Why to Be Selective When Watching TV

“THE most awe-inspiring weapon of communications ever invented.” How well those words, spoken by a noted author of television documentaries, describe the wonder of television! And wonder it is!

Just as your eye travels back and forth some forty-six times to read a column of type in this magazine so the TV camera beam used in the United States scans each picture or image in 525 lines. With thirty complete pictures per second, this means the beam takes less than a fifteen-thousandth of a second to scan a line. Talk about speed reading! Not only that, but the camera first scans all the odd lines, 1, 3, 5, 7 and so on, and then goes back to the top left corner of the picture and scans all the even lines, 2, 4, 6. The process by which TV cameras photograph color and the TV sets reproduce it (although no color is actually broadcast) is even more cause for wonder.

The United States boasts of 930 TV stations and more than 93 million TV sets, upward of 30 percent of which are color sets. In the past five years ten million sets have been sold annually. There the typical family is said to use its TV set some six hours a day on an average.

Man has indeed conquered space when it comes to transmitting information, both by pictures and by sound. But how is this medium being used? Is man putting it to the best possible use?

Many Complaints About TV Programs

The most common complaints about TV programs are regarding the commercials. Nearly all viewers feel that these should be fewer, shorter and, in particular, less interruptive. Government officials have other complaints. One official blasts TV stations for an allegedly biased political point of view. Another official charges them with producing a cultural “wasteland.” Still another stated: “We have taken the most powerful medium ever devised by man for instruction and inspiration, and​—like the temple in Jesus’ time—​turned it over to the merchants and the money-lenders.”

Reviewers in the press speak of “commercial TV’s flavorless pap,” and disparagingly refer to reruns as “recycled waste.” They complain: “It’s no wonder the networks can claim no one cares about their serious offerings. They haven’t begun to try to make them interesting.” One of America’s foremost TV commentators, the late Edward Murrow, once described TV programs as giving “evidence of decadence, escapism and insulation from the realities of the world in which we live.” Much of this criticism is directed against programs intended for children or watched by children.

Why? Why? Why?

Why are there so many complaints about what is being shown on the TV screen, especially in the United States? (In most other lands television is largely or wholly a government monopoly; it decides what the people will see.) An insider, an executive of one of America’s busiest advertising agencies, answered one of these “whys” in an article entitled “The Real Masters of Television.” Therein he said that in 1959 the two leading TV networks were putting on ‘quality shows.’ Then a third network, which was running a poor third, “launched a group of new shows distinguished by stylized violence and unstylized gore.” At once it became a close second, so the other two networks compromised their programming standards in order to hold on to their audiences, for the sake of self-preservation.a

What determines the “quality” of the shows? The public’s response. According to this advertising executive, “in the audience-delivery business, you do not have the luxury of setting either your standards or those of your audience. Instead, they are set for you by the relative success of your competitors.”

Nor is the foregoing just one man’s opinion. A recent reviewer of the five TV programs that were rated the highest in the winter of 1970-1971 were those that he described as ‘cheap, sickening, flat, dull and mindless.’ Audience preference doubtless is one reason why TV programs at times leave so much to be desired.

Another “why” is because of the repercussions that may result from a network’s presenting a challenging documentary dealing with current problems. The documentary, “The Selling of the Pentagon,” dealt with the policy of the United States Defense Department in creating a favorable image of its activities and policies. Although it was rated by some sources as one of the finest documentaries of the year, it aroused the ire of politicians. Also, there was little enthusiasm evinced on the part of member stations, for they feared the loss of their licenses.

Then again, a documentary telling of how banks discriminate against Negroes and against the poor resulted in the loss of considerable revenue on the part of at least one station that carried it. A program that exposed those locally causing pollution resulted in such strained relations between some of the officials of the TV station broadcasting and some of the local business community that it was deemed advisable to discharge the reporter who had developed this program. So fear of economic or political reprisal is another reason why better programs are not more often presented.

Another “Why”

The foregoing “whys” do not explain everything; there is something else. The TV networks and broadcasting stations cannot shift all the blame onto the shoulders of others. This is apparent from the fact that occasionally some very fine programs are presented, especially on educational or “public” stations as they are now called. An outstanding example is the extremely popular and very highly praised program “Sesame Street.” Concerning it the UNESCO Courier was moved to write that it was “a series of wit and humor, devoid of any violence, containing the positive message that no problem can be solved without cooperation. Secondly, it seeks to teach youngsters letters, numbers, and simple counting skills, to stimulate their vocabulary and powers of reasoning and to open their eyes to the world at large.” Thus in one program viewed in May 1971 it featured the number 12, the capital and small letter E, gorillas at play, and a dance sequence that illustrated the difference between a triangle and a square. It was a program both diverting to grown-ups and educational to the children.

What do these facts indicate? That upbuilding and educational programs can be successful if enough skill and quality are put into them; if those producing them are really dedicated to their tasks and are not penny-pinching in dollars or stingy in effort. That is why at times the advertising playlets of just one minute might be the most entertaining features of an evening’s TV fare.

The Need to Be Selective

TV programs reflect the general decline in standards. But what more is to be expected? Why should the TV industry be more idealistic than others are these days? The chief concern of all is profits.

Of course, as an average reader of this journal you can do little if anything about improving the quality of TV programs. But you may be able to improve your own viewing habits. You can be selective as to what TV programs you watch. If you are a parent, you also should be very much concerned as to the kind of programs your children watch. Make sure that what they watch is upbuilding and not trash. And especially keep them from violent pictures, for watching TV desensitizes children to violence. The problem is great, with a violent episode every 14 minutes and a murder every 45 minutes. According to Dr. V. B. Cline, “We are creating violence addicts.” The violent episodes become models that children later act out in real life.

There has been some agitation to decrease the amount of violence but little about decreasing sexual immorality on the TV screen. One cannot keep watching people carrying on loose conduct without becoming morally desensitized. And so, even as with violence, such examples of loose conduct become models for the conduct of the viewers in real life. The Bible says: “Do not be misled. Bad associations spoil useful habits.” (1 Cor. 15:33) You would not choose the company of persons with known loose morals, would you? Then why associate with them on TV? Being selective means being careful as to the kind of TV programs you watch.

And being selective also means controlling the time you spend watching television. As Dr. G. A. Steiner shows in his book The People Look at Television, many persons have an ambivalent attitude toward television, that is, they have conflicting attitudes regarding it. While they say they enjoy watching TV, at the same time they express concern about watching it too much.

You can derive good and pleasure from watching TV, but there is such a thing as being addicted to it. When you let TV programs cause you to neglect your duties, neglect needed sleep, neglect getting wholesome exercise and fresh air, you are not being selective but addictive. Nor, if you are a Christian minister, are you selective if you neglect any of your ministerial obligations for the sake of watching TV programs.

TV is indeed an awe-inspiring weapon of communication, truly a wonder. But learn to control it; do not let it control you.

[Footnotes]