“We don’t have the first amendment, thank God, in Canada,” said Rick Mater ’70, quoting Tim Collings, the inventor of the V-chip.

“We do, thank God,” he went on, “in America.”

Mater, senior vice president of Broadcast Standards at The Warner Brothers (WB) Television Network, presented his pro first-amendment stance on April 7 during a lecture titled, “Censorship: Has Television Gone Too Far?” Mater was on campus as a Metzger-Conway fellow, through the Clarke Center for the Interdisciplinary Study of Contemporary Issues. The program’s goal is to provide Dickinson students with role models and to enrich the curriculum.

Television provides a vast array of violent and sexual images for children to view and mimic. In the wake of this year’s Super Bowl half-time show and the recent onslaught of reality shows, many people are asking whether TV has gone too far.

“There’s no empirical evidence that a link [exists] between viewing television violence and resulting violent criminal behavior; in fairness, even if there is such a link, it may be impossible to prove,” said Mater, who described recent studies on the topic as contradictory.

At WB, Mater is in charge of monitoring all programming content.

“We take lots of time and effort with what we choose to air,” he assured his audience, acknowledging that TV “does have an impact.”

In some instances, the impact of TV can be positive.

“That’s why we push safe-sex messages in shows,” he explained. “In Dawson’s Creek, the kids use condoms. If talking about sex makes it easier for teen-age girls to talk about it, then that’s a service.”

Mater, who holds a B.A. in history and a master’s degree in communication from the Annenberg School for Communication at the University of Southern California, pointed out that the argument on censorship is not new.

For example, in the 1950s, comic books were accused of “destroying the youth” and “causing violence.” For a long time, James Joyce’s Ulysses was banned in the United States, and there has been vulgar content in music and movies since the ’60s and ’70s.

“TV content lags behind other forms of entertainment,” said Mater. “Music, theatre and movies are all ahead of television.

“But television is a convenient target,” Mater said. “It’s easier to attack TV than to deal with thorny issues in society. It’s easier to attack radio, easier to attack music. It’s the easy way out.”

Since the Janet Jackson incident at the Super Bowl, the fine against offenses on TV networks is proposed to be $500,000 per incident.

“Such a fine would put a small-market station out of business,” Mater pointed out.

Moreover, what is deemed appropriate for airing is often arbitrary and capricious, argued Mater, who discussed the practice of “hairsplitting.”

For example, one expletive when “used as an adjective, is OK because it’s not explicitly sexual.

“When people disagree with certain things in popular culture,” said Mater, “they are honestly opposed to it and think that it’s wrong. Some people are opportunists, and some are just concerned. Parents are concerned. I’m a parent, and I’m concerned.”

Mater who has two daughters, Cassidy, 7, and Cameron, 4, emphasized the significance of active parenting.

“You roll the dice with artistic freedom whether for television or music,” he acknowledged. “It’s just important to raise your kids [and] communicate with your kids. Artistic freedom has more of a value than protecting people from it. ”

Mater concluded his speech by answering the question with which he began, “Has Television Gone Too Far?”

“Yes,” he said to an assortment of nods and frowning faces. “TV has often gone too far, and, dare I say it, so what? The marketplace should be allowed to work, and viewers should be allowed to vote with fingers on the remote.”