Jun 17, 2005

FAMILY ENTERTAINMENT--A THING OF THE PAST??? (That's a Shame!)

I was just looking at the Neilsen TV ratings, and I thought some of the programs that folks across the country are watching merits some comment here. For example:

Of the top 14 Cable shows for the week of June 6-12 Was none other than WWE Raw, with between 4.6 & 4.9 million viewers.

Of the top 20 Network shows (ABC, NBC, FOX, & CBS) were the following:

Family Guy, The Simpsons, Hit Me Baby One More Time, Two and a Half Men, American Dad & Fire Me Please.

This to some is FAMILY ENTERTAINMENT???? Am I that much of a narrow-minded old foggie, because I find something desperately wrong with this picture??? Somebody just Shoot me please, or at least pinch me and wake me up from this dreadful nightmare!!!

40 comments:

Quail Lane Alumnus said...

All these shows you're complaining about come on past 9pm. Small children should be in bed. Right? And all the shows have parental warnings, if parents are watching these shows with their children, it's their own fault. None of these shows are appropriate for children, so NO they are not family entertainment. I happen to like the Simpsons, Family Guy, and American Dad, as well as other shows that you obviously don't approve of. Just don't watch them and let the rest of us make up our own minds.

Dan Colgan said...

These three shows in particular exhibit a complete disregard for parental respect and an encouragement of youthful defiance. The fact that they exist at all no matter what time of day they are on is more the problem.

Dan Colgan said...

Before you get all hot and bothered, I agree that YOU are entitled to watch what you want - the unfortunate thing is that parents are not performing the due diligence to make sure that the shows are appropriate for the 9-13 age group who are indeed awake and watching at 9 PM

Quail Lane Alumnus said...

First of all, I agree with you partly, but what are you implying? Are you saying that we should take these shows off the air simply because some unfit parents do not do their jobs? I mean parents have V-chips now so that they don't have to do anything but push a button to limit their child's tv intake. Perhaps instead of complaining about the shows, you should focus on the bad parents. Just a thought... Love the blog btw.

Dan Colgan said...

Bad beat me to it Quail... agreed

Dan Colgan said...

On this same subject though - With our kids staying up later now because of summer... can't we do something though about providing a bit more wholesome programming at the 9-10 slot - I mean it is getting earlier and earlier that we show "questionable" material.

Quail Lane Alumnus said...

There are networks that dedicated to showing "Family" material. How about watching those with that family instead of networks like Fox which are notorious for "tasteless humor." Mmmm.. Tasteless Humor that's the best kind. ;)

Dan Colgan said...

What networks? - If you are suggesting that there is Nick or ABCFamily - you are right, but not everyone has cable so of the four major networks ABC, NBC, CBS and Fox - which one has that family entertainment at 9:00 PM

Quail Lane Alumnus said...

Touchet. You did mention cable networks in your original posts so those were what I was referring to. The Network stations are not intended for Children after 9pm. Good point.

Quail Lane Alumnus said...

But... When did television become the only family activity? No board games? Books? Hide and Go Seek anyone? If you don't like what's on tv find another past time.

David Bowie said...

badsign42--Jumping to mistaken conclusions is just the thing that gets an argument started, so let's be careful with our words. I do not advocate censorship of any kind, and I agree that parents need to be more involved in not only what their children are watching on TV, but the movies they see at the theaters and rent on video, as well as monitoring the music they listen to.

And a question to ALL: Are you going to suggest to me that ALL kids are tucked in their beds after 9PM? Who are we kidding?

Quail Lane Alumnus said...

There again, tucking your kids into bed is a parental problem. We do not need to tell parents to feed or shelter their children. Why should we have to tell them what their kids can or cannot watch?

Dan Colgan said...

OK but quail parental problems become society's problems - so what's the answer other than communities trying to guide parents on how to raise kids

Quail Lane Alumnus said...

Parents are warned at the beginning of every show that they're not appropriate for [insert age range here]. I'm just saying you can't take them off the air just because kids are watching them. You could move them to a later time spot, but they're released on DVD too so it still comes down to the parents guiding their kids.

On a side note: This is my last post today, I'm leaving for a weekend trip. I will check this again Monday. Kudos to everyone, good points all around. Thanks!

Dan Colgan said...

Quail - Also my thanks - and Welcome

David Bowie said...

To Quail-and I'm not suggesting anything of the sort. What I am saying is that they need to be pro-active in their children's activities, and I think you will agree that many do not.

BTW: Have you seen what is on TV lately, and I'm talking about before as well as after 9PM?? No disrespect intended, but think of just how ludicrous that question sounds?

David Bowie said...

