Prime Time TV - Family Viewing

[FreddyE1977]

And that is not even touching on the subject of the "Family Channel", which was bought by ABC from CBN via FOX, and which quickly tried to have their cake and eat it too by sexing-up their shows but rebranding themselves as a "New Kind of Family". Guess there is no longer any place for truth in advertising.

I guess if we complain enough the government will just make them start adding V-chip codes to the commercials, which will have my set blinking on and off so often it will make my head explode.

If I bought the Playboy Channel and scheduled reruns of Donna Reed, could I rebrand that as being "A New Kind of Porn"?

 

[jsu5381m]

What about Tyler Perry's House of Payne on TBS? Perry says its supposed to be for families, but is it actually a safe family viewing show?

 

[azumanga]

And that is not even touching on the subject of the "Family Channel", which was bought by ABC from CBN via FOX, and which quickly tried to have their cake and eat it too by sexing-up their shows but rebranding themselves as a "New Kind of Family". Guess there is no longer any place for truth in advertising.

You can thank Pat Robertson for that channel continuing to be a "Family" channel -- in addition to being forced to continue carrying The 700 Club and their telethons, they must also keep the "Family" name.

 

[MediaBoy4Radio]

Cut the cable.....get an antenna for local news and just buy the dvds or bluerays........the networks are only interested in the prime demo and family ......true familly programming won't give them what they want..........

 

[formeraa]

I grew up in the 70's. I don't remember the shows being particularly family-friendly. However, I do agree that the fights/murders/mysteries were far less graphic than, say, CSI Miami. Norman Lear's sitcoms were pretty edgy, not "family friendly", but my parents were willing to explain anything that I didn't understand. Also, as a kid, I didn't expect to understand EVERYTHING. I figured that I would understand it better as I got older.

 

[bpatrick]

There was a little thing in the mid-'70s call the
family hour rule. It required the networks to
put "family-friendly" programming into the first
hour of primetime Monday-Saturday (Sundays
had to be kids' shows or public affairs in the first
hour). ABC took advantage of that with shows
like "Happy Days," "Laverne & Shirley," "The
Bionic Woman, " "Welcome Back, Kotter," "Donny
& Marie," and "The Six Million Dollar Man." It's been
suggested in any number of books that this is what
made ABC number one; basically the only family-hour
fit on CBS was "The Waltons," and on NBC, "Little
House On The Prairie" and "Emergency!"

But Norman Lear waged a successful court battle
to overturn the family-hour rule ("All In The Family"
and "Maude" had to be moved to 9 PM to comply
with the rule). And indeed there was a problem:
the family-hour rule was in effect from 8-9 (ET/PT),
but in the Central and Mountain time zones affiliates
could show all the adult-oriented programming they
were offered from 8-9, since for them family hour was
7-8. Lear was arguing that the family hour violated the
First Amendment (restrictions on freedom of speech),
but the 8-9 (ET/PT)/7-8 (CT/MT) setup was controversial.
Nice try, though.

 

[FreddyE1977]

I grew up in the 70's. I don't remember the shows being particularly family-friendly. However, I do agree that the fights/murders/mysteries were far less graphic than, say, CSI Miami. Norman Lear's sitcoms were pretty edgy, not "family friendly", but my parents were willing to explain anything that I didn't understand. Also, as a kid, I didn't expect to understand EVERYTHING. I figured that I would understand it better as I got older.

My favorite example was The Dukes of Hazzard. It ran during the "Family Hour" that President Carter had requested the networks to maintain between 8-9PM. One of the standards was "no gunplay". So the storyline had Bo and Luke on probation and not allowed to have guns. (bows and arrows loaded with dynamite blowing buildings to kingdom come were apparently okay, however! As was Catherine Bach in a bikini, halter and hotpants. Not that I'm complaining ;D)

 

[bpatrick]

Cartoony violence was apparently OK; look at
"The A-Team" a few years later. What the networks
couldn't do at 8/7 were the "CSI"s and "Law & Order"s.
Yet come fall, "L&O" gets an 8 PM (ET) slot on Fridays.
Big difference, but if there were complaints about it,
I suspect someone would holler "censorship."

 

[quadraphonic]

More of us feel entitled to more things these days, and non-cartoony violence at all hours of the day or night is one of the things we crave. :-[

 

[TexasTom]

There was a little thing in the mid-'70s call the family hour rule. It required the networks to put "family-friendly" programming into the first hour of primetime Monday-Saturday (Sundays had to be kids' shows or public affairs in the first hour). [...]

But Norman Lear waged a successful court battle to overturn the family-hour rule ("All In The Family"
and "Maude" had to be moved to 9 PM to comply with the rule). And indeed there was a problem:
the family-hour rule was in effect from 8-9 (ET/PT), but in the Central and Mountain time zones affiliates
could show all the adult-oriented programming they were offered from 8-9, since for them family hour was
7-8.

Where a lot of concern in the business over the family viewing time came from was that it actually covered 7 PM to 9 PM ET/PT and 6 PM to 8 PM CT/MT. Since the first hour of the family viewing time was local station time that was typically filled with syndicated programming, that presented a threat to the off-network syndication value of shows that aired after 9 PM ET on the networks. For example, how much less valuable would repeats of "All in the Family" and "MASH" have been if stations couldn't have rerun them in the hour before prime time?

