The Watchdog Mom

AE Network Pushes Graphic Rape at 14-Year-Olds

2013-04-16T20:14:00.000-07:00

Take Action Against Bates Motel

A&E THINKS A GRAPHIC RAPE SCENE IS RATED AS APPROPRIATE FOR 14-YEAR-OLDS

This season’s serial-killer fixation continues with the recent debut of Bates Motel on the once-classy A&E network. Bates Motel explores the formative teen years of Psycho’s Norman Bates… but though the subject matter clearly signals that this is going to be a violent series, A&E thinks it’s just fine for your kids.

The series premiere featured a graphic rape, which the network deemed appropriate for viewers as young as 14!

If you agree that this program was inappropriately rated, take action now. Contact A&E Network, and urge them to give Bates Motel a more appropriate TV-MA rating.

Click here to contact A&E: http://w2.parentstv.org/Main/Action/ActionAlerts/aa_2013_03_27.aspx

Nick Jr's NickMom: A Massive Failure

2012-10-13T19:08:00.001-07:00

...A woman explains her divorce by saying, “We were different signs. I’m a Leo. He’s an a**hole”
...A mother says, “I know a woman who said, ‘I can’t imagine my life without children.’ Really, bitch? ‘Cuz I can!”
...A teenage girl shows her mother how to use Facebook. While her mother talks on the phone, the girl posts an image of the mother flashing her breasts at a Mardi Gras celebration.

These are not samples of an edgy night program rated and geared towards adults. No, these are excerpts from Nick Jr's new "NickMom", which was formerly a kids-only channel. Safest on TV, many assumed.

I dub "NickMom" a. massive. failure. The show and its moms take pride not in nurturing and guiding our children, but in removing ourselves as far from the realm of parenting as emotionally possible. Why is Viacom pushing this down our kids' throats? Why can't this be aired on a different channel altogether?

It's precious, really. Marketing a martini glass to toddlers.

To add insult to injury, NickMom has taken residence on Nic Jr's website. What you'll find there is as adult as it gets:

Top 9 Favorite Wines of Moms
How Many Glasses of Wine Should I Have Tonight?(implying women cannot cope with motherhood without drinking);
Postpartum Breast Threat Levels (which opens with, “Congratulations on the birth of your baby! Sorry about what it did to your body”);
Things I Should Be Doing Instead of Reading 50 Shades of Grey.
Nine Ways to Respond When Your Kid Wants to be Kim Kardashian For Halloween

Can your kids read? Will they be able to soon? Then in the words of NickMom: “SH*T! SH*T! SH*T!”

The October 3^rd episode of NickMom Night Out featured various comedians joking about becoming a stripper rather than staying home with kids. And during a promo for Mom Friends Forever, a mother tells her children, “I do not want you to forget where you came from.” Her teenage son replies, “Your vagina?”

Brilliant.

Look, I'm a mom. I get the "I-can-still-be-cool-even-though-I-have-kids" thing. And I'm about as far removed from perfect as it comes. The only thing organic in my kitchen is a bag of rotten fruit I forgot to feed the kids. Sometimes I find myself wondering just how insane life is actually supposed to be. Am I on candid camera? Did my kids just really do that in public? Aren't they tired YET?? I've been known to refer to my toddlers as sociopaths. (Seriously, toddlers kind of are).

But I don't talk about that in front of them. I talk about it with my girlfriends, safe from their little ears, whose only concerns should be whether or not they get an extra snuggle at bedtime and if I found their favorite Curious George book.

Viacom choosing to merge content this radically is a poor choice. Take the show to another channel altogether. At least, at the very minimum, take NickMom off their website. And I'm not the only one who feels this way. Here are some comments pulled from the ParentsTV Facebook Page:

“I put Nick Jr. on for my kids at 7 p.m. while my husband and I did the dishes. My kids were exposed to vagina jokes, penis jokes and female orgasm jokes. One joke I heard had to do with a woman shoving her kids up their grandmother’s vagina. And this channel was created for kids??”

· “...Why spend all day airing shows teaching children how great it is to love, share, be kind, and be a family....and then tell kids their parents don't even like them?”

· “I just want to thank NickMom for showing my 2½ year-old son a woman stripping with her shirt off. I had changed the channel to what I THOUGHT was safe programming for him. I didn't wait for the channel to come up…only to walk back into the room moments later to the horror that was on TV.”

· “My TV is set up to automatically switch to Nick Jr. when my daughter’s favorite shows come on. I walked in and discovered her watching some woman talk about uncircumcised penises.”

· “Nick Jr. claims this is 'what moms want.' You know what moms want? They want to watch good, quality, educational programming with their children at times convenient for their families -- which is why I'm paying extra for this channel.”

· “We have all heard that ‘children are like sponges.’ Why show our little ‘sponges’ programming that glorifies drinking, vulgarity, racial stereotypes, and rude behavior?”

In addition to being justifiably outraged that they are paying a premium fee on top of their already-high pay-TV rates in order to get a channel which sells itself as appropriate for children 24 hours a day, many posters pointed out that Nick Jr. apparently has only one network “feed.” Thus, while the raunchy Parental Discretion airs on the East Coast at 10:00 p.m., it begins on the West Coast at 7:00 p.m., disrupting the TV and bedtime patterns many parents have established for their children. And in Hawaii, Parental Discretion’s flood of breast and penis jokes airs on the “safe, educational” Nick Jr. at 4 o’clock in the afternoon.

Naturally, "NickMom" rates all its adult-themed programming TV-PG – except for Parental Discretion, which is rated TV-14. Clever, clever, clever.

What about you? Think I'm overreacting?

To contact NickMom about its programming, click here.

Good Christian Bitches

2012-03-06T20:06:00.002-08:00

No, it’s not a title for an upcoming reality show. It’s a new series on ABC .

Unsurprisingly, the media has had very little to say about the title of the show. Realistically, if ABC wants to market misogynistic bigoted stereotypes, they should really aim for more of a universal and copious approach. They could do a whole series of spin-offs, like: "Good Islamic Bitches". (Ooohhhh. Did she really write that??) I did. Too much? Too bad. There are Jewish women to remember, as well as Hindus, Buddhists, Agnostics and Atheists. Mormons and Latter-Day Saints shouldn't be ignored, either.

