Discussion:
Repeal the Children's Television Act of 1990 (BRAND NEW FACEBOOK PAGE)
(too old to reply)
TMC
2012-04-04 07:13:06 UTC
Permalink
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Repeal-the-Childrens-Television-Act/260424677385966

About:
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Repeal-the-Childrens-Television-Act/260424677385966?sk=info

Description
http://boards.radio-info.com/smf/index.php?topic=209411.10

Re: NBC To Debut Saturday Preschool Block
« Reply #13 on: April 01, 2012, 12:03:38 AM »
Quote from: Mario-500 on March 29, 2012, 07:02:12 AM
The description "preschool block" reminds me of my wish for the repeal
of the Children's Television Act passed by the Congress of the United
States in 1990. If more folks were aware of the law and they were to
contact their legislators, there would be a great chance of this law
being repealed, thus leaving broadcasters without obligations to
broadcasting educational and informative programming programming. It
may not lead to the return of the traditional Saturday morning
programming of the past immediately, but it would mean less government
regulation of content broadcast.

There's not really much chance of it being repealed, since I can't
imagine there being much of a groundswell of people writing to their
legislators on this particular issue. Most folks simply don't care one
way or the other.

In any event, even if it were repealed, the chances of it resulting in
the "return of the traditional Saturday morning programming" is
somewhere in the general vicinity of zero. Saturday morning cartoons
did not disappear because of the Children's Television Act -- they
disappeared because children's advertising mostly moved to cable
channels. The revenue just wasn't there to motivate stations to
continue running kid's shows. So the strong stations ran news (which
was more profitable) and the weak stations started running
infomercials. The only way that changes is if stations think that they
can sell advertising during children's programming.

« Reply #14 on: April 01, 2012, 12:18:29 AM »
Quote from: TexasTom on April 01, 2012, 12:03:38 AM
There's not really much chance of it being repealed, since I can't
imagine there being much of a groundswell of people writing to their
legislators on this particular issue. Most folks simply don't care one
way or the other.

Apparently, broadcasters seem to be apathetic about the issue as well
-- even though they're finding the cheapest ways to satisfy E/I,
they're in no hurry to get their lobbying group in Washington to
pressure the congresspeople to abolish E/I.

Quote from: TexasTom on April 01, 2012, 12:03:38 AM
The revenue just wasn't there to motivate stations to continue running
kid's shows. So the strong stations ran news (which was more
profitable) and the weak stations started running infomercials. The
only way that changes is if stations think that they can sell
advertising during children's programming.

Technically, stations still can run ads during kids' shows, but with
so much strings attached as to what ads can and can't be broadcast,
it's hardly worth it. For that reason, "Litton's Weekend Adventure"
has pharmaceutical ads and PI commercials, all focused on adults in
general, during the breaks.

« Reply #17 on: April 02, 2012, 09:13:10 PM »
Quote from: azumanga on April 01, 2012, 12:18:29 AM
Quote from: TexasTom on April 01, 2012, 12:03:38 AM
The revenue just wasn't there to motivate stations to continue running
kid's shows. So the strong stations ran news (which was more
profitable) and the weak stations started running infomercials. The
only way that changes is if stations think that they can sell
advertising during children's programming.

Technically, stations still can run ads during kids' shows, but with
so much strings attached as to what ads can and can't be broadcast,
it's hardly worth it. For that reason, "Litton's Weekend Adventure"
has pharmaceutical ads and PI commercials, all focused on adults in
general, during the breaks.

The problem isn't with the advertising that they're legally allowed to
run -- the problem is that the advertisers simply aren't interested in
buying advertising during children's programming on local stations.
That's why the PI commercials run...the stations can't sell the time
to anyone else. And it has nothing to do with the Children's TV Act,
which was in effect long before children's TV on broadcast stations
dried up. In fact, the strongest years for kids shows on both Fox and
the WB occurred during years in which the act was already in effect.

« Reply #18 on: April 02, 2012, 09:29:58 PM »
Quote from: TexasTom on April 02, 2012, 09:13:10 PM
Quote from: azumanga on April 01, 2012, 12:18:29 AM
Quote from: TexasTom on April 01, 2012, 12:03:38 AM
The revenue just wasn't there to motivate stations to continue running
kid's shows. So the strong stations ran news (which was more
profitable) and the weak stations started running infomercials. The
only way that changes is if stations think that they can sell
advertising during children's programming.

Technically, stations still can run ads during kids' shows, but with
so much strings attached as to what ads can and can't be broadcast,
it's hardly worth it. For that reason, "Litton's Weekend Adventure"
has pharmaceutical ads and PI commercials, all focused on adults in
general, during the breaks.

The problem isn't with the advertising that they're legally allowed to
run -- the problem is that the advertisers simply aren't interested in
buying advertising during children's programming on local stations.
That's why the PI commercials run...the stations can't sell the time
to anyone else. And it has nothing to do with the Children's TV Act,
which was in effect long before children's TV on broadcast stations
dried up. In fact, the strongest years for kids shows on both Fox and
the WB occurred during years in which the act was already in effect.

Nickelodeon and CN don't show blatantly educational programming other
than possibly Nick News (wasn't that sydicated to local station as an
E/I show), school age kids won't watch them. Kids that actually want
to watch educational shows watch PBS

« Reply #19 on: Yesterday at 12:49:37 AM »
If Saved by the Bell qualifies as E/I then whay can't Looney Tunes,
Tom & Jerry, or even the Three Stooges?

But I agree that even if E/I is repealed, the networks will never go
back to Saturday morning kid's shows like they used to be, and will
probably be more likely to drop them completely.

