FCC Would Like to Tune Out of Ratings Controversy

WASHINGTON — Broadcasters, politicians and public-interest groups are clamoring to testify at next week’s Federal Communications Commission hearing on the television ratings system. But the FCC itself, which has rarely shrunk from controversy before, seems to want no part of the limelight.

Upstaged by the White House’s early and high-profile involvement in the ratings issue last year after President Clinton convened a meeting with TV industry executives, top FCC officials have since taken a back seat in a controversy that has galvanized parents, politicians and television executives alike.

In the 32 speeches that FCC Chairman Reed E. Hundt has given this year, for example, only twice has he mentioned the ratings controversy--and then only in passing. His colleagues are similarly circumspect.

“There is so much discussion going on now,” said James H. Quello, an FCC commissioner. “There’s so many people on the Hill weighing in . . . and a lot of the public has problems with the current ratings system . . . but I’m going to hold my fire until the final pros and cons are in.”

The FCC lacks the authority to modify the current ratings plan, instituted by the television industry in January. But it is required by law to review it. If the FCC finds the industry guidelines inadequate, it must construct its own--but it could not legally require the industry to utilize them.

FCC officials said they plan to use the testimony from the June 20 hearing to evaluate the industry’s ratings system. The FCC will then hold another public meeting sometime during the summer to vote on whether to accept or reject it.

Separately, the FCC must also pass rules to implement a federal law that requires TV manufacturers to install V-chip devices in their sets that can electronically sense the TV ratings and let parents block those shows that they do not want their children to watch.

But the overall process, FCC officials concede, could take months to complete since it will occur at a time when the regulatory agency is facing a massive turnover in leadership.

Hundt tendered his resignation last month and said he would leave as soon as Clinton names a replacement. Three other commissioners on the five-member agency are also expected to leave this summer--a prospect some experts say will dampen enthusiasm for quick action on television ratings.

“They don’t want to touch this issue with a 10-foot pole,” said the head of a citizens group that has worked closely with the FCC on numerous issues.

Although the FCC has broad rules requiring “indecent” programming to be scrambled or confined to hours before 6 a.m. and after 10 p.m., the agency has long been reluctant to pass judgment on program content. Only once has the FCC taken a broadcaster to court to enforce such rules, according to Eric L. Bernthal, the attorney for the defendant in the case, Evergreen Media Corp. And the FCC has an informal policy of only taking action against indecent programming in response to a viewer or listener complaint.

Rep. W. J. “Billy” Tauzin (R-La.), the chairman of the House telecommunications subcommittee, said he believes that public pressure on the television industry has made the FCC irrelevant to resolution of the ratings debate. Industry representatives already have tentatively agreed to provide more content information in the ratings and are meeting with their critics this week in an effort to hammer out a compromise before the FCC hearings.

“The difficult work has already been done,” said Tauzin, formerly a defender of the current system but who is now actively seeking reforms. “You could cancel those hearings and have the same results. I think the industry is going to come to some agreement on a better system. I think that’s a foregone conclusion.”