This is not a political post. This is not a thing about partisanship, left vs. right, or anything related to the side of the aisle upon which you vote. This is a human thing, and (more specifically), a woman thing.

Rush Limbaugh called Georgetown law student Sandra Fluke a slut. Bad noun, Rush. Bad. Granted, Fluke wants her university to pay for a 'friend's' birth control. Odd request, especially to a Catholic university. But whatever...this is America, and absurdity is the norm.

Limbaugh calling her a 'slut' was definitely not cool. Yes, he is inflammatory. His uber-conservatism is polarizing, and some of his comments are begging for ~~a giant smack upside the head~~ sensitivity training. But here's my question to you: Where is the media when the not-as-trendy conservative Christian women are bashed?

Where were they when Bill Maher called Sarah Palin a C*nt? Or when he joked about Rick Santorum's wife using a vibrator?

Where were they when Joy Behar called Congresswoman Angle a bitch?

When Olbermann called Michele Malkin a “big mashed-up piece of meat with lipstick on it”?

When Chris Matthews called Hillary Clinton a “she devil”? (I like Hillary. Matthews really ticked me off with that one.)

When Ed Schultz called Sarah Palin a “bimbo” and Laura Ingraham a “right-wing slut”?

And where is the media with Good Christian Bitches? Are Christian conservative women not worthy of being respected in the same way liberal, non-Christian women are? Are Christian women a lesser species? It seems they are, in the eyes of the media.

I wonder how many people will read this post and believe my husband is an immigrant, my kids are minorities, and some of my dearest friends are liberal gay men and Somalian Muslim women?

No. Impossible. I'm a good Christian bitch, right?

Contact ABC and its sponsors today to let them know how you feel about this show.

I Just Want My Pants Back

2012-02-29T12:19:00.000-08:00

Watch this clip:

Like it? That's fine. You're an adult. But do you like it enough to watch it with a 12 year-old? MTV thinks you should.

I Just Want My Pants Back is the latest attempt by MTV to parlay a lifestyle of drunken hook-ups into the living room of minors. But in all fairness (I am no prude), if adults want to complain about finding lost clothing because of a poorly-planned indiscretion, have at it. They are adults. They can do whatever (and, er, whomever) they want to.

But here’s where Watchdog Mom gets irritated: MTV is advertising this show to 12 year olds. Don’t believe me? MTV’s head-honcho himself, the head of programming, David Janollari, is on the record saying the network is targeting kids as young as 12 with the content:

“The idea is to reach out to the 12-34-year-old demo at a level that relates to them.”

Janollari and the rest at MTV want to intentionally target pre-teens and teens with a TV-14 rating. The episodes introduce a foursome, and a woman asking a man to insert his finger into her rectum during intercourse.

If you agree this content is inappropriate for children of any age, please take action now by contacting the sponsors, Dr. Pepper, T-Mobile, and Toyota. Ask them if alcohol-fueled sexual foursomes and a woman who wants finger up her a**’ are an accurate reflection of their mission statement.

Click here now to take action.

Graphic Anti-Abortion Ad During Superbowl XLVI?

2012-02-03T17:40:00.000-08:00

Democratic prez hopeful Randall Terry is taking brilliant advantage of this coming Sunday and the millions of people who will be glued to their televisions. His message: Abortion is murder. Much unlike the wildly controversial but quite tasteful and moving Tebow/Focus on the Family commercial which aired last year, Terry is instead opting for shock value. Not that I blame him; the amount of dough he’s dropped to air these commercials leave little time for pontificating.

The ad will show aborted babies. Their teeny bloodied hands and feet are unmistakably human, and it drives home what Terry is trying to tell the public: He thinks abortion is murder, and he wants it stopped.

It’s not his message which gives me pause. On a personal note, and one completely separate from the work I do with the non-partisan Parents Television Council, I am also pro-life. The horrific images shown in his commercial are real, and it happens every minute of every day. But broadcast television is simply not the platform he should be using for his message. Yes, the abortion industry is shrouded in deception and untruths, and I appreciate the factual message Terry wants to send people. However, the method he's using is cursory, at best. Millions of children and families will be watching the Superbowl on Sunday and these images are simply not appropriate. Whether scripted or real, broadcast television must be safe for ALL viewers. Also, the pro-life message will be ignored if people are polarized and demonized.

Terry has purchased ad space in the following markets:

Arkansas: Fort Smith/Rogers
Colorado: Denver, Colorado Springs/Pueblo, Grand Junction
Hawaii: Hilo, Honolulu, Wailuku
Illinois: Quincy
Indiana: Fort Wayne
Maine: Bangor, Portland
Minnesota: Minneapolis
Missouri: Kansas City, Joplin, Ottumwa, St. Joseph, St. Louis, Springfield
Nevada: Elko
North Dakota: Fargo
Ohio: Cincinnati, Cleveland, Columbus, Dayton, Lima, Steubenville, Toledo, Youngstown, Zanesville
Oklahoma: Oklahoma City, Tulsa
South Dakota: Sioux Falls
Texas: Amarillo, Wichita Falls
Utah: Salt Lake City
Source: (http://www.jillstanek.com/2012/01/graphic-abortion-ads-to-air-during-super-bowl/)

The FCC just ruled that station managers have the right to refuse ads by political candidates during the Superbowl. That could mean massive cancellations across the board. If you see the ad on Sunday, head over to Watchdog Mom's Facebook page and let people know what you thought.

I'll be watching, leerily, like I always do on Superbowl Sunday. Except this just may be the first live television show where I'll have more faith in Madonna's performance than anyone else's.

The Kardashian Barbie

2012-01-24T20:20:00.000-08:00

Recently, I've been subject to some very late nights (not the good kind, I assure you), a houseful of sick people and a couple of very selfish cats. In light of all things half completed, I've plagiarized my alterblogger-ego. I think I would have anyway; sick kids or not. This topic is pretty eye-opening. Enjoy (and please, share it forward!):

The Kardashian Barbie Doll

I'm a recovering Barbie-addict. I played with them until I was like 16, and I still would if I didn't have all boys. I'm a little burnt out on trucks, pirates and Spiderman, so anytime we're at someone's house and they have little girls, I'll immediately wonder if they have Barbies. I even have a method:

I'll make eye contact with the girl. Whether she's across the room or simply in the seat next to me, eye contact will be made.
I'll smile sweetly and gesture for her to come closer.
Once she's within my reach, I'll pull her closer and ask--without moving my lips, mind you, in case there's a mean older sister not minding her own business--if she has any Barbies.