The best thing that I can see coming out of E/I being repealed is that
perhaps college football and basketball will start earlier in the
day.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E/I
Matt Casey
2012-04-05 18:04:58 UTC
Permalink
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Repeal-the-Childrens-Television-Act/260...
About:http://www.facebook.com/pages/Repeal-the-Childrens-Television-Act/260...
Descriptionhttp://boards.radio-info.com/smf/index.php?topic=209411.10
Re: NBC To Debut Saturday Preschool Block
« Reply #13 on: April 01, 2012, 12:03:38 AM »
Quote from: Mario-500 on March 29, 2012, 07:02:12 AM
The description "preschool block" reminds me of my wish for the repeal
of the Children's Television Act passed by the Congress of the United
States in 1990. If more folks were aware of the law and they were to
contact their legislators, there would be a great chance of this law
being repealed, thus leaving broadcasters without obligations to
broadcasting educational and informative programming programming. It
may not lead to the return of the traditional Saturday morning
programming of the past immediately, but it would mean less government
regulation of content broadcast.
There's not really much chance of it being repealed, since I can't
imagine there being much of a groundswell of people writing to their
legislators on this particular issue. Most folks simply don't care one
way or the other.
In any event, even if it were repealed, the chances of it resulting in
the "return of the traditional Saturday morning programming" is
somewhere in the general vicinity of zero. Saturday morning cartoons
did not disappear because of the Children's Television Act -- they
disappeared because children's advertising mostly moved to cable
channels. The revenue just wasn't there to motivate stations to
continue running kid's shows. So the strong stations ran news (which
was more profitable) and the weak stations started running
infomercials. The only way that changes is if stations think that they
can sell advertising during children's programming.
« Reply #14 on: April 01, 2012, 12:18:29 AM »
Quote from: TexasTom on April 01, 2012, 12:03:38 AM
There's not really much chance of it being repealed, since I can't
imagine there being much of a groundswell of people writing to their
legislators on this particular issue. Most folks simply don't care one
way or the other.
Apparently, broadcasters seem to be apathetic about the issue as well
-- even though they're finding the cheapest ways to satisfy E/I,
they're in no hurry to get their lobbying group in Washington to
pressure the congresspeople to abolish E/I.
Quote from: TexasTom on April 01, 2012, 12:03:38 AM
The revenue just wasn't there to motivate stations to continue running
kid's shows. So the strong stations ran news (which was more
profitable) and the weak stations started running infomercials. The
only way that changes is if stations think that they can sell
advertising during children's programming.
Technically, stations still can run ads during kids' shows, but with
so much strings attached as to what ads can and can't be broadcast,
it's hardly worth it. For that reason, "Litton's Weekend Adventure"
has pharmaceutical ads and PI commercials, all focused on adults in
general, during the breaks.
« Reply #17 on: April 02, 2012, 09:13:10 PM »
Quote from: azumanga on April 01, 2012, 12:18:29 AM
Quote from: TexasTom on April 01, 2012, 12:03:38 AM
The revenue just wasn't there to motivate stations to continue running
kid's shows. So the strong stations ran news (which was more
profitable) and the weak stations started running infomercials. The
only way that changes is if stations think that they can sell
advertising during children's programming.
Technically, stations still can run ads during kids' shows, but with
so much strings attached as to what ads can and can't be broadcast,
it's hardly worth it. For that reason, "Litton's Weekend Adventure"
has pharmaceutical ads and PI commercials, all focused on adults in
general, during the breaks.
The problem isn't with the advertising that they're legally allowed to
run -- the problem is that the advertisers simply aren't interested in
buying advertising during children's programming on local stations.
That's why the PI commercials run...the stations can't sell the time
to anyone else. And it has nothing to do with the Children's TV Act,
which was in effect long before children's TV on broadcast stations
dried up. In fact, the strongest years for kids shows on both Fox and
the WB occurred during years in which the act was already in effect.
« Reply #18 on: April 02, 2012, 09:29:58 PM »
Quote from: TexasTom on April 02, 2012, 09:13:10 PM
Quote from: azumanga on April 01, 2012, 12:18:29 AM
Quote from: TexasTom on April 01, 2012, 12:03:38 AM
The revenue just wasn't there to motivate stations to continue running
kid's shows. So the strong stations ran news (which was more
profitable) and the weak stations started running infomercials. The
only way that changes is if stations think that they can sell
advertising during children's programming.
Technically, stations still can run ads during kids' shows, but with
so much strings attached as to what ads can and can't be broadcast,
it's hardly worth it. For that reason, "Litton's Weekend Adventure"
has pharmaceutical ads and PI commercials, all focused on adults in
general, during the breaks.
The problem isn't with the advertising that they're legally allowed to
run -- the problem is that the advertisers simply aren't interested in
buying advertising during children's programming on local stations.
That's why the PI commercials run...the stations can't sell the time
to anyone else. And it has nothing to do with the Children's TV Act,
which was in effect long before children's TV on broadcast stations
dried up. In fact, the strongest years for kids shows on both Fox and
the WB occurred during years in which the act was already in effect.
Nickelodeon and CN don't show blatantly educational programming other
than possibly Nick News (wasn't that sydicated to local station as an
E/I show), school age kids won't watch them. Kids that actually want
to watch educational shows watch PBS
« Reply #19 on: Yesterday at 12:49:37 AM »
If Saved by the Bell qualifies as E/I then whay can't Looney Tunes,
Tom & Jerry, or even the Three Stooges?
But I agree that even if E/I is repealed, the networks will never go
back to Saturday morning kid's shows like they used to be, and will
probably be more likely to drop them completely.
The best thing that I can see coming out of E/I being repealed is that
perhaps college football and basketball will start earlier in the
day.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E/I
The Children's Television Act should not be repealed as it helps
maintain the appropriate use of the public airwaves, prevents the
networks from producing programming that's inappropriate, helps
parents guide their children in what TV programs they should watch,
promotes family-friendly programming, takes the burden off PBS, and
prevents the exclusion of children from TV programming. E/I isn't
censorship. Do we want our children to watch filth or be excluded from
TV programming because everything is for adults.

There is plenty of programming for adults and that's on the
majority of the time. Why can't some time, even if its only for one
hour a week, be reserved for our kids? And when they watch, why can't
they learn something? There's needs to be more available for kids to
watch on television than just cartoons. And I wouldn't want my kids to
watch today's cartoons anyway. They're low quality garbage. It would
actually be censorship to repeal E/I because it would be allowing the
corrupt elements of the entertainment industry to control the
airwaves. Repealing E/I could actually lead to the imposition of
unconstitutional regulations. Do you all want that?

