The Warring States of NPF

The Warring States of NPF (http://www.nuklearforums.com/index.php)
-   Dead threads (http://www.nuklearforums.com/forumdisplay.php?f=91)
-   -   Can the Smurfs still fight Gargamel? (http://www.nuklearforums.com/showthread.php?t=13450)

Dasanudas 03-03-2006 06:50 PM

Can the Smurfs still fight Gargamel?
 
I don't believe this

Lowdown:

Quote:

Originally Posted by CNN.com
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Children's television programs are filled with violent, disrespectful and aggressive behaviors, according to a study commissioned by a conservative television watchdog group.

The Parents Television Council said it monitored more than 440 hours of programming geared toward young people and found 3,488 incidents of violence, an average of almost eight incidents an hour.

The group, headed by L. Brent Bozell, said "there is more violence aimed directly at young children than at adults on television today."

The study reported that the Cartoon Network -- which is owned by Time Warner, the parent company of CNN -- had the highest number of violent incidents with 1,330, or 5 incidents per episode.

The ABC Family Channel had only 318 violent incidents, but had an average of almost 11 per episode, the highest of the networks surveyed.

The report said the WB cartoon "Teen Titans" had the most violence with 21.7 incidents per episode. Time Warner also owns The WB.

"Too often we dismiss violence in children's programming as inconsequential," the study said.

It also pointed out that although cartoons have been historically violent, what's changed is the level of violence, and it called the results "ubiquitous, often sinister, and in many cases frighteningly realistic."

The Disney Channel had the lowest number of violent incidents at 0.95 per episode, the report said. Both ABC Family Channel and Disney Channel are owned by the Disney Co.

The group studied four broadcast networks (ABC, Fox, NBC and The WB) and four cable networks (Cartoon Network, the Disney Channel, ABC Family and Nickelodeon) over a three-week period in the summer of 2005. The study focused on after-school and Saturday morning programming.

The report also criticized the networks for airing children's programs with questionable language -- such as "stupid," "loser" and "butt" -- as well as sexual innuendo, insults, bullying and putdowns.

TV Watch, a group backed by television networks that opposes Washington oversight of programming, criticized the report as sensationalized.

Jim Dyke, executive director of the organization, said parental intervention would be enough to counter violence on children's TV shows.

"Parents relying on ubiquitous and user-friendly technology, ratings information and their own good judgment to manage TV is the best approach, not increased government control," he said.

The nation's first major study on the effects of TV violence was a 1972 U.S. surgeon general's report that said, "Televised violence, indeed, does have an adverse effect on certain members of our society."

Professional health organizations such as the American Academy of Pediatrics, American Psychological Association and American Medical Association have concluded data show at least a casual link between extensive TV viewership and aggression in children.

The Parents Television Council said its report included everything from characters running into a door to depictions of death, fire and off-screen violence that is heard but not seen.

When cartoons were taken out of the numbers, the study still found 2,794 instances of violence, or 6.3 an hour, the group said.

On its Web site, the Parents Television Council says its primary mission is "to promote and restore responsibility and decency to the entertainment industry in answer to America's demand for positive, family-oriented television programming."

The group recently applauded the ABC television network for adding a tape delay during this year's Super Bowl.

My favorite parts? The fact that these people think "stupid" and "butt" are too horrible to mention on TV. That and the including of running into a door or fire are considered violent acts in a show. I've seen Barney fall down on his show, is that considered violent too?

Now, I'm all for cleaning up TV - I do believe what we watch directly affects our consiousness, but this is getting to the point....excuse me, this is WAY BEYOND the point of extreme silliness.

Thoughts?

POS Industries 03-03-2006 07:11 PM

What's funny is that the Parents Television Council comes out with the exact same study every few years, and the results are always the same: children's shows are too darn violent and our kids just don't better than to emulate what they're seeing. Before this, it was Power Rangers. Before that, Ninja Turtles. Earlier still, GI Joe, Transformers, and He-Man.

Personally, I think it might actually be a good thing that "kids" programming has this sort of content. Because of this, studies like this come out and parents jump on the "half-assed overparenting" bandwagon and start keeping an eye on what their children are exposed to. It leads them to interact more with their kids and illustrate examples of right and wrong behavior. Were this sort of thing removed and children's television sanitized to the point that the PTC wants, then parents would be more apt to let their kids sit there staring at the TV all day, being blank, unfeeling zombies or something of the sort.

Parental responsibility is one thing. Promoting a system that leads to complacency is another.

