/
EDITOR
Doug Kouma
OPINION
EDITOR
Anthony Nguyen
EDITORIAL
BOARD
Anne Hjersman
Paula Lavigne
Joshua GiUin
Jessica Kennedy
Jeff Randall
Our
VIEW
i . *
Fuzzy picture
New TV ratings need
a closer examination
If you’ve been watching television lately,
you may have noticed that some networks are
flashing small numbers and letters in the cor
ner of the screen.
No, they aren’t indicative of a winter
storm warning, they aren’t the result of a vin
dictive network employee-tumed-saboteur,
and they don’t mean the Russians are finally
attacking.
Those little numbers and letters are
signifiers of a new era in broadcast televi
sion. Welcome, America, to the TV Ratings
Era, Trial Period No. 1. It started quietly on
Jan. 1, with just a few networks fully em
bracing the self-imposed ratings, but it is
spreading.
And while these numbers and letters are
intended to deliver exactly what parents and
politicians have been asking for—a system
to identify programs with mature content so
parents can switch the channel before the kids
become corrupted—they appear to be little
more than a flawed appeasement by televi
sion executives. v~
The ratings codes are simple enough to
remember. They are based largely on the long
standing ratings indicators (G for general
audiences, PG for parental guidance sug
gested) used by the Motion Picture Associa
tion of America, but they don’t say why a
program has received this rating. A “TV-M”
(mature audiences only)fating could signify
the blood and gore of a film like “Rambo” or
the brief and innocent nudity of a film like
“Romeo and Juliet.”
A better model for TV ratings can be
found only a few channels away on HBO.
HBO includes a breakdown of a program’s
content at the beginning of every program it
shows, with comprehensible tags such as V
for violence, SC for sexual content and BN
for brief nudity.
Yet, the ratings system’s biggest flaw lies
at the feet of its very programmers—the rat
ings for individual programs are decided by
the networks that broadcast then!
This system not only virtually guarantees
an arbitrary and scattershot method of rat
ings, but puts the final say on whether a pro
gram is suitable for minors in the hands of
the veiy people who are trying to sell die pro
gram.
Perhaps a more stable and impartial rat
ings board, like die one created and used daily
by the MPA A, would be in order.
If politicians and television networks re
ally want to protect our children from the less
savory elements of television programs, they
would consider changing the current system
before it becomes too entrenched to remove.
We may have gone too far to make all televi
sion programming suitable for all ages, but
that doesn’t mean we need a ratings system
that’s equally unsuitable.
, •**•*-. z
Editorial Policy
Unsigned editorials are the opinions of the
Spring 1997 Daily Nebraskan. They do hot
necessarily reflect die views of die Univer
sity of Nebraska-Lincoln, its employees, its
student body or the University ofNebraska
Board of Regents. A column is soley the
opinion of its author. The Board of Regents
serves as publisher of the Daily Nebraskan;
policy is set by the Daily Nebraskan Edito
rial Board. The UNL Publications Board,
established by the regents, supervises the
production of the paper. According to policy
set by the regents, responsibility for the edi
torial content of the newspaper lies solely
in the hands of its student employees.
Letter Policy
The Daily Nebraskan welcomes brief let
ters to the editor and guest columns, but
does not guarantee their publication. The
Daily Nebraskan retains the right to edit
or reject any material submitted. Sub
mitted material becomes the property of
the Daily Nebraskan and cannot be re
turned. Anonymous submissions will not
be polished. Those who submit letters
must identify themselves by name, year
in school, major and/or group affilia
tion, if any. Submit material to: Daily
Nebraskan, 34 Nebraska Union, 1400 R
St. Lincoln, Neb. 68588-0448. E-mail:
letters@unlinfo.uni.edu.
Mehs ling’s
VIE#
■
Todd
ANDERSON
La Threur returns to city of love
Terrorism threat creates an uneasy mood in Paris
“Do not leave your baggage
unattended. Any baggage left
unattended will be destroyed
imnfedi&tely. Please alert one of Our
supervisors if you notice baggage
left under a seat, in a waste-bas
ket....”
Paris is on the alert. Ever since
the terrorist bombing a month and a
half ago in one of the trains running
from a suburb, Parisians can’t get
the threat of bombs off their mind.
They can’t because the French
government won’t let them. French
leaders have put together a compre
hensive action plan to prevent
another attacje. Examples of new
security measures are everywhere —
the subway, airports, train stations,
even the streets in front of larger
stores.
The huge department stores like
Galeries Lafayette used to be
concerned about shoplifting, asking
you to leave your bags in a deposi
tory before entering. Now they ask
to see inside every backpack and
purse, and you’re allowed to keep
these articles with you.
I guess if there really is some
thing in your bag that is set to
explode, they want to make sure the
person carrying the device is the
first to feel the blast. At the muse
ums there are X-ray and manual
searchesofbagsofany size—all
, because of today’s technology. A
bomb can be built from plastic
pieces smaller than a lighter.
The requests not to leave any
form of baggage unattended are -
serious too. A friend of mine, while
waiting for someone &t the arrival
gate at the airport, was hastily i V
asked, along with hundreds of
5S553*:!::-: J
■i i
66
The security guards
themselves are
intimidating
enough.”
others, to clear the area so a small
bag could be “removed.” The
security officers quickly sealed off
the area and blew the package into a
thousand pieces in a controlled
explosion — done without hesita
tion.
The security guards themselves
are intimidating enough. There are
your regular police officers with
funny-looking square hats who carry
batons and small guns. Next are the
international security officials —
badges indicate so — who carry
larger weapons. Finally, to make
everyone feel as SAFE as possible,
there are swarms of 1 8-to-20-year
old French military draftees.,
They carry very large automatic
weapons chained to their bodies. If I
weren’t so alarmed by the way they
carry these weapons—casually
slung under their arms, finger on the
trigger -— I’d find their uniforms
. ■, i; ' ....
quite humorous. They all wear green
jumper suits tucked into their black
boots and have shaven heads
covered with a beret, precisely
tipped at the right angle.
Parisian streets, normally not
recognized for cleanliness, are
covered with even more trash now.
Why? The brilliantly inspired
French leaders came up with a good
one. To prevent terrorists from
hiding bombs in trash cans, every
receptacle in the subway, train
stations, streets, etc., must be sealed.
Piles of trash are now collecting
next to the receptacles.
Finally, in any potential place of
terrorist attack, a warm feminine
voice announces every 5-10 minutes,
in French and English, the impor
tance of keeping personal items with
you at all times.
It’s impossible to forget about the
threat of terrorism, yet Parisians still
commute to and from work, tourists
pack the subway cars, and the
security guards continue their
routine checks of restroom stalls and
seat-bottoms. All of this creates an
eery calm over the city.
Surely this can’t go on forever. ^ f
As soon as the government relaxes,
the people forget, and whichever
terrorist group reorganizes —
something will happen.
Sadly, it’s inevitable. Fot now, at r
least, there is plenty of work for the
French militaty draftees and the eco
green-suited trash sweepers in the
subway.
5- ' . -s' V„- •
Anderson is a junior French
and Spanish major and a Daily
Nebraskan staff reporter studying
abroad in France.