I agree that not everything should be family-friendly and for
children. Adults should have entertainment, but the networks giving
children three hours of their programming time every week isn't making
that much of a sacrifice and guarantees continued freedom of the
airwaves. If you hurt our kids by denying them that three hours that's
currently devoted to them you'll hurt us all. I'll say it again. The
networks devote the majority of their time to adults, but they can
give children three hours a week so children can learn.
Remysun
2012-04-13 03:11:34 UTC
Permalink
     The Children's Television Act should not be repealed as it helps
maintain the appropriate use of the public airwaves, prevents the
networks from producing programming that's inappropriate, helps
parents guide their children in what TV programs they should watch,
promotes family-friendly programming, takes the burden off PBS, and
prevents the exclusion of children from TV programming. E/I isn't
censorship. Do we want our children to watch filth or be excluded from
TV programming because everything is for adults.
It needs to be reformed or rolled back to pre-1990 standards. Back
then, there were adaptations of Huck Finn and other childrens' books,
lessons on parts of speech, science experiments, safety tips, and be
nice to others messages. Now, everything is zoo shows and Disney
skirting the E/I because everything they produce is vertical
integration. Kids learned jack shit from Hannah Montana, but it sure
helped sell a lot of stuff.

Seriously, Pokemon may be a blatant commercial, but subtly, there's
649 of them, individually named with allusions and puns, and there's
kids who've memorized all of them, which proves that they could learn
if education wasn't such a crock.
     There is plenty of programming for adults and that's on the
majority of the time. Why can't some time, even if its only for one
hour a week, be reserved for our kids? And when they watch, why can't
they learn something? There's needs to be more available for kids to
watch on television than just cartoons. And I wouldn't want my kids to
watch today's cartoons anyway. They're low quality garbage. It would
actually be censorship to repeal E/I because it would be allowing the
corrupt elements of the entertainment industry to control the
airwaves. Repealing E/I could actually lead to the imposition of
unconstitutional regulations. Do you all want that?
If that's what they had before, then yes. Weekday afternoons and
Saturday mornings used to belong to kids. Now, everything has been
reduced to the 3 hours needed to comply with the law, and the
diversity (which is the greatest lesson we can pass onto children) has
been nearly eliminated, save for Dora's once a week appearance on CBS.

And the worst part is that it doesn't address the needs of children at
their various stages of development. It would actually be better to
have the old cartoons back on TV, because parents might actually watch
with their children out of nostalgia, and that togetherness is what's
missing from society.

So I know what you're saying, but the three hours is very limiting,
because it's not enough.
Ken Arromdee
2012-04-23 22:33:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Remysun
Seriously, Pokemon may be a blatant commercial, but subtly, there's
649 of them, individually named with allusions and puns, and there's
kids who've memorized all of them, which proves that they could learn
if education wasn't such a crock.
This argument always bothered me. How do you know that the kids memorized
all the Pokemon? Maybe they memorized 2/3 of them, forgot some more,
and got 10% of them wrong. Maybe they just know the names but got the
descriptions wrong. After all, how would you ever notice?
--
Ken Arromdee / arromdee_AT_rahul.net / http://www.rahul.net/arromdee

Obi-wan Kenobi: "Only a Sith deals in absolutes."
Yoda: "Do or do not. There is no 'try'."
Remysun
2012-04-24 02:34:19 UTC
Permalink
This argument always bothered me.  How do you know that the kids memorized
all the Pokemon?  Maybe they memorized 2/3 of them, forgot some more,
and got 10% of them wrong.  Maybe they just know the names but got the
descriptions wrong.  After all, how would you ever notice?
For the original 150, there was a Pokerap. The video and card games
depend on taking advantage of Pokemon strengths and weaknesses. Plus,
both versions depend on reading. The card game is their first dabble
in fine print. I'm actually surprised that the Christian Right hasn't
yet denounced Pokemon over their version of evolution.

But really, even if they err as much as you claim, that would still be
a sad improvement if it could somehow be applied to standardized
tests. Like when I had to memorize the periodic table.
Ken Arromdee
2012-04-24 19:06:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Remysun
This argument always bothered me.  How do you know that the kids memorized
all the Pokemon?
For the original 150, there was a Pokerap. The video and card games
depend on taking advantage of Pokemon strengths and weaknesses.
Taking advantage of Pokemon strengths and weaknesses helps you play the
game better, but you need to memorize very few Pokemon in order to just
play and even win. You certainly don't need to memorize even half of them.
You can't even get all the Pokemon in a single game.
Post by Remysun
Plus, both versions depend on reading.
Reading is not memorization.
--
Ken Arromdee / arromdee_AT_rahul.net / http://www.rahul.net/arromdee