Fifthfiend 03-03-2006 07:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by POS Industries
Personally, I think it might actually be a good thing that "kids" programming has this sort of content. Because of this, studies like this come out and parents jump on the "half-assed overparenting" bandwagon and start keeping an eye on what their children are exposed to. It leads them to interact more with their kids and illustrate examples of right and wrong behavior.

Eh, in my experience mostly it just makes them turn into dumb panicky assholes about shit they were already aware of, and then like three months later they stop giving a shit. Parents teaching their kids "right and wrong" sounds nice in theory, except what parent actually believes half the shit they tell their kids is right and wrong?

Quote:

Originally Posted by POS Industries
Were this sort of thing removed and children's television sanitized to the point that the PTC wants, then parents would be more apt to let their kids sit there staring at the TV all day, being blank, unfeeling zombies or something of the sort.

If television was sanitized to the point the PTC wants then kids would probably just stop watching and go do something.

And hell after a week of that, parents would either call the networks and demand more violent TV, or just pump their rugrats full of Ritalin until the little fuckers sat down and shut up.

The SSB Intern 03-03-2006 08:12 PM

This is ridiculous. The 1940ish cartoons never had these guys on their backs and they were very violent. And when moniter tv for 440 hours, you now officially have too much time.

On another note, I can't believe that CNN would spend time making an article about this. Nothing ever happens, they just keep getting their diapers in a knot.

Fifthfiend 03-03-2006 08:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The SSB Intern
On another note, I can't believe that CNN would spend time making an article about this. Nothing ever happens, they just keep getting their diapers in a knot.

Yeah, TV news anymore is like the goddamn modern-day carival sideshow, a parade of freaks and bullshit for anybody dumb enough to believe that the lady actually has a real beard.

MetalPsycho 03-03-2006 09:11 PM

Jack Tompson must be having a wet dream.

Jees. Don't they think they're taking this a little too...I dunno...harsh? I mean come on. Violence is a pretty natural thing we face every day. Are we going to start sanitizing real life next? Riiighty then.

And come one. What's this Teen Titans crarzyness. I don't even see how that even counts as kids TV. After all, it DOES have violence and the word butt used to the point it's just painful to hear it.

Arlia Janet 03-03-2006 09:33 PM

I miss the good ole days where Jerry could shoot Tom in the ear with a pistol and everything would be just fine a few seconds later. I don't want my kids watching this "realistic" stuff where people who do bad things have to live with the consequences.



... Jerry was a little bitch by the way.

Fifthfiend 03-03-2006 11:26 PM

You know what always pissed me off, was once in a while they'd have Tom actually catch Jerry and eat him, except then Jerry'd be in Tom's stomach and he'd just stab him in the appendix or something and when Tom screamed Jerry'd run out.

It's like at that point it's like come on Tom, just give it up. I mean you're not even physically capable of digesting him. I mean, just give it up.

POS Industries 03-04-2006 02:09 AM

Bah, that's not as bad as the new Tom and Jerry garbage they put out now and again. You know, the stuff where they're friends and team up to solve mysteries or fight ghosts or some stupid crap like that...

But to me, it comes down to the same old "things sure were better back in the old days" nonsense people like to spew out. I've pointed this out when someone, my mother as an example, would do this.

"When I was younger, towns weren't as big as they were. Everybody knew each other and they were much more polite. Things were so much better back then."

"Yes, but people of different skin pigments couldn't even drink at the same water fountain, our nation was trapped in a losing war for a decade with thousands of casualties, there was a political assassination in this country every two or three weeks, women were having abortions with coat hangars and lysol, and The Lemon Pipers? Are you fucking kidding me?"

In short, it's not that cartoons have gotten worse, it's just that the people who experienced older ones remember them more fondly and are put off by the unfamiliarity of what is new. It's the natural human fear of change and difference. If something is different from what we know, then it must be bad... it must be...

Kaelus 03-04-2006 11:21 AM

They should count the violent incidents in a Bugs Bunny cartoon.

Quote:

Daffy: Well, I guess I'm the goat.
[Bugs holds up a sign that reads "Goat Season Open!" and Elmer shoots Daffy].
Daffy: Boy am I a pigeon.
[Bugs holds up a sign that reads "Pigeon Season" and Elmer shoots Daffy].
Daffy: Why, if he's dead, then I'm a mongoose!
[Bugs holds up a sign that reads "Mongoose Season" and Elmer shoots Daffy].
Daffy: You're a dirty dog.
Bugs: And YOU are a dirty skunk!
Daffy: I'm a dirty skunk? I'M a dirty skunk?
[Bugs holds up a sign that reads "Dirty Skunk Season" and Elmer shoots Daffy].
How can they complain about Teen Titans when there's this show where people get shot in the face?

PS: don't you love Wikipedia?


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:18 AM.

Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.