Broadcasters have a responsibility to serve the public interest and protect Americans from objectionable content, particularly during the hours when children are likely to be watching.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
Isn't it only appropriate that, in return for the free use of the public spectrum, broadcasters provide something substantial, something that wouldn't otherwise be provided by marketplace competition?
And I believe that public broadcasting has an important trust with the American people, it's an intimate medium of television, and that we can do reading and language development for young children without getting into human sexuality.
If we want parents to be discerning about what children are watching then we need to put stuff in there for them to watch, too.
For those broadcasters who are less than responsible, the FCC needs to have sharper teeth to enforce the law.
Parents should watch what their children watch and not use TV as a babysitter. If a show is objectionable they should turn it OFF. They should write the president of the network and tell him they are never going to watch that program again and why.
Our legislation addresses broadcasts over the public airwaves, but I hope the cable and satellite industries see the importance of this issue and voluntarily create a family tier of programming and offer culturally responsible products.
The great thing about being a broadcaster is you have this incredible responsibility to the people that make it all happen, the people that turn on the television set.
Parents should be allowed to choose which cable or satellite channels - sources of the most extreme content - come into their homes.
I think if you open the door to government control of television, then you let in a host of questions about rights.
It's so very important as to what a child watches on TV. I feel for every parent that knows this, and cares, because they only have control of the child's viewing to a certain point.
No opposing quotes found.