Even though the whole argument about denouncing/regulating/ignoring pop culture is petering out, I want to quote this Mark Schmitt post as both the best statement I've seen on the subject and a perfect, though far more eloquent, articulation of my views on it:
First, this is one of those issues about which the only reasonablereaction is an ambivalent one, and it's fair to assume that many ofthose who say they're concerned about culture in this way have asimilarly ambivalent or complex reaction. That is, they want somegreater sense of control on the influences on their children, but theysuspect that any legal solution will either be ineffective or will havenegative consequences. Likewise with any technological solution, likethe V-chip or internet parental controls. That doesn't lessen theconcern, though, and parents want to feel that politicians understandthat concern.
...
Third, avoid "policy literalism." Just because people in polls say,"I'm concerned about sex and violence in the media," doesn't mean thatthe only response is to propose a law that would somehow limit sex andviolence in the media. Remember that typically the next sentence out ofa parent's mouth is something like, "I can't be with him 24 hours aday." The part of the concern that government can do something about isthat parents' don't feel they have enough time to understand all theexternal influences on their kids and help them deal with them. So awell-constructed way of talking about the time pressures of the moderneconomy is fully responsive to the concern about values.
'Nuff said.
