Educationally/Insufficient? An Analysis of the Availability & Educational Quality of Children’s E/I Programming Barbara J. Wilson, Ph.D. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Dale Kunkel, Ph.D. University of Arizona Kristin L. Drogos, M.A. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign November 2008 An Analysis of the Availability and Educational Quality of Children’s E/I Programming ii Children Now Contents 2 Introduction 5 Method Sample Content Measures 11 Results Availability and Scheduling of Children’s E/I Programming Evaluating the Content of E/I Programs Educational Lessons Featured in E/I Episodes Primary Lesson in E/I Episodes Educational Quality of E/I Episodes Aggression in E/I Programming Comparing E/I Programming on Commercial versus Public Broadcasting Best Performing E/I Series 22 Conclusion 23 References 25 Appendix A 26 Appendix B childrennow.org 1 An Analysis of the Availability and Educational Quality of Children’s E/I Programming Broadcast television offers equal access to all Introduction segments of society, regardless of one’s econo- There are a number of ways in which children’s mic standing. Other than the purchase price educational programming can be obtained in of the television receiver, there is no additional the U.S. today. Children may watch short cost to obtain any of the programming viewed. clips and some full-length programs on their Thus, broadcast television provides a basic computer via live video streaming delivered service to society and particularly to children on the Internet. They may view programs on that somewhat parallels the provision of videotape or DVD with playback devices con- public schools. While affluent families may nected to the television set in the home. They certainly choose to spend money to enroll their may watch programming delivered by cable children in private schools that offer enhanced networks such as Nickelodeon or The Disney resources, all families have access to public Channel. Or, like their parents and grandpar- schools regardless of their financial capabilities. ents did long ago, they may simply turn on the The same is true for children’s access to edu- television set and watch a children’s program cational programming via broadcast television. delivered on a local broadcast channel. While affluent families may be capable of providing their children with supplementary To facilitate the first of these options, the options, broadcast television is available to child’s family must have a computer in the serve the needs of all in our society. home and a high-capacity broadband network connection. For the second option, a DVD Indeed, television broadcasters have a unique player or similar device is required, and then a obligation to serve the public interest in their purchase price must be paid for each program community because of their use of the pub- desired. And for the third option, a monthly licly-owned airwaves to transmit their program cable television subscription fee is involved, signal. Many modern technology companies with higher tiers of service often required to that use the public airwaves, such as cellular receive the most popular children’s channels. telephone or wireless Internet providers, pay In sum, across all of these alternatives, eco- significant fees of millions of dollars to the nomics may play a significant role in shaping government at spectrum auctions in order to children’s access to video programming that gain access to the airwaves necessary to can, when properly produced, inform and operate their business. In contrast, due to educate them in important ways. long-standing historical precedent, broadcast television stations (most of which were first The fourth and oldest of the options men- licensed in the 1940s and 1950s) deliver public tioned above for receiving children’s educa- interest programming as their “payment” for tional programming is via over-the-air using the airwaves, rather than having to pay broadcast television. In previous decades, this any fees for spectrum use. Although there medium has delivered landmark programs are many dimensions to each broadcaster’s of extraordinary value to the nation’s youth, public interest obligations, serving the needs including such classics as Kukla, Fran, & Ollie of children is recognized as a critical part of (1947-57), Captain Kangaroo (1955-1984), that mission. and Fat Albert and the Cosby Kids (1972-1985). The first two of these programs each received Peabody awards, and the third was recognized with an Emmy. 2 Children Now Requirements of the CTA Television Act sought to improve the role of television in children’s lives. In the words of The current law that governs children’s pro- Senator Timothy Wirth, one of the bill’s gramming on broadcast television is known as chief sponsors: the Children’s Television Act of 1990 (CTA). This statute specifies that each broadcast Television is a unique medium that television station must provide programming offers incredible opportunities to enrich “specifically designed” to serve the educational the lives of