Five-Second Delay Coming To Live TV?

[DToTheJ]

While there is currently a delay in place on some awards show telecasts, the Parents Television Council is seeking that all broadcasters enforce a five-second delay on all live programming.

Full story:
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/452779-Broadcasters_Cable_Fight_Intervention.php
(the item is in the column in the middle of the page)

 

[JayR]

...Parents Television Council...

What a crock!

These jerks want to push their "moral" agenda on the rest of the country.

Be a responsible parent. It's on YOU to decide what's appropriate or not for your child, NOT the FCC or the broadcasters!

A word or a boob slips out...BIG DEAL! Grow up and get over it already!

 

[imhomerjay]

They want their moral agenda, others want their own. Nothing new there.

I agree with not letting kids watch something if you find it risky, but also ask how it matters in the least if a brief delay is used? You find out who won the best art direction award five seconds after the folks in the theater? You don't get to hear the naughty word or see the body part? (I've heard you can find that stuff on the Internet-thingy.) Even if the PTC gets a, um, moral victory by getting a delay imposed, it's hardly a big issue.

 

[azumanga]

Personally, I'm surprised that the PTC hadn't even ordered a ban on off switches, or order that all TVs get hardwired to the wall, as they don't trust parents to turn off the set or even unplug the TV. Many parents know what their kids should and shouldn't watch, and they use their own judgment in controlling what their kids see -- they weren't born yesterday.

The PTC assumes that any and all parents, especially those that don't follow the PTC's dogma, are idiots. Parents know better than that.

 

[imhomerjay]

Yes, most parents (or so I'd like to think most) are. But, again, how does something so minor as a brief delay impede it? If the networks don't want the bare body part or fleeting foul word on their airwaves, it is, after all, their choice. Would we be up in arms if the networks did it and PTC had never suggested it?

It's a bit like content ratings systems or explicit language advisories. They do not mean people can't view/listen to the content, they simply provide one more resources for people to know what's "inside the package" so to speak.

 

[JayR]

Yes, most parents (or so I'd like to think most) are. But, again, how does something so minor as a brief delay impede it? If the networks don't want the bare body part or fleeting foul word on their airwaves, it is, after all, their choice. Would we be up in arms if the networks did it and PTC had never suggested it?

It's one thing if the networks did this as part of their corporate policy; it's another when an external entity like the PTC requests/demands that networks do it.

Personally, I'm surprised that the PTC hadn't even ordered a ban on off switches, or order that all TVs get hardwired to the wall, as they don't trust parents to turn off the set or even unplug the TV. Many parents know what their kids should and shouldn't watch, and they use their own judgment in controlling what their kids see -- they weren't born yesterday.

The PTC assumes that any and all parents, especially those that don't follow the PTC's dogma, are idiots. Parents know better than that.

Thank you.

 

[landtuna]

I have OTA DTV and already have a delay.

Unfortunately, it is between the video and audio.

 

[kenglish]

It's a little more complex than just sitting two VTRs side-by-side and stringing the tape between them.

Maybe the PTC could arrange to pay us for the (hardware and people) expenses?

Or, encourage parents to have a frank talk with their kids about how "some things are inappropriate, and may offend some people, but they occasionally happen and should be overlooked when they do inadvertently occur". (I remember when things happened, my parents would look at us kids, and we all would say, "Ah...wooo, wooo"! We knew it was a bad word or meaning, but it didn't kill us.)

 

[FreddyE1977]

thanks to digital transmission, I think they are already on a five-second delay, if not more

 

[imhomerjay]

It's one thing if the networks did this as part of their corporate policy; it's another when an external entity like the PTC requests/demands that networks do it.

Demand, ask, suggest...semantics. They have their rights to ask networks to do what they want, as does any group that's more in line with my thinking, your thinking or whoever. So we're saying the networks can feel as a matter of corproate policy it's a good idea to put something on delay if someone inside their offices thinks of it themselves, but not if some organized group of citizens pressures them to? Seriously, the end result is the same, and no one has yet offered an explanation of how it takes away any value from the viewing experience.

 

[quadraphonic]

...Parents Television Council...

What a crock!

These jerks want to push their "moral" agenda on the rest of the country.

Which is different from you pushing against their "moral" agenda how?
You shouldn't argue against what someone else is doing, if you're doing the same thing.

Be a responsible parent. It's on YOU to decide what's appropriate or not for your child, NOT the FCC or the broadcasters!

Then if it's up to the parents, why do you want to decide for the responsible parents what's appropriate or not for their child?
"A word or a boob slips out..." that should be "appropriate enough?"