(Huh. I've never actually written it out before; it kind of reads like someone trying to score crack.)

That said, I have to say the prospect of a Kardashian Barbie Doll creeps me out. I don't care if it's the only doll in a sea of excavators and superheros, I won't touch it with a ten-foot pink brush. Sure, Barbie is no stranger to controversy. The Dallas Cowboys Barbie caught a lot of flack:

(But comparing a professional cheerleader to a sex tape goddess isn't even a logical argument.)

"Cher in Bob Mackie Barbie"

(Let's be honest: Bob Mackie gets away with stripper garb because he's Bob Mackie)

"Jazz Barbie"

(I've been to a jazz show on Broadway. Yes, they dress like this. And yes, like Barbie, they look like strippers.)

"~~Tramp Stamp~~ Totally Tattoos Barbie"

(Much to my husband's dismay, I like tattoos. I even have a few. But there's no way I'd get near a Slag Tag.)

Regardless of how many poor choices the marketing team at Mattel has made, short of a "Playboy Barbie" line coming out, nothing tops the poor message that a Kardashian doll sends. Can you imagine the conversation?

Little Girl: "Mommy, who is Kim Kardashian?"
Mom: "Well, she and her sisters are on TV."
Girl: "Why?"
Mom, chewing lip uncomfortably: "Well, because they're famous."
Girl: "Are they singers?"
Mom: "No."
Girl: "Do they play sports?"
Mom: "Uh, nope."
Girl: "Do they dance?"
Mom: "Technically yes, but not in the way you're thinking."
Girl: "Well, why are they famous?"
Mom points across the street: "Look! A firetruck!"

Indeed, Kim's sex tape and the need to carry $10,000 handbags brought them much fame and wealth, but it's not the best message to send young, impressionable girls. Point is, do not buy the Kardashian doll.Send a message to Mattel. Or call them at 1-800-524-8697 . Let them know they can do better than this.

I mean, come on. Her as a Barbie???

Equinox Gym Ad Crosses the Line?

2012-01-18T15:17:00.000-08:00

Look at this photo:

Outside of hiring an under-aged teen for an adult film, anything else come to mind? How about a gym membership?

This ad is for a national print and billboard ad for the swanky Equinox Gym franchise. Admittedly, sex sells in the advertising world. From Bratz Dolls to the completely untalented Kardashians, the crux of most successful advertising campaigns rests on sex. But Terry Richardson, the photographer for this campaign, really takes 'sexy' to a new low. Terry is the twisted talent behind the infamous and pedophilia-pushing Glee photo spread (see my news appearance discussing it here). Give the guy a Google (or Bing/Yahoo/et al, thank you SOPA/PIPA) and prepare your gag reflex.

Contact Equinox. Call them. Write on their Facebook Page. Let them know that if it's memberships they seek, perhaps a tamer approach might work better. Or even a healthier one. I mean, it's a health club for cripes' sakes, not an underground Ecstasy-fueled nightclub.

Me? I'm going to let them know that an anorexic and coked-up looking underage model doesn't make me think "treadmill". It makes me want to run in the opposite direction, to a gym where people don't look like she does.

My Debate with Media Lawyer: Who Won?

2012-01-16T08:01:00.000-08:00

In case you missed last week's post covering the suit before the Supreme Court, I discussed it on my local news with a media lawyer. His argument was flimsy, at best, citing some nonsense about networks having no idea what 'indecent' material could be viewed as. We did agree on one point, however: The free market will make sure any over-the-top content aired on broadcast television is not aired. Advertisers don't want to be associated with what the mass public views as offensive, and if consumers aren't happy, no one wins. Let's be clear about one thing: This lawsuit isn't about freedom of expression. It's about money.

What say you? Do the federally-funded public airwaves demand the same attention and accountability as any other commodity we invest in? Should advertisers and networks be held to a higher standard than paid cable?

Supreme Court to Rule in Favor of Broadcast Indecency?

2012-01-12T10:53:00.000-08:00

Media junkies everywhere are discussing the upcoming ruling by the SCOTUS, which could be devastating for families everywhere (or not, depending on the family). In the FCC vs. Fox TV, The Federal Communications Commission filed suit against Fox TV for a number of expletives used by not-so-classy celebs. (See story here).

Ironically, I'm on my way out the door now to go tape a segment for our local news. It's regarding an upcoming episode of Modern Family, where a bleeped 'F'-bomb will be dropped multiple times. This very week, our country could see television move to a directions where bleeps could be tossed out the window, along with bans on nudity.

Opponents of the suit say it's unconstitutional for the SCOTUS to decide what can or cannot be said on TV. Advocates say it's unconstitutional for the SCOTUS to not decide what can or cannot be said on TV.

I'll present the facts and let you decide:

The *"Family Hour" was enacted by network heads and members of the FCC as a safeguard for families. Meant specifically to prevent anything indecent being said on public airwaves during a time when families-specifically children-are most likely watching, it has been laughingly and arrogantly ignored for the better part of the 80's until present time.

The real kicker though, is that you pay for it. You may hate shows like American Dad, Family Guy, or Glee, but you have no choice but the fund its content. These are shown on broadcast television, which is about as public as your local post office or library. Which you pay for with tax dollars.

So you tell me: Is it unconstitutional? The SCOTUS, who are federal employees, bankrolled by us, is set to decide what can or cannot be said on public airwaves. The public airwaves are federal, which are also bankrolled by us. I don't know about you, but I happen to think it's amoral for the government to take my money, and tell me to change the channel if I don't like what I paid for.

But that's me.

*The previous post stated The Family Hour was a bill signed by congress. This was incorrect. Corrections have been made.