Obi-wan Kenobi: "Only a Sith deals in absolutes."
Yoda: "Do or do not. There is no 'try'."
j***@gmail.com
2014-01-19 15:33:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Matt Casey
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Repeal-the-Childrens-Television-Act/260...
About:http://www.facebook.com/pages/Repeal-the-Childrens-Television-Act/260...
Descriptionhttp://boards.radio-info.com/smf/index.php?topic=209411.10
Re: NBC To Debut Saturday Preschool Block
« Reply #13 on: April 01, 2012, 12:03:38 AM »
Quote from: Mario-500 on March 29, 2012, 07:02:12 AM
The description "preschool block" reminds me of my wish for the repeal
of the Children's Television Act passed by the Congress of the United
States in 1990. If more folks were aware of the law and they were to
contact their legislators, there would be a great chance of this law
being repealed, thus leaving broadcasters without obligations to
broadcasting educational and informative programming programming. It
may not lead to the return of the traditional Saturday morning
programming of the past immediately, but it would mean less government
regulation of content broadcast.
There's not really much chance of it being repealed, since I can't
imagine there being much of a groundswell of people writing to their
legislators on this particular issue. Most folks simply don't care one
way or the other.
In any event, even if it were repealed, the chances of it resulting in
the "return of the traditional Saturday morning programming" is
somewhere in the general vicinity of zero. Saturday morning cartoons
did not disappear because of the Children's Television Act -- they
disappeared because children's advertising mostly moved to cable
channels. The revenue just wasn't there to motivate stations to
continue running kid's shows. So the strong stations ran news (which
was more profitable) and the weak stations started running
infomercials. The only way that changes is if stations think that they
can sell advertising during children's programming.
« Reply #14 on: April 01, 2012, 12:18:29 AM »
Quote from: TexasTom on April 01, 2012, 12:03:38 AM
There's not really much chance of it being repealed, since I can't
imagine there being much of a groundswell of people writing to their
legislators on this particular issue. Most folks simply don't care one
way or the other.
Apparently, broadcasters seem to be apathetic about the issue as well
-- even though they're finding the cheapest ways to satisfy E/I,
they're in no hurry to get their lobbying group in Washington to
pressure the congresspeople to abolish E/I.
Quote from: TexasTom on April 01, 2012, 12:03:38 AM
The revenue just wasn't there to motivate stations to continue running
kid's shows. So the strong stations ran news (which was more
profitable) and the weak stations started running infomercials. The
only way that changes is if stations think that they can sell
advertising during children's programming.
Technically, stations still can run ads during kids' shows, but with
so much strings attached as to what ads can and can't be broadcast,
it's hardly worth it. For that reason, "Litton's Weekend Adventure"
has pharmaceutical ads and PI commercials, all focused on adults in
general, during the breaks.
« Reply #17 on: April 02, 2012, 09:13:10 PM »
Quote from: azumanga on April 01, 2012, 12:18:29 AM
Quote from: TexasTom on April 01, 2012, 12:03:38 AM
The revenue just wasn't there to motivate stations to continue running
kid's shows. So the strong stations ran news (which was more
profitable) and the weak stations started running infomercials. The
only way that changes is if stations think that they can sell
advertising during children's programming.
Technically, stations still can run ads during kids' shows, but with
so much strings attached as to what ads can and can't be broadcast,
it's hardly worth it. For that reason, "Litton's Weekend Adventure"
has pharmaceutical ads and PI commercials, all focused on adults in
general, during the breaks.
The problem isn't with the advertising that they're legally allowed to
run -- the problem is that the advertisers simply aren't interested in
buying advertising during children's programming on local stations.
That's why the PI commercials run...the stations can't sell the time
to anyone else. And it has nothing to do with the Children's TV Act,
which was in effect long before children's TV on broadcast stations
dried up. In fact, the strongest years for kids shows on both Fox and
the WB occurred during years in which the act was already in effect.
« Reply #18 on: April 02, 2012, 09:29:58 PM »
Quote from: TexasTom on April 02, 2012, 09:13:10 PM
Quote from: azumanga on April 01, 2012, 12:18:29 AM
Quote from: TexasTom on April 01, 2012, 12:03:38 AM
The revenue just wasn't there to motivate stations to continue running
kid's shows. So the strong stations ran news (which was more
profitable) and the weak stations started running infomercials. The
only way that changes is if stations think that they can sell
advertising during children's programming.
Technically, stations still can run ads during kids' shows, but with
so much strings attached as to what ads can and can't be broadcast,
it's hardly worth it. For that reason, "Litton's Weekend Adventure"
has pharmaceutical ads and PI commercials, all focused on adults in
general, during the breaks.
The problem isn't with the advertising that they're legally allowed to
run -- the problem is that the advertisers simply aren't interested in
buying advertising during children's programming on local stations.
That's why the PI commercials run...the stations can't sell the time
to anyone else. And it has nothing to do with the Children's TV Act,
which was in effect long before children's TV on broadcast stations
dried up. In fact, the strongest years for kids shows on both Fox and
the WB occurred during years in which the act was already in effect.
Nickelodeon and CN don't show blatantly educational programming other
than possibly Nick News (wasn't that sydicated to local station as an
E/I show), school age kids won't watch them. Kids that actually want
to watch educational shows watch PBS
« Reply #19 on: Yesterday at 12:49:37 AM »
If Saved by the Bell qualifies as E/I then whay can't Looney Tunes,
Tom & Jerry, or even the Three Stooges?
But I agree that even if E/I is repealed, the networks will never go
back to Saturday morning kid's shows like they used to be, and will
probably be more likely to drop them completely.
The best thing that I can see coming out of E/I being repealed is that
perhaps college football and basketball will start earlier in the
day.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E/I
The Children's Television Act should not be repealed as it helps
maintain the appropriate use of the public airwaves, prevents the
networks from producing programming that's inappropriate, helps
parents guide their children in what TV programs they should watch,
promotes family-friendly programming, takes the burden off PBS, and
prevents the exclusion of children from TV programming. E/I isn't
censorship. Do we want our children to watch filth or be excluded from
TV programming because everything is for adults.
There is plenty of programming for adults and that's on the
majority of the time. Why can't some time, even if its only for one
hour a week, be reserved for our kids? And when they watch, why can't
they learn something? There's needs to be more available for kids to
watch on television than just cartoons. And I wouldn't want my kids to
watch today's cartoons anyway. They're low quality garbage. It would
actually be censorship to repeal E/I because it would be allowing the
corrupt elements of the entertainment industry to control the
airwaves. Repealing E/I could actually lead to the imposition of
unconstitutional regulations. Do you all want that?
I agree that not everything should be family-friendly and for
children. Adults should have entertainment, but the networks giving
children three hours of their programming time every week isn't making
that much of a sacrifice and guarantees continued freedom of the
airwaves. If you hurt our kids by denying them that three hours that's
currently devoted to them you'll hurt us all. I'll say it again. The
networks devote the majority of their time to adults, but they can
give children three hours a week so children can learn.
Beat it liberal. I'm sick and tired of you people wanting government to regulate EVERYTHING. That shit needs to end!
