[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 7 (Wednesday, February 2, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: February 2, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                          TELEVISION VIOLENCE

  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I would like to discuss briefly some 
events yesterday both in the House of Representatives and here in the 
U.S. Senate dealing with television violence. Some announcements 
yesterday represented a step forward on the issue of the epidemic of 
violence on television.
  Let me begin my remarks by saying that Senator Simon here in the U.S. 
Senate has played the pivotal role in bringing this issue to a head. I 
have deep admiration for the work Senator Simon has done. He started 
his work some years ago and was at the forefront at a time when others 
were not speaking much about this subject.
  Because of Senator Simon's work and because of the work of others, 
including my colleague, Senator Conrad of North Dakota, Congressman 
Markey, Senator Hollings, and many others, because of all of that work, 
the cable industry and the broadcast industry are now talking about the 
need to monitor violence on television.
  The issue is very simple. Technology has exploded in this country. We 
went from the first snowy little television sets of 6- to 8-inch 
screens to wonderful color televisions on large screens, to Theater 
Vision, the VCR, and high definition television. Some TV's now carry 
500 channels.
  At the same time, during the decade of the eighties, violence on 
television tripled. We now have enormously violent television 
programming in this country. Some of us feel very strongly that the 
many, many studies documenting a relationship between violence on 
television and violent behavior in our country ought to be something we 
should be concerned about.
  I do not maintain we should censor in any way what someone can or 
cannot show on television. I do not maintain we should regulate in any 
way what is shown on our television sets. I do believe, however, that 
we ought to empower people in this country. We ought to empower parents 
with information and devices that will allow them to better supervise 
their children's television viewing.
  Let me repeat what I said on the floor before. If today someone 
knocked on the front door of your home wearing a fancy, shiny silk suit 
and said, ``Look, I have a troop of actors in my truck parked outside 
of your house. We are wonderful, creative actors. We would like to 
bring our actors and actresses into your home and put on a show for 
your children. And these actresses and actors will be killing each 
other, shooting each other, and bludgeoning each other. Blood and gore 
will fly in every direction in your living room.''
  You would say, ``Why, you cannot do that. That is child abuse. How on 
Earth do you dare suggest that at my front door?'' Yet this violance 
comes through the front door on radio waves to our televisions.
  Some say, ``Well, that is simple. What we do is have parents watch 
what their children watch and supervise their children's viewing 
habits.'' That is easier said than done, as almost all of us 
understand. I hope we could find ways to air less violence during the 
times when children are watching.
  I have introduced two pieces of legislation in the Senate, neither of 
which involves censorship or regulation. One calls for the construction 
of a quarterly television violence report card. The report card will 
show which are the most violent television programs and who sponsors 
them. I think we should give that information to parents and let 
parents do the rest. That is democracy from the bottom up. That is my 
first bill.
  All of the recent announcements made by the industry, in my judgment, 
are fine, and I commend them for it. But they do not alleviate the need 
to pass a bill like mine. I am going to propose a modification of my 
bill to require a quarterly television violence report card for only 2 
years. After those 2 years, when the industry begins to implement it's 
monitoring systems, maybe we will not need the report card. I will 
modify my bill in this way, and I will continue to press forward with 
my legislation.
  Second, I have been the lead sponsor here in the Senate of a bill 
that was authored by Congressman Markey in the House. This bill would 
require a bleep chip on every television set. We now require that every 
television set produced in this country contain a chip that allows the 
television set to produce captions for the hard of hearing and the 
deaf. That was done in 1990, I believe, by the Congress. As of July 1 
of last year, every set manufactured must have that tiny, little, 
inexpensive chip. And the result is that every television set sold in 
this country has that chip. There is room on that chip and the 
technology is available to also block out programs that are violent.
  Congressman Markey and I suggest that we have a system by which the 
television industry rates its programs. If a progarm is violent, a 
parent with a bleep chip can block out that violent program to protect 
the children of that family. That is not censorship. It is not 
regulation. And in my judgment, the announcements of the industry in 
the past couple of days do not remove the need for this bleep chip 
bill.
  I intend to press forward on both of these issues with Congressman 
Markey and others, and I hope we will be successful.

                          ____________________