Snooki, Sex, and Your Dime

2011-12-09T07:41:00.001-08:00

Last night I went on my local Fox station to discuss the most recent study released by The Parents Television Council. It covers popular MTV "reality" shows, like Jersey Shore, Teen Mom, 16 & Pregnant, and Real World. If there's ever a reason to push for Cable Choice, it's now.

You are paying for this content. You may not watch MTV or VH1 or even want it with your cable lineup, but regardless, you're paying for it. Every bleeped word, every moronic antic? Yup, you paid for it. If Viacom wants to peddle this 'entertainment' via cable companies everywhere, go for it. It's a free market. But don't expect me to pay for someone else's entertainment choices.

It's kind of like going to Asia de Cuba on Madison Avenue and paying for my neighbor's dessert.

Make sure to voice your support for Cable Choice. Call your cable provider and let them know they need to offer Cable Choice or they'll lose a customer.

Advocate Analyzes MTV Programming: MyFoxTWINCITIES.com

Fox's 'Allen Gregory'

2011-11-06T17:33:00.000-08:00

Fox has not had a glowing reputation with its programming slotted during the Family Hour. From Glee to Family Guy to American Dad, the blatant lack of regard for families across this country is clear. I thought the scripting of pedophilia (Family Guy), bestiality (Family Guy), mocking of the disabled (Family Guy), sibling sexual fantasies (American Dad), and bondage (American Dad), had reached the height of indecency on broadcast TV.

Until now.

I'm convinced Fox's human resources department is holding job fairs at halfway houses for child molesters. Allen Gregory (Sundays, 8:30 p.m. ET) is a show that slithers to new a new gutter of sludge. My beef isn't with the writing, if I can call it that. My beef is with Fox airing this crap at 8:30 PM, during the massively-ignored 'Family Hour'. The show’s title character is actually a 7-year old child in second-grade, who has sexual fantasies of his elderly principal.

Seven.Years. Old.

Upon being sent to the Principal's office for drinking wine at lunch, Allen is shown having a series of sexual fantasies about her, which include ogling her hairy (blech) cleavage and rubbing her down with suntan oil as she lay topless. And predictably, Allen and his teacher head to a hotel room where it’s clear they’ll be having sex:

Allen: “Let me ask you something. Is it just like a complete mess down there?”

Principal: “I'm gonna level with you. It's like post-Katrina.”

Allen: “Damn it, you're perfect.”

Allen Gregory reclines on the bed. The lights go out. Principal starts moaning his name: “Allen Gregory, Allen Gregory...”

I understand that there are people across this world with freakishly strange senses of humor who enjoy seeing a second grader having sex with his teacher. But they need to enjoy their twisted fantasies on someone else's dime. Allen Gregory is aired on public broadcast television, which means YOUR tax dollars pay for this. Contact your local Fox station and tell then you don’t want this airing.

The advertisers who link their brand with Allen Gregory :

Boost Mobile

Microsoft Windows 7 PC

Trident Layers

Nikon Cameras: Corporate Contact

Toyota Camry

Metro PCS unlimited plan (Call Sprint)

Volkswagen CC

I've included links to the customer service for each company. Make sure to let them know that in this down-turned economy, your hard-earned dollars shouldn't be funding this type of crap on television.

FX Network's "American Horror Story"

2011-10-23T15:22:00.000-07:00

If there were ever a time to argue for the necessity of Cable Choice, it's now. I'm never afraid of the content I see in movies or on TV. My short stint with acting a thousand years ago exposed me to the 'magic' of movies and television. Dismembered body parts (wax moldings) blood (corn syrup, usually) and dead people very rarely scare me. The minds behind the dead bodies, dismembered corpses and the blood is what causes me to jump out of my chair.

Like Ryan Murphy (Nip/Tuck and Glee), who has put out another darling for families everywhere. American Horror Story (Wednesdays, 10PM Eastern/FX Network) is primarily centered around the Harmon family. It highlights sex, murder, self-mutilation, masturbation, S&M, dismembered fetuses, corpses, and demons, and a teenaged boy's fantasies of murdering his classmates.

And it's on basic cable. You can't opt out of having it--you are forced to pay for it.

Dr. Ben Harmon moves his family (after sleeping with one of his students) to a new state and a new home, which just happens to be haunted and (of course) has a history of gory murders. Rampant use of the ever-classy genital slang like “p***y” and “c***sucker.” is there, along with the good doctor Ben fantasizing about his housekeeper and masturbating himself to a very graphic and loud orgasm. His wife is shown having sex with (and becoming pregnant by) someone in a full-body rubber S&M bondage suit. This rubber-wearing lunatic may or may not be her husband.

And it's on basic cable.

Victims are stabbed or axed to death, forcibly drowned, or graphically murdered. Each episode also includes views of dismembered corpses, fetuses, and what I can only surmise to be demons.

But you know what really gets me? It's when a Christian is sexually assaulted and murdered while praying. I think it goes unsaid that Ryan Murphy and his cronies over at FX wouldn't dare exhibit this type of violence on another religion. Maybe Murphy has a love/hate thing with God. Maybe he's secretly enraged over Christian doctrine and theology and uses his medium of television to exert said rage. Maybe he was a nerdy kid who was picked on by jocks at parochial school. Who knows? What is certain is that Murphy and FX are a bunch of talentless hacks who are using the most predictable, unoriginal and banal means of shock value around: Picking on the church. He may be rich and successful, but talented he ain't.

I included a clip of the show, which opens with a disabled girl staring ominously at two boys who threaten to hurt her with baseball bats. Creepy, yes. Cheap and trite? Yes. But maybe in the mind of Murphy, nothing says "horror" like a kid with Down's Syndrome, right?

Curious who sponsored American Horror Story? See below and click the links to contact the sponsors. Tell them to pull out or they'll lose a consumer.

Sponsors:

AUDI

Channel One News and Your Schools

2011-10-11T13:42:00.000-07:00

Channel One News is a 'school-safe' news channel which informs teens on current world events and pop culture. It's free to schools, which means it's funded by a lot (LOT) of advertising. Earlier today I posed as an interested parent wanting to get Channel One in my school district. The reps at Channel One were very helpful, and informed me that they have many new things coming, including an interactive model geared towards grades as young as three, where kids can build their comprehension skills

Thank God for that. We all know that sending our kids to school to build academic skills is just an urban legend, really. Interactive whiteboards with a lot of advertising is what's necessary to up their IQs. The rep at Chanel One assured me that the interactive "Smart Boards" were a "really expensive" add-on service to the basic newscast, and some schools probably couldn't afford them. Was my district a part of that demographic? I almost hung up on him.