d***@gmail.com
2012-04-12 19:53:21 UTC
Permalink
i have to say this is so wrong on so many levels... there are many reasons why censorship must be outright banned...
1: censorship is a fragment of communist
2: it goes against my freedom as well as other people's freedoms...
3: nothing good has come of it the children now adays are more ignorant then ever.
4:ignorance leads to corruption.
5: kids don't want to be educated from the tv they just want to chill after an annoying day of school. some need to be distracted from their pain some days.
6: its an insult to everything that America stands for.
add it all up and you got a seriously evil bill.
and matt casey you are an idiot all this bill has done is create evil.
the only thing we've gained is a way to torment children. reality doesn't need to be hammered into kids this way. i don't expect you to listen i only expect you to have some respect for what has been lost and what HASN'T BEEN GAINED!
p***@gmail.com
2018-06-16 17:59:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by TMC
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Repeal-the-Childrens-Television-Act/260424677385966
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Repeal-the-Childrens-Television-Act/260424677385966?sk=info
Description
http://boards.radio-info.com/smf/index.php?topic=209411.10
Re: NBC To Debut Saturday Preschool Block
« Reply #13 on: April 01, 2012, 12:03:38 AM »
Quote from: Mario-500 on March 29, 2012, 07:02:12 AM
The description "preschool block" reminds me of my wish for the repeal
of the Children's Television Act passed by the Congress of the United
States in 1990. If more folks were aware of the law and they were to
contact their legislators, there would be a great chance of this law
being repealed, thus leaving broadcasters without obligations to
broadcasting educational and informative programming programming. It
may not lead to the return of the traditional Saturday morning
programming of the past immediately, but it would mean less government
regulation of content broadcast.
There's not really much chance of it being repealed, since I can't
imagine there being much of a groundswell of people writing to their
legislators on this particular issue. Most folks simply don't care one
way or the other.
In any event, even if it were repealed, the chances of it resulting in
the "return of the traditional Saturday morning programming" is
somewhere in the general vicinity of zero. Saturday morning cartoons
did not disappear because of the Children's Television Act -- they
disappeared because children's advertising mostly moved to cable
channels. The revenue just wasn't there to motivate stations to
continue running kid's shows. So the strong stations ran news (which
was more profitable) and the weak stations started running
infomercials. The only way that changes is if stations think that they
can sell advertising during children's programming.
« Reply #14 on: April 01, 2012, 12:18:29 AM »
Quote from: TexasTom on April 01, 2012, 12:03:38 AM
There's not really much chance of it being repealed, since I can't
imagine there being much of a groundswell of people writing to their
legislators on this particular issue. Most folks simply don't care one
way or the other.
Apparently, broadcasters seem to be apathetic about the issue as well
-- even though they're finding the cheapest ways to satisfy E/I,
they're in no hurry to get their lobbying group in Washington to
pressure the congresspeople to abolish E/I.
Quote from: TexasTom on April 01, 2012, 12:03:38 AM
The revenue just wasn't there to motivate stations to continue running
kid's shows. So the strong stations ran news (which was more
profitable) and the weak stations started running infomercials. The
only way that changes is if stations think that they can sell
advertising during children's programming.
Technically, stations still can run ads during kids' shows, but with
so much strings attached as to what ads can and can't be broadcast,
it's hardly worth it. For that reason, "Litton's Weekend Adventure"
has pharmaceutical ads and PI commercials, all focused on adults in
general, during the breaks.
« Reply #17 on: April 02, 2012, 09:13:10 PM »
Quote from: azumanga on April 01, 2012, 12:18:29 AM
Quote from: TexasTom on April 01, 2012, 12:03:38 AM
The revenue just wasn't there to motivate stations to continue running
kid's shows. So the strong stations ran news (which was more
profitable) and the weak stations started running infomercials. The
only way that changes is if stations think that they can sell
advertising during children's programming.
Technically, stations still can run ads during kids' shows, but with
so much strings attached as to what ads can and can't be broadcast,
it's hardly worth it. For that reason, "Litton's Weekend Adventure"
has pharmaceutical ads and PI commercials, all focused on adults in
general, during the breaks.
The problem isn't with the advertising that they're legally allowed to
run -- the problem is that the advertisers simply aren't interested in
buying advertising during children's programming on local stations.
That's why the PI commercials run...the stations can't sell the time
to anyone else. And it has nothing to do with the Children's TV Act,
which was in effect long before children's TV on broadcast stations
dried up. In fact, the strongest years for kids shows on both Fox and
the WB occurred during years in which the act was already in effect.
« Reply #18 on: April 02, 2012, 09:29:58 PM »
Quote from: TexasTom on April 02, 2012, 09:13:10 PM
Quote from: azumanga on April 01, 2012, 12:18:29 AM
Quote from: TexasTom on April 01, 2012, 12:03:38 AM
The revenue just wasn't there to motivate stations to continue running
kid's shows. So the strong stations ran news (which was more
profitable) and the weak stations started running infomercials. The
only way that changes is if stations think that they can sell
advertising during children's programming.
Technically, stations still can run ads during kids' shows, but with
so much strings attached as to what ads can and can't be broadcast,
it's hardly worth it. For that reason, "Litton's Weekend Adventure"
has pharmaceutical ads and PI commercials, all focused on adults in
general, during the breaks.
The problem isn't with the advertising that they're legally allowed to
run -- the problem is that the advertisers simply aren't interested in
buying advertising during children's programming on local stations.
That's why the PI commercials run...the stations can't sell the time
to anyone else. And it has nothing to do with the Children's TV Act,
which was in effect long before children's TV on broadcast stations
dried up. In fact, the strongest years for kids shows on both Fox and
the WB occurred during years in which the act was already in effect.
Nickelodeon and CN don't show blatantly educational programming other
than possibly Nick News (wasn't that sydicated to local station as an
E/I show), school age kids won't watch them. Kids that actually want
to watch educational shows watch PBS
« Reply #19 on: Yesterday at 12:49:37 AM »
If Saved by the Bell qualifies as E/I then whay can't Looney Tunes,
Tom & Jerry, or even the Three Stooges?
But I agree that even if E/I is repealed, the networks will never go
back to Saturday morning kid's shows like they used to be, and will
probably be more likely to drop them completely.
The best thing that I can see coming out of E/I being repealed is that
perhaps college football and basketball will start earlier in the
day.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E/I
I call bullshit on your claim and here is why. First of all, such a law was made under false pretenses and, as such, should be grounds to be dismissed under numerous violations of the laws of the United States, as well as the Book of The Law of which this country was founded upon in the first place, and among the violations of the law are the RICO Act and similar legislation, as well as violations of Section 18 of the United States Code, specifically, Chapter 47 where it deals with fraudulent and deceptive practices. Those two things alone should mean jail, if not prison, time for the people that made such laws...you read me right, such people deserve to be imprisoned for their evil. I could name other laws if I so desire, but those two sections of the law alone mean a ton of crimes already.

