about a guy being paralyzed; when was the last NFL player to get paralyzed? How many years ago again? The worst you typically see is something like Carson Palmer shredding his ACL, and these guys are being helped off or carted off waving at the crowd and pumping their fists.

On the other hand, the commercials condense as much intensity into a short time as possible. It's like the old joke about bad comedies where the trailer is hilarious, but then you see the movie and realise that they crammed all the funny scenes into the trailer...

And yes, it'll be a while before my kid watches the "Jacked Up" segment on ESPN...

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

I'd also believe that the kids would realize something was wrong from the attitude of their dad, who may be really quiet and solemn at that point. I really believe that a lot of the reason kids get 'scared' at CSI commericials is because their parents are in a state of panic about changing the channel or something.

Actually, in my particular case I DIDN'T think much of what was happening on screen UNTIL my child reacted. So, no.

[ISiddiqui]

::shrug::

Well, you may consider it inappropriate for your children, but frankly, its not going to end anytime soon. And football, especially, is prime oppertunity for hyping shows that the 18-34 crowd would love. Like I said, you can choose not to watch it again (though the other issue is football commericals have NEVER been all that family friendly - from Levitra and Viagra, to beer commercials with girls in skimpy clothing, to commercials for R rated movies).

I think that getting upset over a CSI commerical where someone bops a mom on the head in between breaks of an exceedingly violent game as the NFL is silly (it'd be different if you were talking baseball, for instance.. but I still wouldn't have sympathy for ya), but that's just me.

[Buccaneer]

Imran, I am tending to agree with your views here. Do you think that all sports have become more violent? And if so, why?

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Buccaneer

Imran, I am tending to agree with your views here. Do you think that all sports have become more violent? And if so, why?

I wouldn't say they have BECOME more violent, just that the violence is more highlighted. Think of segments like "Jacked Up" on ESPN. But they don't have to be that blatent. The spotlighting of big hits in ultra sllllloooowww motion in highlights also tends to increase the amount of violence we see. I mean how many of us could see the Carson Palmer injury in slow motion without wincing.

Although, I would argue that bigger and faster players have made more spectacular collisions. So perhaps violence has increased somewhat, but I think the TV coverage of these games contributes a far greater deal.