Most recently, Chanel One's heavily marketed website, Teen.com (owned by Channel One's parent company, Alloy Media) showcased a porno-ish photo of Glee's Naya Rivera:

In bolded brackets next to Ms. Rivera's crotch is a warning for youngsters: "[Warning: They're all hot, but you prob shouldn't look at them at school and/or work!]" Then it encourages teens to run out and buy a copy of FHM to see more sexy photos.

Are you kidding me? My tax dollars are paying to fund this crap?

My love story with Channel One goes back to 2008. From 2007-2009, I headed the New Jersey Parents Television Council, and in 2008 I worked with a parents advocacy group who contacted me to go before their board of Ed in our town. Nutley, NJ, is a smallish suburb of Manhattan, and is home to down-home Italian families, football, manicured lawns, and a lot of involved, take-no-prisoners parents who were enraged by the prospect of Channel One invading their schools. While the Board listened politely to our case, it was a no-go on our end. Channel One soon found its way and its many ads into the hallways of Nutley schools.

Josh Golin with Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood writes a very good article on Channel One here. He urges parents to get involved, and this Watchdog Mama agrees.

Get in touch with your district and find out if they have Channel One. If they do, ask why. In the world of logic, there's absolutely no reason for kids to be bombarded with advertising and cheap pop culture while at school.

MPAA OKs PG-13 Ads in Kids' Media

2011-09-26T11:47:00.000-07:00

The world of advertising reminds me of a roach: It preys and feeds on the unassuming, its snarky practices multiply at lightening speed, and you know where there's one, there are at least 100 more waiting. Today, let talk about the slimy vermin also known as The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA).

A recent finding by the CARU (Children's Advertising Review Unit) demonstrates the darkened crevasse in which the MPAA breeds. Forget the constant onslaught of PG-13 marketing in the preschool aisle at Toys R Us (Spiderman, Batman, Pirates of the Caribbean, etc); now PG-13 movies are being marketing to kids on television during specific viewing times tailored for youngsters and their families. During the kid game show "Hole in the Wall" on Cartoon Network, trailers for "Transformers: Dark of the Moon", "Green Latern" and "Captain America" were all shown.

("Transformers: Dark of the Moon")

But upon being contacted by CARU, the brass suits at Paramount and Warner Brothers were arrogantly unapologetic. In a statement to CARU, they said they’d "placed the ads in those media intentionally", as "no specific guidelines of the MPAA were violated"

Hmmm. The MPAA describes a PG-13 rating as such: "Parents Strongly Cautioned. Some Material May Be Inappropriate For Children Under 13." It goes on to then say: "...(A) PG-13 rating is a sterner warning by the Rating Board to parents to determine whether their children under age 13 should view the motion picture, as some material might not be suited for them...any drug use will initially require at least a PG-13 rating. More than brief nudity will require at least a PG-13 rating.."

So let me get this straight: The MPAA "strongly cautions" parents to not expose their kids to a PG-13 movie, but they market the same PG-13 movies kids under 13.

Are they...morons? Do they think we won't pick up on that?

Contact the MPAA and let them know you object to their marketing methods.

Toddlers, Tiaras, and Hookers

2011-09-07T22:12:00.000-07:00

TLC's hit show, Toddlers and Tiaras, has long engaged my gag reflex. Something about pageants in general creeps me out, but pageants featuring girls barely out of diapers? Ick. The mothers are basically insane, and the pageant judges should seriously consider adopting a new profession. I mean, they judge little girls in evening gowns. It's just wrong, people.

But not one to be outdone by current industry standards of pre-pubescent sexualization, TLC ("The Learning Channel", if you can believe that) has upped the ante on exploitation. Its latest episode showcases a darling little three-year-old dressed as none other than Julia Roberts in Pretty Woman:

I've said this before and I'll say it again: Am I missing something here? Did the girl's mother have a brain relapse? What the hell was she thinking? She defended the outfit, saying she was "stunned" by the media's outrage and that her child was completely unharmed by it.

Of course she was. Because all of us nay-sayers are the crazy ones, right? Everyone knows adorning our babies in skanky hooker attire is perfectly acceptable.

When I was little, I had a Daisy Duke Halloween costume. When my grandmother saw it (and the shorts were to my kneecaps, BTW), she made me wear a sweatshirt over it, hissing at my mother in disgust. But Daisy Duke is a long cry from a prostitute, and I certainly wasn't parading around on national television wearing twelve pounds of makeup and thigh-high "come hither" boots.

My peeps over at the PTC have slammed TLC, and rightly so. In an age where pedophiles rule the streets and girls are forced to grow up faster than the speed of light, TLC should get a new agenda. If you're a cable subscriber and TLC is part of your package, contact them. Tell them to clean it up or they're going to lose a customer. (Link below)

This show is yet another fine example of why Americans are begging for Cable Choice.

Contact TLC here.

Apple iNsanity

2011-08-30T09:39:00.000-07:00

The iPhone has a newish app out called "War Pinball HD". Based on popular films like Platoon, Navy Seals and Missing In Action, there's no denying that war film buffs will enjoy playing this game. And I get that; I really enjoy a good action flick. Given the choice, I'd take a war or spy movie over a 'chick flick' any day of the week.

But I wouldn't let my four-year old play a game based on it. Yet this is exactly what Apple is wanting you to do. The app, priced at an allowance-friendly $2.99, is rated for kids 4 and up. As in, not old enough to use a knife, still wears a Pull-Up, still sleeps with a blankie, four years old.

Uh..say what?

The game has a sound chip equipped with the same language used in the movies (not ideal for kids), as well as the artillery sound effects. Not one to be controversial, Apple feigned corporate responsibility by working with the game's inventor, Gameprom, and changed the default setting to 'mute', requiring a password to turn the sound back on. Brilliant.