OK folks, let's not get carried away with the censorship argument. I am NOT advocating taking anything off the air. In case any of you are around my age, and I'm 52, I think you will agree that there was far more censorship of TV programs in our younger days than there is today. I remember an episode of I Love Lucy where they would NOT show Lucille Ball because she was pregnant. NOW that's censorship!!! And remember the flap over Elvis swinging his hips???? Give me a break!

Dan Colgan said...

You buy'n?

Dan Colgan said...

Instigating... probably a good assessment -

David Bowie said...

To From the Fence: I find some of your comment intriguing, but I'm puzzled by what you call censorship. I see no obvious evidence of censorship. If the programs you cited had to "fine tune" their story lines, that is a clear indication that they crossed the line of what constitutes indecency as defined in Federal Law ( 18 USC 1464.)

Dan Colgan said...

Oh please don't tell me your leaving for good! - My "ego" couldn't handle it.

David Bowie said...

To From the Fence: I'm very sorry you do not like my tone, but straight forward and blunt is the way I am. If you find that berating or condescending, I can't help your misperceptions.

Dan Colgan said...

Fence - I have a fairly good idea of who you are and if you know me as well as you think you do, you will know that I don't care what other people think.

If you're wrong, I say your wrong. I'm have not the least bit of political correctness and I'm very proud of it. I am blunt and to the point. You don't like that about me? SORRY for you. But I have had many discussions here with those who have not attempted out of the gate to make an ass out of me and I will continue to respect those who take the time to outline their argument sensibly. IF YOU don't like the way I say or present an argument that's solely your right. But frankly I will continue to call a spade a spade.

Dan Colgan said...

wow, that was just cold.

Dan Colgan said...

Its good I know you were kidding SSW :)

Quail Lane Alumnus said...

Just made it back in town.. Glad to see I had some people agree with me, and thank you for the compliments. It is almost impossible for all of us to agree, but I think it is important for us to disagree as civilized as humanly possible. I love debates, I am now officially addicted to this blog.

Dan Colgan said...

Quail - Love to hear your thoughts on Separation of School and state...

Dan Colgan said...

Interesting, Watcher: how you make assumptions like that without having ever posted to our blog.

Every American has the right to defend their position and when unfairly "Shot" at, to shoot back.

Anyone here who has made valid arguments has been so noted and given their due. -

Dan Colgan said...

Sometimes people misinterpret some of the posts as adversarial when they are truly intended to provoke their true position and not just for them to spew party line. I play devil's advocate here as well.

David Bowie said...

Thought it was a good time to post "watcher" or just take a pot shot. Kind of curious for a first-time commenter???

I agree totally with PA--but be warned "watcher" I ask no quarter and I give no quarter. That's just the way it is!

David Bowie said...

If you can't take a little heat--maybe you should stick to watching!

David Bowie said...

One curious question "watcher:" Now that we know how arrogant and ignorant you can be--are you going to engage in any intellgent debate on the issues contained on this blog-site?

Dan Colgan said...

ooooo good comeback - after all you have to keep up with the rest of the one-line commenters here right?

Dan Colgan said...

It would indeed. That's a shame.

David Bowie said...

"Heed my warning" "watcher"--That's a fairly hard line for someone who has not taken a position on any issue. Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't you instigage this little exchange by starting off with a cheap shot a PA & myself. From where I sit, you're in no position to be warning anyone about anything. And as far as exhibiting "some level of professionalism" I've not seen any evidence to the contrary.

I will certainly look forward to engaging in a good spirited debate on some issue, without all this unprovoked hostility.

To badsign42: In a comment on another issue PA referred to you as "a voice of reason," and I see no reason to disagree with that designation. Your comments are well taken and articulared in a professional manner. You are a most welcome addition to this site. Suggestion: Perhaps you could consider authoring an "article" for posting on the main portion of this site. I'm sure that PA can get you set up as a "contributor." Your thoughts on this?????

David Bowie said...

Defensive-badsign????? I wonder why I come across as defensive? If someone disagrees with me or PA or whoever that's fine, and that's what discussion is all about. However I draw a line at someone taking a cheap unprovoked shot, especially one who has just started visiting this site. I suspect that you might feel the same way, if you want to be honest about it, because it is human nature.

Dan Colgan said...

OK I've stayed out of this conversation long enough...after all I am an egotistical, arrogant, know-it-all and you should feel priveledged to receive my wise words. (Sheesh)

Bad, I think we both get what you area saying,. the problem is that there are those who regardless of history, continue to badger and nudge us until we have to defend ourselves. - The observation you made about watcher was a very good catch. It was a wise-crack. - If he didn't mean it that way, there were much better expressions to use.

David Bowie said...

Boy-PA, I thought I didn't mince words??? (ha ha)

Dan Colgan said...

Bad has a point in that we can all watch our phrasing more carefully and try not to DELIBERATELY start fights.

David Bowie said...

Point well taken!