We are deeply concerned that, no matter how well intentioned or carefully crafted, government mandated ratings on television also will prove to be little more than that a censor s tool. Indeed, that is precisely what the Supreme Court concluded in a host of decisions in which similar ratings systems have been struck down on constitutional grounds. It is difficult to imagine how the implementation of Congress vague mandate to rate content that is sexual, violent, or indecent can be implemented in a manner that simply advises rather than suppresses ideas. The statute vests unlimited and standardless discretion in the FCC and its advisory panel to select which programming will be labeled as excessively violent, indecent or otherwise inappropriate for children. Such a scheme will inevitably chill laudable ideas and viewpoints or drive them from the marketplace altogether.
TV programming is a tempting subject for demagoguery.
As librarians who regularly provide guidance and advice to parents about selection of appropriate reading materials for their children, we believe that decisions about what children read or view must be made by parents, not government officials. To make those decisions wisely, parents must be free to exercise their judgement based on information and advice from a variety of sources of their choosing. But government labeling, which serves to suppress ideas rather than inform and advise, has no place in a society governed by constitutional principles. In conclusion, the ALA strongly urges that the FCC reject demands for a content- based government rating system. We appreciate the opportunity to present our views.