Click here to submit your feedback to Apple. Send this post to everyone you know. My endeavor is to not stifle commerce, but to enforce basic decency standards. Parents buy these games based on the ratings; companies funded primarily by consumerism should refrain from obfuscating the fact that children are an at-risk demographic and their best interests must be taken into consideration. The advertising should accurately reflect the content.

Playboy Bunnies and Womens' Lib?

2011-08-18T09:56:00.000-07:00

When someone thinks of feminism, I'm sure Playboy immediately comes to mind. Forget birth control, suffrage, and equal pay; true liberation is found in deep cleavage and nude centerfolds. Right?

NBC is bringing this glitter to the public airwaves as part of their Fall 2011 lineup. The polemic is that the show will demoralize women by casting them in a meaty light. But NBC prez Bob Greenblatt claims the show is about 'female empowerment', and the nay-sayers are missing the mark on the show's premise. From Gloria to a local NBC affiliate, to the Parents Television Council to the American public, it's clear people are not happy about the show.

I'll play devil's advocate for a moment: There's something very retro about revisiting the Playboy empire glam of eld. When the clubs ruled major cities and those silk bunny ears were as valuable as gold in the waitress arena, girls everywhere wanted to be a part of it. The country was on the eve of a major sexual revamp, and Playboy was a key architect. I get it.

Kind of.

But here's where you really need to pay attention: It doesn't end with the broadcast of The Playboy Club. Ironically, that's least of my concerns. First off, there's Hulu, Side Reel, etc. Forget the decency clauses and sensors; this show will be available to watch anytime on the Internet, 24/7. And if history is any guide, we can safely assume that the slippery slope of prime-time television writing will bang out (bad use of words, sorry) sloppy episodes of glorfied prostitution, spousal infidelity, drugs, alcohol abuse, battery...you get the point.

'Female Empowerment'? Hmmm...

And then comes the real Frankenstein: Marketing and Advertising. Halloween costumes, TV spin-offs, Disney's newest tween sensation will be groomed for the next lead, and commercials for upcoming episodes will be aired during The Family Hour. But why stop there? Maybe Hasbro will make a Playboy Bunny Girl doll. For $19.99! A Hef doll in a Mercedes for $24.99! Think I'm nuts? Until public outcry reached epic proportions, Hasbro had a whole line of Pussycat Dolls ready for sale.
(I can't think of something I'd like my kids to play with more than a slutty Nicole Sherzinger toy.)

In an age where pornography rules and monogamy is considered antiquated, why do we want to further perpetuate the myth that people must always exist in an uber-aroused state? Don't we want more for our ~~kids~~ society?

Contact NBC here.

Fox 9 Twin Cities

2011-08-10T07:56:00.000-07:00

My post last week on The Teen Choice Awards was a hot one. Not that I had anything to do with it; I really didn't. All this Watchdog Mom did was present the facts.

The feedback is what made it so hot. People were (are) outraged, and rightly so. I emailed a producer I've worked with before at our local Fox news affiliate, and she asked me to come on their evening show and discuss this current topic. This is my appearance discussing the awards and television how you, the consumer, can get involved:

(My thanks to the producers and Heidi Collins over at Fox 9 Twin Cities for asking me back. See my other clips on Fox 9 here.)

Want another way you can get involved? Send this link to as many people as you know. I even tiny'd it for you: http://tinyurl.com/3dm7caa

Teen Choice Awards

2011-08-04T18:16:00.000-07:00

The Teen Choice Awards airs this Sunday on Fox. I can't think of a show less appropriately titled than this one. Almost every one of the movie nominations are rated "R". I understand the whole "pushing the envelope" thing in the entertainment industry, but I really don't know why Nickelodeon (parent company: Viacom) keeps forcing adult content down the throats of kids.

Oh wait, yes I do. Advertising revenue. Instead of an awards show with commercials and product placement geared towards pre-teens and teens, we now have a show that's akin to a porn flick packaged in Toys R Us wrapping paper. It's actually quite smart. Sick, but smart.

The Teen Choice Awards are the brain child of Nickelodeon. When parents see that bright orange paint splat they automatically think the show is ok for all children in their house to watch. Nickelodeon's own website promotes the show as a family-friendly, with nominees like iCarly and Justin Beiber, and page ads for Trix Cereal, The Smurfs movie and McDonald's. But let’s look at little closer at the nominees:

Black Swan (R) – Nominated for Choice Movie: Drama

No Strings Attached (R) – Nominated for Choice Movie: Romantic Comedy

Bad Teacher (R) – Nominated for Choice Movie: Comedy

The Hangover Part II (R) - Nominated for Choice Movie Actor: Comedy

Let Me In (R) – Nominated for Choice Movie: Horror

Paranormal Activity (R) – Nominated for Choice Movie: Horror

Saw 3D (R) – Nominated for Choice Movie: Horror

Scream 4 (R) – Nominated for Choice Movie: Horror

Due Date (R) – Nominated for Choice Movie: Hissy Fit

Bridesmaids (R) – Nominated for Choice Movie: Hissy Fit

Wonder why aren’t any of the above nominees listed on Nick’s website? Could it be the 'R' ratings, the consequence-free sex, drunken hook-ups, drug use, prostitution, and full frontal nudity of men and women? The horror movie nominees are so raw and twisted that they’re actually referred to as "torture porn” in the critic arena.

But let me be clear: If you're an adult, I could care less where your amusement center is. For most, it seems to be in their crotch area. But it's a free world-- laugh it up. If you get off watching people being shredded to ribbons like in the Saw franchises, go for it. Just leave the kids out of it.

And let’s talk about the giant purple dinosaur in the room: If "R" rated movies are for 17 and up, is Nickelodeon saying the awards are only meant for that age range? This is from the MPAA's own website:

"...Children under 17 are not allowed to attend R-rated motion pictures unaccompanied by a parent or adult guardian. Parents are strongly urged to find out more about R-rated motion pictures in determining their suitability for their children. Generally, it is not appropriate for parents to bring their young children with them to R-rated motion pictures."

My niece Emily is ten years old. She's not allowed to watch Teen Nick (and I heartily agree with that ruling). She told me she rarely watches the Teen Choice Awards, like many of her friends. "Why not?" I asked her. "Well, maybe if they had some more choices [nominees] for like, stuff I could see, I'd vote and watch it. But everything is PG-13 and R rated so I don't even know what to vote for." Maybe she should write to Nickelodeon and demand more from a network her parents pay big bucks to have in their home. She is after all, the client.