Second, we already HAVE this little thing that is called the Public Broadcasting System, and if you do not have a station like that which is in your area, then by all means make such a station exist in your local area yourself! Nothing is stopping you from doing that, you lazy bum! Get a permit, as well as the proper educational requirements, or recruit the people with those things, into starting up such a station, go on Kickstarter, GoFundMe, or something of that nature, make lemonade stands, bake sales, or whatever that you can to make such a station, and quit causing children to miss out on having fun in their lives.

Third, if you so desire, you can also go a similar route and make up your own independent television station that offers something that is an alternative to the Atheist/Humanist/related ilk religious indoctrinating stations and provide something that is based upon a Creationist variant of PBS.

Fourth, this legislation was never built upon common sense, and it was not only groups like the NCAA, as well as other sports organizations, that wanted such stations to cater to their own need to have televised sports, but that it was also hypocrites in both Judeo-Christian circles that betrayed Christianity and Judaism that peddled these evil agendas of their own, and, ironically enough, their own enemies that wanted to push the mandates of such groups like PBS, as well as their own agenda, upon the public that made such legislation possible in the first place.

Fifth, in the digital age, it makes absolutely ZERO sense whatsoever to peddle a law that was made in an analog station era, and even in the analog station era, it STILL did not make sense to peddle such a law, as it has always been fairly easy to get a license from the FCC to make a television or radio station, so you need to quit making up excuses and make your own television stations instead if you truly think that children should listen to your agenda! There are also these other things that are called public access television stations that you can support, as well as make, alongside the Public Broadcasting Stations, if you truly feel the need to educate children, just make the programming well enough and they will come to you. Additionally, you can also have another digital channel on a mainstream network that can do your two to three hours of educational programming requirements in such a law all the time. There are already even television stations that provide such things like Quest, so quit your whining, you Communist brats!

Sixth, as darkin said, it is a fragment of not just Communist ideology, but also Socialist, Fascist, AND Nationalist ideology, to peddle educational requirements into television programming. We already get enough indoctrination of their ways of thought through the programs themselves, so why do we even NEED a law making even MORE religious and political indoctrination on the books in the Children's Television Act of 1990, as well as similar legislation, anyway?

Seventh, also as he said, it goes against the freedoms of ourselves as individuals, other people, and the First Amendment, specifically, the right to free speech. No truly freedom loving people would ever dare to stand for such a law that is corrupt and dishonest to the core and this law, as well as its related ilk, is that to the letter.

Eighth, it is bad enough that the sports organizations did as they did to peddle the laws for their own agendas, and that alone should mean that they, as well as the institutions that they cover, should lose their funding completely, as well as be banned from ever existing. This does not mean that I have an agenda against organized sports in educational facilities, far from it, rather, I have zero tolerance for sports programs, as well as educational facilities that operate under false pretenses of education and that also make up a variety of religious terrorists under a variety of banners. This is your REAL first line of battle in the War on Terror.

Ninth, once again, as darkin had said, said ignorance in children leads to corruption and, as such, it is bad enough that they are being taught this same kind of ignorance in the so-called "educational system," let alone through things like PBS, but to double down, if not triple down, the proverbial hedged bet that you have made on the table with legislation like this will only make you a loser on multiple levels in the end when your bluff has been called, and believe me, as a person that plays a LOT of poker, as well as has a fairly good grasp on how human behavior is made, doing that is a VERY bad idea on your end, just saying.

Tenth, yet once again, as darkin said, children DO NOT want to be educated after a long day of school, for their own 7 to 3 is just as bad as the adult 9 to 5 and they also go through their own stressors as it is, and perfectionist nations like India, Japan, China, South Korea, North Korea, and Singapore have high suicide rates PRECISELY because people place so much emphasis on education and conformity to society, family traditions/obligations, and/or the state, that they fail to truly teach children the things that are REALLY important in their lives. Even anime and manga series in Japan are beginning to talk about these sorts of things, as well as movies and television shows there as well, and the bottom line is that if it is to such a breaking point in those nations already, then could you imagine if things got worse in THOSE countries, and especially ones with large populations like India and China? We are the third largest country in the world in the terms of population, as well as one of the five largest countries in the world in the terms of physical area. Could you imagine the ramifications of the United States of America collapsing in on itself because people suddenly snapped due to being forced into such a conformist society, regardless of WHO was doing the conformity? You only need to look what is already happening in nations like I had mentioned, as well as the rising rates of mental illness worldwide to see how bad of an epidemic that things are getting to in this world. Things like the ones that I mentioned are proof enough of why this legislation is evil, immoral, and must be repealed immediately.

Eleventh, it is not the job of television, regardless of it being analog or digital, or educational or non-educational, the internet, or schools to teach children, nor can they truly provide all of the education that a child needs, as there are three forms of education that a child also needs to learn in their lives and those forms of education are called a social education, a life skills education, and a moral/ethical education. The Book of Proverbs, Chapter 22, and Verse 6, states, "Train up a child in the way that they should go, and when they are old, they should not depart from that way in their lives." This means that, ultimately, the job of educating your children falls on the PARENTS, and NOT the pseudo-educational system! I know that there will be those that will say "Well, what if the child comes from a broken home?" I come from one myself, and if I can overcome that, as well as a lot of other issues in my life, then certainly any child is capable of doing so in their lives and if they choose wrongly, well, the Holy Scriptures said this as well, and four times nonetheless, which is, "There is a way that seems right to a person, but in the end, it will always lead to death." This is the price that you pay for doing the moral equivalent of sticking a fork or knife inside of an electrical outlet or poking a bear. Also, as he said, some days are just plain painful for children to bear, not just emotionally, but sometimes physically as well in their lives. The Holy Scriptures say, "Laughter does a body good, like a form of medicine," and, indeed, there have been numerous medical studies that literally prove that laughter is indeed the best medicine. You will not be able to excuse your circumstances for your immoral behavior from your Creator when your time on this mortal coil ends.

Twelfth, to have such legislation on the books in this country is to support not only ironically breaking the law under the pretense of getting an education, but it is also supporting ideologies that were part of groups that we, as a country, once waged physical war against, yet, the more that time passes on, the more that I find out that we, as a country, are becoming the things that we once fought against and this was all engineered by people like yourself that peddled such things like Agenda 21, The Georgia Guidestones, and The Forty-Five Goals of Communism. We, as a country, let alone as a planet, can not let such evil remain unchecked and we have a moral and ethical mandate to stop such evil from existing, for, as was once said, "All that is necessary for evil to win is for good people to do nothing."

