YOU ARE HERE: LAT HomeCollections


Viewers Bare Disdain For 'Sex Wars'


We get letters . . .

I would like to respond to your column, "The Bare Truths of TV Sex Wars." My overall reaction is one of thanks. The "TV Sex Wars" have escalated to an unbearable level. It's about time you, and I hope many others, jump up and say, "Hey, enough! Is that the best you can do?"

However, I believe there is a much larger problem and story you did not address in your column. When I talk to other television programmers in major cities around the country and describe the content of a typical ratings period here in Los Angeles, they all say, "I could never put that on the air here! The outcry would be unbelievable."

Why has there not been an outcry here in Los Angeles? Why do I only receive a few negative letters and an equal number of positive letters after the few nights we attempt to compete with a possibly offensive (to some) "Girlie" show? Why is it that Southern California accepts this material and has for years? Why are these shows, these local news series, the local specials and individual syndicated programs, the highest rated?

As producer of one of the few local, non-news programs in Los Angeles, I have a responsibility to the people of Southern California. In my opinion, sex programming is a failure of my responsibility, which is why 90% of the shows that KCBS-TV broadcasts as part of "2 on the Town" are not sex-related.

But I share my responsibility with the people of Los Angeles. The viewers of Southern California have the final vote, always. Unfortunately, their votes have not always been encouraging and on many nights, discouraging, but it is their choice.

MICHAEL P. MEADOWS, executive producer, "2 on the Town."

I am filled with disgust and anger that this kind of sleazy debasement of women is done on TV where children can watch it. After viewing Channel 7's "Eye on L.A." a few times, I stopped. For about three months I hadn't watched Channel 2's "2 on the Town," but when Brazil was listed, I decided to see it. I didn't expect to see more fanny and breast shots on the beach.

LOUISE KOOS, Temple City

I've always thought it was demeaning to women to show their physical endowments as something to drool over. It's just another way to keep us in "bimbo land."

ANN ROBINSON, Hermosa Beach

Sadly, the local TV stations are no different from their network parents in stooping to anything to generate ratings. After all, anything is justifiable in pursuit of the almighty advertising dollar. It's the American way, right? Even worse, these panoramic vistas of human geography air at times when the average youngster is still up watching TV. Now that's intelligent programming.


I have never lowered my intellect enough to watch either of those asinine programs because I find their advertisements both on television and in the TV Times so disgusting.

C.F. FISHER, Irvine

Imagine my shock when I have to open my very own TV Times and find bikinis, and for all intents and purposes, nude girls crawling like animals across the page. Shame on the Times for advertising such filth.


Your commentary on Sam Donaldson is one of your most egregiously distorted portraits of a lens louse I've ever seen. How can you describe Donaldson as America's most famous reporter? A reporter, he's not. A television actor, he is, albeit not a very good one.

Being assigned to the White House press corps brings with it a responsibility to cover the news and not make the news with unverified rumors. However, Sam is slick and obsessive. What is he yelling about? He wants the focus on himself. That's what makes Sammy run.


Anyone with any sense recognizes Sam Donaldson's hatred of our President. He is rude, arrogant and an unmannerly boor. Your defense of him is typical liberal blab. Khomeini and Gorbachev also love him. You have joined the club.

JEANO BAILARD, Carpinteria

Thank God for Sam Donaldson. Thanks to reporters like him, we know when the President is giving us "double-talk." Everyone knew he was going to make a good speech. That's his specialty. Too many people believe whatever Reagan says. I think Bruce Herschensohn doesn't know what he's talking about and probably wishes he could be half the reporter Sam Donaldson is.


Why does Herschensohn get upset about Sam Donaldson's perceived roles? Herschensohn hasn't said a word all these years about the President's. Or does Herschensohn feel that being President and being the Gipper are one and the same role? Or is being Reagan the President's role? Gets pretty complicated, all right. So hooray for Sam Donaldson!


I was beginning to like you until I read your article extolling the virtues of Sam Donaldson. That guy is obnoxious. He is a boisterous boor and very disrespectful toward the office of the presidency. I keep hoping that Reagan's helicopter will blow Donaldson's hairpiece off and reveal what is underneath--nothing.


Los Angeles Times Articles