America’s children. Virtually and informational needs of children. The task every developed country in the world of enforcing this obligation falls to the Federal devotes more resources than we do on educational television for children. In Communications Commission (FCC). contrast, our broadcasters often ignore There are two chief reasons why the Congress the child audience or offer cartoon adopted the Children’s Television Act. First, programs that are principally designed to promote toys to children. We can legislators recognized that educational pro- do better than this. Indeed, we must do gramming that is carefully crafted for a narrow better… (Congressional Record, July 19, target audience can generate significant learn- 1990, p. S10123). ing outcomes, offering tremendous benefit for the nation’s youth (Kunkel, 1991; Palmer, In the early years following enactment of the 1988). The Congress hoped that the Children’s CTA, evidence surfaced that many broad- Television Act would prompt commercial casters had failed to take the new law seriously. stations to deliver high-quality educational Stations made frivolous claims in reports sub- fare equivalent to that provided by such public mitted to the FCC to document compliance, broadcast programs as Sesame Street and asserting for example that The Flintstones was Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood. And second, the educational because it taught lessons about his- record is quite clear that when the FCC tory, and The Jetsons was educational because deregulated its previous policies requiring it taught about new technologies (Center for children’s educational programming in 1984, Media Education, 1992; Kunkel & Canepa, the broadcast industry quickly abandoned the 1994). One station designated Yogi Bear as genre almost entirely (Kerkman et al., 1990; educational because it teaches “certain moral Wartella et al., 1990). Two classic programs and ethical values such as not to do stupid valued for their educational contributions, things or you will have trouble; don’t take what Captain Kangaroo and Fat Albert, were can- doesn’t belong to you or be prepared to face celled within a year following the FCC’s deci- the music” (Kunkel, 1998). sion to deregulate. The FCC responded to this situation by In the absence of regulatory requirements, adopting new rules designed to more clearly broadcasters naturally seek to maximize their specify what programming could legitimately revenues by attracting the largest possible qualify as educational for purposes of comply- audience, a goal at odds with targeting ing with the CTA. These policies, adopted children because of their modest numbers in in 1996, specify that stations are expected to the overall population as compared to adults. provide a minimum of three hours per week of Judging that marketplace failure had occurred, “core educational programming” for children. and that serving the needs of children was To qualify as a core program, each show must: central to the public interest, the Children’s (a) have education as a significant purpose; childrennow.org 3 An Analysis of the Availability and Educational Quality of Children’s E/I Programming (b) have a specified learning goal and target task. In the intervening years, several develop- audience; (c) be aired on a regular schedule ments have surfaced to suggest that the qual- between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m.; and (d) be ity of the E/I programming on commercial labeled as E/I to identify the program to the television may have suffered further. In 2004, public as educational/informational two Washington, D.C. area broadcast stations for children. had their license renewals challenged by public interest advocacy groups on the basis of seri- ous inadequacies in their children’s educational Previous Research on programming efforts (Office of Communica- E/I Program Performance tion of the United Church of Christ and Center for Digital Democracy, 2004). These Shortly following the adoption of these new challenges are still pending before the FCC. FCC rules, Dr. Amy Jordan and colleagues In a separate case, the FCC applied a record at the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the fine of $24 million to the Univision Network University of Pennsylvania conducted several in 2007 for significant shortcomings in the annual studies evaluating the educational qual- children’s educational programming on its 24 ity of the E/I programs aired by commercial stations (Federal Communications Commis- broadcast stations in the Philadelphia area sion, 2007). In describing the FCC’s action, (Jordan, 1998, 2000; Schmitt, 1999). The The New York Times characterized it as an findings indicated that program quality was unusual rebuke to the industry “after years of strongest shortly after the new FCC rules were permissive oversight in this area” (Labaton, adopted, with roughly a third of all E/I pro- 2007). In the context of these recent events, grams rated as “highly educational” in 1997-98 it clearly is both important and timely to (29%) and 1998-99 (33%).