The message on the medium
published 06 Oct 2008
According to its Web site, www.tvadvo.com, the Television Advocacy Group, which began almost four years ago, was formed by a group of ladies “who wanted to make a difference... by improving the content of local television programming.”
Content is deemed to cover values portrayed in the program, decency in speech, dressing and action, contribution to the intellectual development of viewers, promotion of healthy love for country (I wonder what “unhealthy love for country”means) and respect for religious beliefs.
What the group does is to conduct workshops for anybody willing to listen. After a brief introductory presentation by a TAG member, the participants are made to watch a taped show from free (i.e., non-cable) television and are asked to fill out an assessment sheet where they “grade” the program watched.
Each of the aspects of the program’s content, those I mentioned in the second paragraph, were assigned specific weights. The participants are then asked to sum up their scores. A grade of less than 50 means the program has “questionable values” and thus is not recommended for children. A score between 51 and 75 indicates that part of the material may not be suitable for kids and would thus need parental guidance. Seventy-six and above means the program is “recommended for all ages.”
The group also encourages its members to put in writing their observations on any given show and forwards these letters to the network over which the show is aired as well as to the Movie and Television Review and Classification Board.
***
One Saturday morning I hauled off my six-year-old son Elmo (we were—still are—short of house help) to a TAG workshop I had been invited to attend and eventually write about. The meeting was held at the Tanglaw Review Center along Examiner Street in Quezon City. Tanglaw is one of the women’s centers of the Opus Dei prelature. It occurred to me that I should not be surprised that Elmo was the only member of the male species in the center—with the exception, of course, of the dozen or so drivers of the ladies, all of whom were waiting at the entrance.
Elmo engrossed himself in his Transformers coloring book while introductions were being made. Soon, one of the ladies asked my permission to take him out of the room as soon as the showing started. “It’s not really for kids,” I was told. Well, okay. Elmo did not object anyhow.
The show turned out to be an episode of Maalaala Mo Kaya featuring Judy Ann Santos and newcomer Jason Abalos. She was a career-driven woman who just recently discovered she was terminally ill. He was a call boy whom she happened to run over and who begged her to keep him company, just to talk. Before the lights were turned off, we were reminded to be mindful of the criteria as we would be asked to evaluate the show.
Of course I was not there as a workshop participant. I was there as an observer, a member of the media, assessing whether the group’s cause’s was worthy, and, perhaps more importantly, whether its goals were realistic and its methods effective. I did not quite stay long enough to finish the show—I wanted instead to chat with some of the organizers and check how my son was behaving himself while seated at the long registration table just outside the meeting room. I found him drawing while stuffing himself with the baked chips we bought as baon.
Two TAG members, gave me the group’s Web address and said I should find everything I would need to know there. They narrated their own experiences watching some noontime shows which they felt bared too much skin. They said they often wrote to networks about the skimpy attires of the dancers on these shows. Soon after the letter is sent, the dancer’ skirts get longer and cleavages are covered up, But after a few days, they are at it again.
The ladies feel the public has to write more letters.
***
I do not doubt that TAG has only the welfare of the TV-viewing youth in mind. But I feel it has numerous challenges to hurdle.
First, the group’s members are usually middle- and upper-class matrons. The children in their households (except the yayas, perhaps) most likely watch cable TV. How can they expand their reach to the people behind Cartoon Network, Nickelodeon, the Disney Channel, even MTV? Moreover, the Internet is just as popular as a media form. Maybe there are other existing groups for this.
And if TAG intends to focus on free tv since it is what is viewed by the majority of the population, how do they make that connection with the masses?
Second, TAG is identified with a religious movement that is perceived by the public as ultra-conservative. This may be some kind of baggage that can be a turn-off to the more liberal minded. Then the group’s message, no matter how good, timely, relevant and practical, may be ignored even before it is delivered.
Third, the members cannot ever expect to go against business. Sex (and violence, and other racy ideas that grandmothers usually frown upon) sells. It is almost axiomatic. TAG members may have to do something else aside from writing the networks (despite giving a second copy to the MTRCB). They should look at TV-viewing policies in the home, as implemented by parents, instead. Ultimately what children are allowed to see is the parents’ responsibility. TAG should focus most of its energy not to the networks, not to the TV review board, but to parents.
There is no sense fighting an expanding world. One even risks being accused of censorship or, at the very least, self-righteousness. We need to be critical, sure, but we need to keep an open mind. TAG’s challenge is furthering its advocacy while being in tune with the realities of this day and age.
adelle_tulagan@yahoo.com