Thirteenth, a lot of people that support this ironically immoral legislation are complaining about how television was used to target children into buying toys or cereal never mind that their own idiocy failed to comprehend just how corrupt, illogical, immoral, and evil that their mindsets were when they thought of this Level 99 dumbass legislation.

Fourteenth, what these clueless dimwits that peddled such laws into existence failed to consider was that it was highly likely that many of these children also had parents that worked at the companies that did the advertising for these commercials, as well as worked for the companies that made the actual products for the commercials, so thank you, fucktards, for not only boring children to death, but causing rising mental illness rates in them, for causing them to become to be in giant shooting galleries, for teaching them to become helpless and defenseless in their lives, for also causing mental illness rates to rise in adults, for causing parents to get laid off from companies that either move overseas, or to fold completely, and for also contributing to rising homeless rates in this country...great job, asshats.

Fifteenth, by all of their screeching about these things, they were kind of falling into the same trap that the magazine known as Highlights fell into, which was, essentially making such a stink about advertising to children that their de facto complaining/attention whoring/narcissism ironically made an advertisement campaign in and of itself. Sadly, despite being structured similarly to the "Don't Vote for Me" concept that was made in the two different "Brewster's Millions" movies, the people that pull off similar things to what Highlights did also made up advertising as well, and, to even be MORE brutally honest, Highlights also DID make television commercials once upon a time as well, so that makes them even WORSE with regards to adhering to their "no advertising to children" ideology.

Sixteenth, whenever E/I required programs do not air, even LONGER commercials were invented for equally gullible adults called infomercials. Seriously, go through a weekend on your major television networks and see how many of those things exist...they are even more prevalent than the boring pseudo-educational programs and they keep making the same big promises to adults that the old advertisements did to children...the parallels, as well as hypocrisy, are annoying, biased, evil, and painfully obvious to those that know reality. However, I am not saying that some of these products do not live up to their claims, or that are not seriously great products (Gotham Steel Pan, any Ronco product, Proactiv, or any Worx product immediately come to mind), but what I DO have a problem with is how dishonestly that you chose to work with these mental midgets that made this educational requirement law to peddle your products. Seriously, there are already stations in which this sort of thing happens, like QVC, HSN, and many local areas that have local digital channels that are exclusively built for infomercials, and that are also powered by network affiliates. You all need to let the products sell themselves instead of promoting hypocrisy and age discrimination towards children in your lives.

Seventeenth, if the concept of infomercials was not long enough, then the concept of sports on weekends is even more of a commercial, not only for educational institutions, but for other companies as well. I do not oppose commercialized sports, far from it, as I do enjoy watching them, but to use such evil legislation like the Children's Television Act of 1990, as well as its related ilk, and twisting already existing legislation into promoting your own products, then that is just as bad as letting those people that wish to promote infomercials while decrying the evils of advertising to children and, at the same time, turning adults into gullible and mindless bigger versions of children themselves, is wrong in many different ways, and, as such, your own brand of hypocrisy, not just on this issue, but with many others, are why you need to be gutted of your leadership and taken over by people that truly DO care about the concept of education in the end. Also, if you absolutely MUST advertise for these sports organizations, for educational facilities, and for sports related products, like hygiene companies, automobile parts companies, sports drink companies, and such, then by all means be honest in how you do so, otherwise I will replace your dishonest leadership with more honest leadership and let your leaders rot in prison cells. Seriously, sports programs are technically like a super long commercial that, unlike informercials, tend to actually be entertaining, and that is the only reason why you exist, let alone all of these other companies and places of education, and were that not so, then you try removing sports and educational programs from them and see how many jobs that you lose, as well as how well our educational system happens because of your immoral behavior over making sports programs by dishonest means in your lives. You did not do this sort of thing prior to the 1960s, and if it was good enough then, it is good enough for you in the modern era.

Eighteenth, though there were many people that were right to call out the immorality of cartoons, the problem was that many of the leaders of such movements in Christian and Jewish circles were also hiding various sins themselves. I am not saying that judging things as good and evil is wrong, let alone people over those same things as well, far from it, as the Holy Scriptures demand that you do stand against evil by any MORALLY and ETHICALLY RIGHTEOUS, HONEST, JUST, and TRUTHFUL means that are possible, but when you do not have your own house in order over those matters, then you honestly do not need to be saying anything and talking about such things when you have not eliminated them in your own lives. The Holy Scriptures said something about the blind leading the blind and well, you know what happens when that happens and that is they both fall into the ditch. You all need to fix your own problems in this area in your lives, you all need to quit bearing false witness against your neighbors, and THEN you need to PROPERLY confront evil where it exists. The reality is that political correctness, regardless of it being from the left, right, middle, or fringe, political incorrectness, regardless of it being from the left, right, middle, or fringe, and moral anarchism are all EQUALLY destructive to society and that the lot of you need to stand up for what is MORALLY and ETHICALLY correct instead of what is morally and ethically incorrect in your lives. Get the beams out of your own eyes first BEFORE you complain of the specks that are in the eyes of your neighbors!

Nineteenth, if the concept of digital television was not enough of a reason to repeal all of this legislation, let alone the actions of the groups that I had mentioned, then the advent of the internet certainly has done the trick. Places like YouTube, as well as various similar websites, and numerous other televised streaming websites, and a LOT of educational websites, have essentially made television the technological equivalent of the vacuum tube. Seriously, all that televisions are really good for these days are for playing video games...that is what I do with mine in real life, and one day, televisions will be phased out entirely and all video games will be essentially on devices that are not exclusively televisions or computers anymore, but that is a whole other topic for a whole other time.

Twentieth, and lastly, this legislation was made under false pretenses and it was also peddled by a diverse group of people that wanted to do so for their own selfish purposes, and yet all of them are against the values, morals, ethics, and laws of this country, and, as such, no true freedom loving people should tolerate such behavior from people, so I see one of two ways that this could go...a. we recognize things like digital television and the internet and create digital channels for pseudo-educational, as well as actual educational, programming, for sports, for cartoons, and for more adult programming or b. I send you all to prison for your behaviors, which will essentially be like hearing you say to your employees that you caused your companies, and even entire government agencies, like the FCC, IRS, FRB, CIA, and others, to collapse (which technically is your fault, as you did the immoral, unethical, and evil behavior that led to your downfall), and you could be thanked for ruining your own country, as well as cause your counterparts and foreign divisions to have a chain reaction series of events worldwide, and things would be a LOT rougher for people globally. Were you smart, I would say to repeal your Children's Television Act of 1990 and other similar legislation, as well as disband the FCC, as it has way too much power, as well as has too many fingers in too many pies that are not their own, and that it actually stands against the principles of this country...choose wisely.