A word or a boob slips out...BIG DEAL! Grow up and get over it already!

"It's 5 seconds...BIG DEAL! Grow up and get over it already!"

You're arguing two different scenarios together there.

 

[quadraphonic]

It's one thing if the networks did this as part of their corporate policy; it's another when an external entity like the PTC requests/demands that networks do it.

How do the networks know that the public wants it if they're left on their own to decide about it?
Should the networks not listen to their viewers in other situations, or just this one?

 

[Markxxx]

I agree there isn't any big deal with a delay. It's not like anyone is gonna notice five seconds of delay and it will give the stations a chance to catch more than a few swears if they so desire.

 

[Robnoxious]

Televisions sold in the US since the early 90's have all been required to have V-chip to aid parents in locking out material that the parent may want to keep their children from seeing. I know a grand total of zero parents that use it. A required 5 second delay would be just as moot.

 

[azumanga]

If the networks don't want the bare body part or fleeting foul word on their airwaves, it is, after all, their choice.

And it should remain their choice -- no network, station or producer should be influenced by the PTC's demands. And neither should the FCC.

 

[imhomerjay]

Please. So when people of your mindset tell them they want something, that's ok, though, right? This group--love 'em or hate 'em--is comprised of, wait for it, viewers. They're organized and using their influence to try to get something done. If there's something so horrific about a brief delay, anyone else is free to organize their efforts and advocate for the their position.

 

[Tom Wells]

All I can see is that they intend for us to experience the "problematic" information 5 seconds later.
Are they calling for a PTC censor at the dump button in every TV station and monitoring every cable channel?
Inasmuch as there is no real way to satisfy such people, all that could happen is a lot of money spent to create a 5 second delay
that likely won't ever do anything but generate heat and problems because no one will pay for warm bodies to monitor it all.
And as others point out, nothing is really live anymore due to our modern distribution of programming digitally.
Radio and TV were once live, and I remember in a 1927 book about radio, where the situation of a public speech broadcast on radio was described. It claimed the people listening on the radio heard the speech in real time like the front row listeners present at the speech,
but the people at the back of the area, due to the audio propogation time vs. radio propogation time, heard it well after the radio listeners.
It could only be milliseconds but they were emphasizing just how fast radio waves travel.

Now, if they should call for adding audio advance/retard on televisions, I'd support them on that.
Children should NEVER have to experience audio sync issues....that's like so totally film projector, man.

"Hey buddy, check the lower loop length, I think it's too long."

 

[azumanga]

This group--love 'em or hate 'em--is comprised of, wait for it, viewers. They're organized and using their influence to try to get something done.

Except that most of them are actually senior citizens who send hundreds of e-mails and letters apiece, as a way to give an illusion of "millions" of viewers demanding that the networks change their ways. Recently, the FCC started to pay closer attention to their tactics, and discount any complaints that they suspect was subject to "ballot stuffing".

 

[w9wi]

It's a little more complex than just sitting two VTRs side-by-side and stringing the tape between them.

Maybe the PTC could arrange to pay us for the (hardware and people) expenses?

No kidding. Especially the "people" part. The equipment, while probably a significant burden for some smaller stations, isn't completely out of the question. Who's supposed to be *operating* it, on the other hand, is going to be a problem -- again, especially at smaller stations.

Or, encourage parents to have a frank talk with their kids about how "some things are inappropriate, and may offend some people, but they occasionally happen and should be overlooked when they do inadvertently occur". (I remember when things happened, my parents would look at us kids, and we all would say, "Ah...wooo, wooo"! We knew it was a bad word or meaning, but it didn't kill us.)

Y'know, I wonder when it's going to dawn on them, the reason some of these words keep popping up on TV is because that's the way real people talk.....

 

[imhomerjay]

Except that most of them are actually senior citizens who send hundreds of e-mails and letters apiece, as a way to give an illusion of "millions" of viewers demanding that the networks change their ways. Recently, the FCC started to pay closer attention to their tactics, and discount any complaints that they suspect was subject to "ballot stuffing".

Those darned seniors.

I already understand who they are in large part, and what they do. It's neither here nor there. Anyone can use the tactics; they don't have some mythical power not available to anyone else to try to sway things to their particular view. All well and good that the FCC isn't paying those things much heed, but that's the government (and a whole other topic). If the broadcasters want to pay attention to (or disregard) any group, senior citizens with lots of stamps and envelopes or anyone else for that matter, that's their choice as a business, just as they sometimes pay attention to campaigns to save certain shows or what have you.