You know the scenario: at home, you discover some spare time around 12:30 p.m. and flip on the TV. You stop on the Fox channel just in time to immerse yourself in screaming and punching matches complete with bleeped-out swearing and cheering from a charged-up studio audience.

And although you sneer as you watch, you suddenly become captivated.

This is a common reaction to the much-watched, controversial “The Jerry Springer Show.”

In fact, some of us find Springer’s outrageous show topics such as “I Have Sex With My Sister” and “Hands Off My Lover” (actual program titles) — gasp — entertaining.

We realize the show is repulsive, degrading and ridiculous, but we can’t stop watching.

And Jerry Springer’s reputation may have suffered, but he’s making a fortune from the attention. Not only has he released a video of uncensored shows entitled “Too Hot for TV,” viewers can order “Jerry Club” merchandise through his very own Web site.

Springer’s show is comparable to your run-of-the-mill trash talk show, following a success pattern that also struck “The Jenny Jones Show,” “Geraldo” and “Ricki” in years past.

The difference is, however, that trash talk shows are becoming worse as time marches on. For instance, Springer really gained fame when his guests started picking fistfights on a daily basis.

As adults, we can watch “The Jerry Springer Show” for a good laugh because we understand the show’s mission — to shock its audience into thirsting for more. But we can’t speak for young viewers. I know I’m singing the same old tune — children shouldn’t be overexposed to programming that contains sex and violence. But I really believe this.

Wiping trash talk shows and other potentially harmful programming off the air presently is unrealistic. My point is, all the popularity surrounding “The Jerry Springer Show” may be temporary, but when the show’s glory has passed, it’s bound to pass the torch to a new, even more vulgar talk show. Where do we draw the line? It wouldn’t really be much of an issue if “Jerry Springer” were broadcast on late-night television as it used to be, but its current daytime slot enables it to target impressionable, summer-vacationing kids.

In all fairness, it’s not as if Springer hasn’t taken any heat for his show. Viewers likely are familiar with the scrutiny clouding his “success” in recent months.

Springer not only has been criticized for his tasteless show topics, he has been accused of “coaching” guests and staging fights.

Although he’s denied the latter charge, he admits to establishing a filthy program. In fact, he told “Dateline NBC” a month ago that his tactics are justified because viewers take it with a grain of salt.

Maybe adult viewers do.

This is where the question of television’s impact on children steps in. Does TV desensitize audiences, or is programming a reflection of the eroding standards of today’s society?

Hard to tell. But take a gander at all the murders and crime involving teenagers and children; kids take guns to school and open fire out of rage. They do this because they are taught to channel their anger through violence. Unfortunately, “The Jerry Springer Show” simply is one wolf in a pack. Sociologist Erich Goode has said countless studies show that TV in general contributes to desensitization and gradually increased aggressive behavior.

Yet the air waves remain poisonous because, in the end, money is the end goal and action sells. Springer himself admitted to it. What’s ironic is that, at each show’s end, Springer takes about 30 seconds to deliver a “meaningful” message to viewers.

Maybe that’s how he gets to sleep at night.

We can’t entirely blame violence among children on TV, but let’s face it: Children model their behavior after what they see from adults — in real life or on their TV screens.

Maybe some kids can watch “The Jerry Springer Show” and realize its guests are an embarrassment to the U.S. population. But we shouldn’t just assume that.

Drawing a line between programming rights and censorship always has been a sticky situation, but surely a compromise is possible.

I’m all for freedom of speech. But I’m also for protecting the generation who will care for me when I’m old and gray.

I wonder if Jerry Springer and the other wolves think of that.

---

Staci Hupp is a junior in journalism and mass communication from Grimes. She is the editor in chief of the Daily.