I’ll save her the stamp. Viacom is making sure they have enough viewers to spare. Sure, if the awards were geared towards kid-centered content, I'm sure only kids would watch. But throw in movies with rampant drug use, drunk driving, rules-free sex and sadistic torture, and you have a show the whole family, from kid to adult, can identify with.

No Strings Attached: Best Rom Com Nominee

Saw 3D: Best Horror Nominee

The Hangover: Part 2. Best Comedy Nominee

Let Me In: Best Horror Nominee

Katy Perry + Smurfs = ?

2011-08-01T09:07:00.000-07:00

The Smurfs premiered this past Friday with $36.2 million dollars in ticket sales. I haven't yet seen the movie, but I plan to. It sounds like a cute revisit to my 1980's childhood, where Saturday morning channels rotated between Smurfette, the Care Bears and Fat Albert. And when I say "rotated", I mean that literally. We didn't have remote controls.

This post is not about the movie, but about Katy's outfit at the premiere:

(In the words of Phil Hartman as Ed McMahon, "Heyyyy-ooo!")

I know she's a performer and yaddya yaddya, but come on, Katy...it's a kids' cartoon. What's wrong with a little class? I'm not suggesting a business suit; I'd even settle for your stylist lowering that bedazzled hem 8 inches or so. But Katy's sexed up anima persona invading the rapidly shrinking innocence of childrens' programming is not breaking news. Remember the controversy of her duet with Elmo? We don't need to promote highly sexualized stars to little kids. It serves no other purpose than pimping out our kids for more revenue to advertisers. (E.g.: Instead of Sesame Street appealing to a 3-5 year-old fan base, they now appeal to a 3-to-dirty old man fan base.) The same applies for controversial stars. Read my post on that and Amy Winehouse here.

So while the movie itself sounds cute and yes, I plan on taking my 5 year-old son to see it when he fills up his sticker chart (hey, movies are expensive-I'm making the the boy work for it), I'm not a fan of Katy displaying her ahem, assets, while promoting the movie. Production companies are savvy entities. They know that while there are many talented voice over actors out there, casting the girl who sang about cheating on her boyfriend with another girl and losing her virginity as a teenager will attract a much larger crowd over anyone else. And of course that's what they want; they're in the business to make money. But at what cost? And why is it now the norm?

I'm not boycotting the movie, and I'm not stamping my feet and screaming 'foul'; I'm just irritated that everything in this world from cartoons to toys to food is a cleverly marketed shortcut to sex. The other day, my five year old asked me if he could live with me forever.

"Well, probably not." I said, smiling. Of course I was flattered. And slightly panicked.

"Why not?" He asked, frowning.

"Well, someday you'll want to live by yourself. And you might meet a pretty girl and want to marry her."

His chubby cheeks scrunched up in horror. "I think I'll just stay with you", he said firmly.

I know his innocence won't be there forever. But can't I at least hold on to it for longer than five minutes?

Amy Winehouse: No "Wake Up Call" Made

2011-07-24T20:49:00.000-07:00

"Dead at 27." Sadly, this is a line I've read in a Hollywood obit one too many times. Amy Winehouse and her low, sultry voice and gloppy style left a legacy of drugs, alchoholism, and little more. Before you read on (or click off), let me assure you this post is not about the sadness of her death. I won’t even touch on the eerie similarities between Winehouse and Joplin. Not only would I sound like every other blog out there, it would be entirely disingenuous. Of course it's devastating to think of that young soul who met its end tragically. But personally, I have no teary feelings. And frankly, outside of the revenue she brought in, I don't think Hollywood could give a damn, either.

Instead I want to highlight the danger of endorsing such a volatile figure to our youth. Gone are the days where stars' drug use was limited to Page 6. Now, in our microwave-ready world of instant news and social media it's nearly impossible to not see a wasted Winehouse's slurred and incoherent speech at MTV's Europe Awards. Gone are the days where Elvis's drug use was folklore and River Phoenix's death shocked the world. Today we see intoxicated stars receiving awards and Amy's death, while horrific, was certainly no surprise. Like Anna Nicole Smith, we watched her every moronic slur and every unapologetic drunken misstep unfold. And then we watched her get nominated, on a stage decorated with brightly-colored surfboards, and 20,000 kids in the audience cheering for her victory.

Perfect.

It's not just Amy who Hollywood promotes. Eminem cleaned house at the 2010 Teen Choice Awards; the list is endless. Sure, it's the parents' jobs to tell kids what's right and wrong. But let's face it, we no longer live in a world where parents and their kids eat dinner every night around the table. This is a time where roughly 30% of kids live in a one-parent home, many others live in homes with two working parents, or others live with extended family.

And that is exactly what advertisers are banking on. They know as well as I do that mom and dad aren't going to pause the old TiVo when someone like Winehouse starts slurring her speech and launch into a thoughtful moral lesson. Mom and Dad won't see it--they're at work. Or the awards are shown on a giant sceeen TV in Best Buy. Or in a mall. Or at a friend's house. Or on somebody's iPhone on the subway.

The Internet is abuzz with articles shouting "wake-up call!" regarding Winehouse's death. While her death is tragic and should be a monumental wake-up call, it's not going to be. From Judy Garland to Chris Farley to Heath Ledger to Winehouse, Hollywood's headstone of dead stars reads as long as the boulevard they frequented. There will be no wake-up call. What there will be are more awarding drug-addicted stars. There will be more hooplah and glitter thrown on strung-out celebrities, many of them appearing in commercials for popular clothing lines purchased by tweens, cosmetics endorsements, fast-food songs...even kids' programming like Nick, Jr. and Sesame Street. And inevitably, there will be more dead stars.

And still no lesson learned.

Basketball Wives: A Slam Dunk of Stupidity

2011-07-21T16:34:00.000-07:00

It's no secret that I despise most of reality television. Simply speaking, the art of entertainment is gone. Outside of the bad script writing and banal oversexualization, all that remains are average joes and janes who voyeur their lives for a paycheck and a shot at a red carpet premiere. I caught an episode of VH1's Baksketball Wives the other night. These women are so obnoxious and classless I'm amazed their husbands' publicists aren't putting a stop to the show. Or maybe that's the whole point? Who knows.