So while it ws framed as a free speach issue, a big concern over family viewing time was simple economics.

 

[landtuna]

More of us feel entitled to more things these days, and non-cartoony violence at all hours of the day or night is one of the things we crave.

I don't know about 'more of us' but I personally have quit watching once favorite programs such as CSI and L&O SVU because of the level of violence and/or "grossness". Even former "educational" services such as Discovery and History go way overboard. And other male-oriented programmers such as Spike never made the first cut.

I am really tired of sensational violence and gun-toting actors in virtually every TV drama on-air today and am getting much more selective as the seasons go by. Outside of sports, my viewing hours wouldn't make a blip on any measurement.

 

[benwolf]

I quit watching CSI over the gore, but CSI: Miami seems to have a lot less with the same strong storylines.

I can't believe everyone's overlooked the most G-rated network show out there: American Idol. My grandparents love it...I think it's really brought families together, celebrating music and talent.

 

[landtuna]

I can't believe everyone's overlooked the most G-rated network show out there: American Idol.

Maybe because I can remember earlier talent shows which presented people with show-quality talent and didn't ridicule them that I find AI among the most tasteless shows on TV. AI is nothing more than an anonymous popularity contest.

 

[LKellerIII]

I can't believe everyone's overlooked the most G-rated network show out there: American Idol.

Maybe because I can remember earlier talent shows which presented people with show-quality talent and didn't ridicule them that I find AI among the most tasteless shows on TV. AI is nothing more than an anonymous popularity contest.

Though AI has "discovered" talented people, you have to remember that part of what the show does is cater to our cruel streak by parading the sad, deluded and talentless people in front of the judges so we can watch them being ridiculed.

We all know there are hundreds more people who audition, and are neither good enough nor bad enough to get on the broadcast.

 

[vchimpanzee]

I quit watching CSI over the gore, but CSI: Miami seems to have a lot less with the same strong storylines.

I can't believe everyone's overlooked the most G-rated network show out there: American Idol. My grandparents love it...I think it's really brought families together, celebrating music and talent.

If it's so G-rated, why does it never have a TV-G rating?

 

[bpatrick]

I can't believe everyone's overlooked the most G-rated network show out there: American Idol.

Maybe because I can remember earlier talent shows which presented people with show-quality talent and didn't ridicule them that I find AI among the most tasteless shows on TV. AI is nothing more than an anonymous popularity contest.

Though AI has "discovered" talented people, you have to remember that part of what the show does is cater to our cruel streak by parading the sad, deluded and talentless people in front of the judges so we can watch them being ridiculed.

We all know there are hundreds more people who audition, and are neither good enough nor bad enough to get on the broadcast.

Nothing new; there's no time for everybody. Even Ted Mack turned
down Elvis Presley; when Arthur Godfrey's people saw Buddy Holly,
their reaction was, "What is music coming to?" But at least neither
Mack nor Godfrey verbally beat up on the acts (Godfrey waited until
they were regulars on his show--witness Julius La Rosa), nor did Big
Ed on "Star Search." I took "The Gong Show" for what it was, played
mostly for laughs, but I have never watched "American Idol" and don't
intend to, at least as long as Simon Cowell is around.

 

[quadraphonic]

All of us have that same capacity to be mean and catty to other people as "the judges" do, and the people on most other shows. We just don't get to flaunt it because we have roles in polite society where hollow caricatures don't fit in that well....

 

[dmargalotti]

I have never watched "American Idol" and don't
intend to, at least as long as Simon Cowell is around.

AI is certainly not G-raged family viewing...especially the auditions and early rounds. PG or PG-13 maybe, but not G. And Simon for all his direct and often seemingly harsh criticism is not the only problem with AI. The producers obviously choose to show people in the auditions who make the program seem like a modern day freak show. They could just focus on the people who make the cut and the ones who come close but fall short. Instead they deliberately include a world a singing human oddities which is fine if you enjoy watching that sort of thing. Those people are exploited much the same way the guests on Springer, Maury, and Montel are exploited. But at that point, the show is no longer suitable G-rated family viewing.

 

[vchimpanzee]

Nothing new; there's no time for everybody. Even Ted Mack turned
down Elvis Presley; when Arthur Godfrey's people saw Buddy Holly,
their reaction was, "What is music coming to?"

And now my extremely conservative radio station plays them both right alongside Dean Martin and Frank Sinatra.

 

[bpatrick]

I don't doubt it. But remember that Mack and
Godfrey (along with Ed Sullivan and Lawrence Welk)
were born around the turn of the 20th century, and
I guess the sight of Elvis or Buddy Holly didn't square
with their upbringing (can you imagine Elvis trying to
land a job with Welk--the same man who said Alice Lon
wore her dresses too short?). Times do change: what
seemed scandalous in the '40s and '50s seems like nothing
today. (People actually thought Sinatra was making love
to the microphone in his "swooner" days, and remember the
outcry over the Beatles' hair after their Sullivan appearances?)