[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 121 (Tuesday, July 25, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10661-S10662]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


                               THE V-CHIP

 Mr. SIMON. Mr. President, today, I would like to share with my 
colleagues a Chicago Tribune editorial which makes a compelling 
argument against the Senate's V-chip proposal. I urge all of my 
colleagues to review it.
  I ask that the full text of the article be printed at this point in 
the Record.
  The article follows:

               [From the Chicago Tribune, July 14, 1995]

                  Power to the Parents on TV Violence

       The good news on the TV violence front is that a national 
     consensus seems to have developed that something must be done 
     to control the messages and images reaching American 
     children.
       The bad news is that some of the methods Congress is 
     considering to achieve that control would do violence to the 
     constitutional right to free expression--and that is 
     intolerable.
       There is, however, a way that promises effective control 
     and respects the Constitution. But it will require restraint 
     by Congress, cooperation by the TV industry and--

[[Page S 10662]]
     indispensably--determination by parents to actively monitor their 
     children's viewing.
       The Senate this week held hearings on a proposal by Sen. 
     Ernest Hollings (D-S.C.) to regulate the hours at which 
     programs deemed unacceptable for children could be broadcast.
       This plan, though well-intentioned, is objectionable on two 
     accounts. Not only does it involve the government in 
     evaluating the acceptability of ideas--the very thing the 1st 
     Amendment was created to prevent--but it also lets the 
     government decide when those ideas may be expressed. Good 
     intentions cannot dispel the odor of censorship emitted by 
     this proposal.
       Another idea, already incorporated in the Senate's 
     comprehensive telecommunications legislation, is for the so-
     called V-chip. This is an electronic device that would be 
     built into TV sets and would react to a broadcast signal or 
     tag, blocking reception of programs identified as too violent 
     or otherwise objectionable.
       Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), sponsor of the V-chip proposal, 
     would require manufacturers to begin installing such chips in 
     new TV sets and would order the broadcasting industry to 
     ``voluntarily'' develop a system for rating their programs 
     for excessive violence and other objectionable content. If 
     the industry didn't comply within a year, then a government 
     panel would be empowered to create the ratings, which 
     broadcasters would be required to use in tagging their 
     programs to work with the interactive chip.
       The 1st Amendment hazard in Conrad's measure ought to be 
     obvious. There can be no truly voluntary rating system under 
     the sort of duress that this legislation implies. What's 
     more, for the government to require broadcasters to label 
     their programs as too violent or too salacious is intolerable 
     interference with the right to free expression.
       New television sets ought to come with blocking devices; 
     Congress ought to require them if manufacturers do not 
     voluntarily include them.
       But decisions as to what to block ought to remain in the 
     hands of parents, finding their guidance wherever they 
     choose. There is no shortage of groups--religious, artistic, 
     others--offering views on what is worthy children's TV fare. 
     Let them provide the information and give power to the 
     parents.
     

                          ____________________