The latest drama on Basketball Wives is that two of the women were arrested in Itlay for getting into a fight. I'm laughing as I write this...grown women brawling it out like a couple of middle-school rivals.

A special thanks to Meeka and Tami (above) for making Americans look soooo good.

The irony is that without their rich husbands, makeup artists and stylists, they're just a bunch of nasty women clawing at each other. And this is ratings gold? These women are morons! Don't they understand that America, (and now Italy), is laughing at them? Like Mob Wives or the all-too-many Real Housewives, we're watching heavily made-up women slobber over Louis Vuitton and running to the finish line of vanity and narcissism.

I'm reminded of my former stomping grounds and home out east; in northern New Jersey, Manhattan and all the surrounding boroughs, things like club brawls, gold-digging and classless displays of character are usually pigeon-holed into stereotypical prejudicial bubbles of cultures unlike our own. The ending result is further polarization between races, and very poor life lessons taught to our burgeoning young women.

Or, what we also refer to as, "reality television".

Egomaniacs and Reality TV

2011-07-15T18:16:00.000-07:00

I recently read an article in LiveScience highlighting a new study in Cyberpsychology which details how fame is the #1 draw to kids (preteens and teens) when it comes to viewing choices. A key bullet of the study pointed out that the quest for fame, specifically in the age of Twitter and Facebook, lends to an inflated sense of being. Translation: Narcissism.

Outside of Napoleon (or a toddler), I can’t think of a bigger narcissist than a teenager.

And we owe a great deal of thanks for the enlarged egos to reality TV. It's no secret this genre of 'entertainment' (and I use that term loosely) has changed many a life. From the mob wives who had to endure raids, infidelity, beatings and jail-bound husbands in private, to the little girls pimped out by their pageant mothers, people had to actually live their lives in privacy! The housewives of America who used to have crow's feet and non-inflated lips...we now have women whose boobs are next to their earlobes and their faces are stuck in an “I think I just pooped my pants” expression.

Then we have Snooki. I'll leave it at that.

But today, let's talk about our teen moms. I don’t think there’s anyone on earth who could say with conviction that children raising children is a plus to our society. Let me make one thing clear: I give major props to these girls who didn’t take the easy way out and chose to have their babies. But shame on the media for glamorizing a life less ordinary, and shame on their greedy parents for allowing it. Our society has plummeted into a gutter of voyeurism where following people’s heartaches and struggles is something we need to validate our own lives. ("Well, at least my daughter isn't hooked on drugs and pregnant.")

Teen Mom (MTV) led Tuesday night’s cable lineup as the Number 1 show. A show packed with meaningless sex, suicide attempts, domestic battery, child neglect, drugs, alcohol…this was number 1? Why?

Could it be that all of these teen babies raising babies are now front and center on magazine covers? They have managers, publicists, stylists, and hordes of paparazzi. It’s no secret teenagers are narcissists anyway. They’re trying to figure out how they fit into the world (much like toddlers), and it’s a hard place to be. But (much like toddlers), they have very little sense and even less self-control. Perhaps bombarding them with images of poor decision-making being rewarded by lots of notoriety isn’t the wisest thing to do.

Two and a Half Men: Sponsors, Pay Attention

2011-07-07T12:27:00.000-07:00

A lot of the work I do at the PTC is centered around advertiser accountability. Specifically, the companies who support Two and a Half Men. With Ashton Kutcher replacing Charlie Sheen, whose recent antics award him the Biggest Moron on the Face of the Earth trophy ("winning!" "tiger blood!" the "godesses"), the direction of the show remains to be seen. My guess? Down. Maybe not in ratings (yet), but in even raunchier and uncreative ~~writing~~ garbage. I don't know if Kutcher will be able to fill Sheen's dry and cantankerous persona so many found appealing; Kutcher's comedic chops were honed as a boisterous and practical-joke playing personality (That 70's Show, Punk'd, etc), so seeing him as a replacement for a crotchety sex-obsessed man-child is hard to swallow. No pun intended. Also, Kutcher is very good-looking; youthful and physically fit. Technically speaking, of course. Charlie...? Not so much:

(When you tell your kids to stay away from drugs and high-priced prostitutes, just show them this picture. 'Nuff said.)

What is certain however, is that advertisers will jump as high as they can to obtain coveted commercial slots in the debut episodes. And that is where you and I come in: Since Two and a Half Men is aired on broadcast television (public), during the Family Viewing Hour, you know that highly impressionable little kids and tween/teens will be assaulted with masturbation jokes, threesomes, and gutter-swilling frat boy humor. All brought to you proudly by Burger King! McDonald's! Chrysler! The list goes on.

If you like that sort of humor, have at it. It's a free country. But most of us don't, especially at 8 PM. Move it cable or a later hour. I've linked this post to a page with some letters sent out to advertisers. Take a look and see what YOUR tax dollars and YOUR money is buying you. Still ok with it? Then this probably isn't the blog for you.

Advertiser Letters

Sexing Our Babies Up

2011-07-05T06:04:00.000-07:00

If you don't think there's an overt endeavor on behalf of marketers to draw our girls into a world of hypersexualization, perhaps it's time for you to come back to Earth. From Bratz Dolls to the aggressive campaigning of pop music, girls don't stand a chance against the mounting pressure. As a mother of two boys, I get very angry when I look around and notice how pathetic this has all become. How am I ever supposed to mentor my sons and teach them how to respect women, when society does everything to the contrary?

There's a very simple reason why the sexed up approach to the clothing and toy aisles is taking place: Buying power. Whereas 9 and 10 year olds were previously not in the arena of tween and teen merchandise, they are today. And to companies like Hasbro (who actually started production on a line of Pussycat Dolls, after the raunchy burlesque-themed pop group), this means billions of dollars. Just take a look at the montage the PTC put together:

Think I'm making something out of nothing? Why should your girls be any less of a target?

Read more on this here:
Sexualizing Childhood
Tinseltown's New Target (2010)