The V-chip: a safety cap for your television
Elizabeth Sheehan (Editor: Veronique Autphenne)

The V-chip, or anti-violence chip, is hardware that is placed in television sets and is capable of detecting encoded ratings information to block programs previously identified as objectionable based upon their content.

Legislation passed in March 1998 stipulates that all new televisions sets sold in America after January 1, 2000 must contain the V-chip technology. Opponents of the V-chip claim that the installation of the chip could lead to government control of television programming and violates the free speech rights of programmers.

The hardware chip works in conjunction with two pre-determined ratings system that rate shows based on viewing age standards and on content. The chip interprets the ratings that are encoded in the broadcasters’ signal and subsequently blocks predetermined programming.

The proposed age-based ratings system is similar to the movie ratings system. It has the following categories: ‘TV-G’ for suitable for all audiences, ‘TV-PG’ for parental guidance suggested, ‘TV-14’ for programs unsuitable for children under the age of 14, and ‘TV-MA’ for mature audiences only. The content based ratings system is broken down thus: ‘V’ for violence, ‘S’ for sexual situations, ‘L’ for coarse language, and ‘D’ for suggestive dialogue.

The V-chip operates in a standard television set that has the V-chip installed or with a set-top converter box suitable for older televisions that do not already have the technology.

However, the technology is useless without the cooperation of television broadcasters in agreeing upon the standardized ratings system and the application of this system to their programs.

Ironically, it’s been said that the V-chip isn’t really a ‘chip’ at all, but a derivative of existing closed-captioning technology. The encoded ratings information is embedded on the same signal that carries closed-captioned information. Lawsuits currently abound as to the originator of this technology what with millions of dollars in royalty and licensing fees in question.

Tri-Vision, a Canadian supplier of high-technology products, holds the exclusive worldwide rights for the manufacture and distribution of the V-chip technology designed by the Canadian inventor Tim Collings.

Soundview Technologies, a Connecticut company, manufactures a set-top converter that can interpret the electronic ratings signal and block programs for older televisions not equipped with the V-chip technology.

Jonathan Thompson, spokesman for the Consumer Electronics Manufacturers Association, says ‘The cost of V-chip sets will be very modest, if noticeable at all’ (Aversa 1998: 1). The consumer will see about a $5 to $20 increase in the price of TV sets with the V-chip installed. High-end television sets (27-inch and larger) probably won’t see an increase at all. Converter box prices will be modest, as well, running only about $50-60.

Currently, television sets are the main targets of the V-chip installation, but computers that have TV tuners will also be subject to the installation of the V-chip. The V-chip in computers will only block TV programming -- it will not be able to block news or other content coming across the computer via the Internet. Opponents of the V-chip question this and are keeping a watchful eye on the application of filtering technologies to the Internet.

Broadcasters, understandably, were not thrilled about any system that could possibly reduce the audience for their programming and thereby reduce their advertising revenue and so fought against any type of government intervention regarding content. But driving the V-chip technology is the belief that children are exposed to too much violence and other objectionable programming on television, and opposition could backfire on broadcasters.

Groups such as the American Psychiatric Association, which are involved with the Citizen’s Task Force on TV violence, have been integral in the effort to protect children from gratuitous violence on television. The APA and others believe that the ratings system and the V-chip enable parents to make better-informed decisions about what their children watch.

Broadcasters and others oppose the idea of the V-chip along freedom of speech and censorship issues. Broadcasters point out that the V-chip technology makes blanket judgments and can’t, for example, make a distinction between the violence of a ‘Terminator 2’ versus ‘Schindler’s List’ (Bellafante 1995) without further refinement to the ratings systems. But considering the criticism and lengthy debate over the current accepted standards, any further revision to the ratings standards is unlikely.

Representative Edward Markey, D-Mass, has been called ‘the father of the V-chip’ and has pushed vociferously for the V-chip technology and the 1996 Telecommunications Act that requires all television sets with a screen 13-inches or larger to have the V-chip blocking technology installed.

The original stipulation was for the V-chip to be installed in all TVs manufactured after March 1, 1998. The FCC granted an extension on March 13, 1998 to install V-chips in half of all TV sets by July 1, 1999 and in all sets by January 1, 2000. Also, at this time, the ratings systems that would interact with the technology were confirmed.

There is continued opposition from various groups that consider the V-chip a form of censorship, with the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) in the lead. From their document entitled, ‘Why Does the ACLU Oppose the V-Chip Legislation Currently Pending in Congress?’ comes the following quote, ‘A media ratings system mandated by the government under the threat of the formation of a federal rating system should private industry fail is not a "voluntary" system. It is a form of censorship clearly forbidden by the First Amendment’ (ACLU 1998:1).

The ACLU believes the V-chip is unconstitutional and unnecessary. Government control of the ratings system actually takes away parental control by imposing standards on what is objectionable content. Also, there are currently blocking devices such as ‘lock-boxes’ that can deny children access to certain channels and don’t require any governmental interference.

NBC is also something of an opponent. Although they assert they support the V-chip overall, it has refused to use the ratings system based on content and currently only use the age-based ratings system. Their opposition lies in the belief that it is impossible to consistently apply the content labels to programming.

The American public doesn’t seem particularly impressed with the V-chip or the ratings systems. A recent survey by ‘Morality in Media,’ a national non-profit interfaith organization media watch-dog group shows that more Americans favor stronger enforcement of existing FCC indecency laws than the current ratings system or V-chip technology (Morality in Media 1998). Another poll by the Associated Press also showed that 51 per cent of parents pay little or no attention to the ratings when they appear on-screen (Goldberg 1998).

The full impact of the V-chip won’t be known for a few years when eventually all new televisions manufactured will have the technology installed. But retailers have not seen significant requests for V-chip enabled sets, public opinion seems lukewarm at best, and it’s been said that this is strictly a Washington beltway issue, driven by politics rather than actual want or need.

Americans, however, do take their first amendment rights seriously and should this technology and its use become oppressive or intrusive as opponents fear it might, V-chip technology may be in for a tough road ahead.

Aversa, J. (1998) ‘FCC Adopts V-Chip Standards’, The Associated Press, 12 March.

Bellafante, G. (1995) ‘Locking out violence’, Time, Volume 146, No. 4, 24 July.

‘Violence chip: why does the ACLU oppose the V-Chip legislation currently pending in Congress?’ (1998) [http://www.aclu.org/library/aavchip.html], March.

‘Parents beware! The FCC’s V-Chip/TV ratings decision opens the gates to more and more of what is already injuring America’s children, Morality in Media says,’ (1998) [http://www.prnewswire.com], 12 March.

Goldberg, H. (1998) ‘Poll: adults ignore viewer warnings’, The Associated Press, 2 March.

BACK TO HOME PAGE