Now what do you have to say against that, Matt Casey, a.k.a., Captain Bullshit? How do you like THOSE apples?
p***@gmail.com
2018-08-01 17:23:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by TMC
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Repeal-the-Childrens-Television-Act/260424677385966
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Repeal-the-Childrens-Television-Act/260424677385966?sk=info
Description
http://boards.radio-info.com/smf/index.php?topic=209411.10
Re: NBC To Debut Saturday Preschool Block
« Reply #13 on: April 01, 2012, 12:03:38 AM »
Quote from: Mario-500 on March 29, 2012, 07:02:12 AM
The description "preschool block" reminds me of my wish for the repeal
of the Children's Television Act passed by the Congress of the United
States in 1990. If more folks were aware of the law and they were to
contact their legislators, there would be a great chance of this law
being repealed, thus leaving broadcasters without obligations to
broadcasting educational and informative programming programming. It
may not lead to the return of the traditional Saturday morning
programming of the past immediately, but it would mean less government
regulation of content broadcast.
There's not really much chance of it being repealed, since I can't
imagine there being much of a groundswell of people writing to their
legislators on this particular issue. Most folks simply don't care one
way or the other.
In any event, even if it were repealed, the chances of it resulting in
the "return of the traditional Saturday morning programming" is
somewhere in the general vicinity of zero. Saturday morning cartoons
did not disappear because of the Children's Television Act -- they
disappeared because children's advertising mostly moved to cable
channels. The revenue just wasn't there to motivate stations to
continue running kid's shows. So the strong stations ran news (which
was more profitable) and the weak stations started running
infomercials. The only way that changes is if stations think that they
can sell advertising during children's programming.
« Reply #14 on: April 01, 2012, 12:18:29 AM »
Quote from: TexasTom on April 01, 2012, 12:03:38 AM
There's not really much chance of it being repealed, since I can't
imagine there being much of a groundswell of people writing to their
legislators on this particular issue. Most folks simply don't care one
way or the other.
Apparently, broadcasters seem to be apathetic about the issue as well
-- even though they're finding the cheapest ways to satisfy E/I,
they're in no hurry to get their lobbying group in Washington to
pressure the congresspeople to abolish E/I.
Quote from: TexasTom on April 01, 2012, 12:03:38 AM
The revenue just wasn't there to motivate stations to continue running
kid's shows. So the strong stations ran news (which was more
profitable) and the weak stations started running infomercials. The
only way that changes is if stations think that they can sell
advertising during children's programming.
Technically, stations still can run ads during kids' shows, but with
so much strings attached as to what ads can and can't be broadcast,
it's hardly worth it. For that reason, "Litton's Weekend Adventure"
has pharmaceutical ads and PI commercials, all focused on adults in
general, during the breaks.
« Reply #17 on: April 02, 2012, 09:13:10 PM »
Quote from: azumanga on April 01, 2012, 12:18:29 AM
Quote from: TexasTom on April 01, 2012, 12:03:38 AM
The revenue just wasn't there to motivate stations to continue running
kid's shows. So the strong stations ran news (which was more
profitable) and the weak stations started running infomercials. The
only way that changes is if stations think that they can sell
advertising during children's programming.
Technically, stations still can run ads during kids' shows, but with
so much strings attached as to what ads can and can't be broadcast,
it's hardly worth it. For that reason, "Litton's Weekend Adventure"
has pharmaceutical ads and PI commercials, all focused on adults in
general, during the breaks.
The problem isn't with the advertising that they're legally allowed to
run -- the problem is that the advertisers simply aren't interested in
buying advertising during children's programming on local stations.
That's why the PI commercials run...the stations can't sell the time
to anyone else. And it has nothing to do with the Children's TV Act,
which was in effect long before children's TV on broadcast stations
dried up. In fact, the strongest years for kids shows on both Fox and
the WB occurred during years in which the act was already in effect.
« Reply #18 on: April 02, 2012, 09:29:58 PM »
Quote from: TexasTom on April 02, 2012, 09:13:10 PM
Quote from: azumanga on April 01, 2012, 12:18:29 AM
Quote from: TexasTom on April 01, 2012, 12:03:38 AM
The revenue just wasn't there to motivate stations to continue running
kid's shows. So the strong stations ran news (which was more
profitable) and the weak stations started running infomercials. The
only way that changes is if stations think that they can sell
advertising during children's programming.
Technically, stations still can run ads during kids' shows, but with
so much strings attached as to what ads can and can't be broadcast,
it's hardly worth it. For that reason, "Litton's Weekend Adventure"
has pharmaceutical ads and PI commercials, all focused on adults in
general, during the breaks.
The problem isn't with the advertising that they're legally allowed to
run -- the problem is that the advertisers simply aren't interested in
buying advertising during children's programming on local stations.
That's why the PI commercials run...the stations can't sell the time
to anyone else. And it has nothing to do with the Children's TV Act,
which was in effect long before children's TV on broadcast stations
dried up. In fact, the strongest years for kids shows on both Fox and
the WB occurred during years in which the act was already in effect.
Nickelodeon and CN don't show blatantly educational programming other
than possibly Nick News (wasn't that sydicated to local station as an
E/I show), school age kids won't watch them. Kids that actually want
to watch educational shows watch PBS
« Reply #19 on: Yesterday at 12:49:37 AM »
If Saved by the Bell qualifies as E/I then whay can't Looney Tunes,
Tom & Jerry, or even the Three Stooges?
But I agree that even if E/I is repealed, the networks will never go
back to Saturday morning kid's shows like they used to be, and will
probably be more likely to drop them completely.
The best thing that I can see coming out of E/I being repealed is that
perhaps college football and basketball will start earlier in the
day.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E/I
I forgot to mention Twenty One, which is that it also violates the First Amendment to the Constitution, as well as similarly related federal, state, and local laws to have the Children's Television Act of 1990 be put into place.
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...