WASHINGTON — Teenagers who watch programs like “Friends,” “That ’70s Show” or “Sex and the City” are more likely than their peers to get pregnant or get someone pregnant.

That’s the finding of a recent study conducted by a behavioral scientist at the Rand research organization and published in the journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics.

The study, which tracked more than 700 sexually active teenagers between the ages of 12 and 17 for three years, discovered that those who viewed the most sexual content on television were nearly twice as likely to get pregnant or get a girlfriend pregnant.

“This is another one of those studies that backs up common sense,” said Dan Isett, director of public policy with the advocacy group the Parents Television Council. “The media environment that children are exposed to has an impact on them. The scientific data backs up what people already instinctively know.”

While previous studies have demonstrated a link between watching television programs with sexual content and becoming sexually active earlier and between sexually explicit music videos and an increased risk of sexually transmitted diseases, this was the first study of its kind to show an association between television watching and teen pregnancy.

“Watching this kind of sexual content on television is a powerful factor in increasing the likelihood of a teen pregnancy,” said Anita Chandra, who conducted the study. “We found a strong association.”

According to the research, about 25% of those who watched such television the most were involved in a pregnancy, compared with about 12% of those who watched the least.

“We don’t think that [TV] is necessarily more significant than some of the family and neighborhood factors that can lead to teen pregnancies,” said Chandra. “But even when we removed all the other factors, we still saw a compelling link between a high exposure to sexual content on television and teen pregnancies.”

A previous study also published in The Journal of Pediatrics revealed that adolescents who are exposed to television with sexual content are more likely to overestimate the frequency of some sexual behaviors, to have more permissive attitudes toward premarital sex, and to initiate sexual behavior.

That study, conducted by S. Liliana Escobar-Chaves and colleagues at the University of Texas Health Science Center, reviewed mass media research conducted between 1983 and 2004.

“Every parent and health-care provider should be very troubled by these findings,” said Dr. Gary Rose, president and CEO of the Medical Institute for Sexual Health in Austin, Texas. “Our children are saturated in sexual imagery. The average teenager spends three to four hours per day watching television, and 83% of the programming most frequently watched by adolescents contains some sexual content. Yet, we have never stopped to ask what effect all this sexual content in television, the Internet and music has on young people.”

The Church has been speaking of the danger for some time.

“I have no doubt that the media can cause young people and adults, as well, to be confused about what is right and wrong and what behavior is acceptable and what is not,” said Cardinal William Keeler, then-Archbishop of Baltimore, following the release of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ 1998 pastoral letter “Renewing the Mind of the Media,” which encouraged individuals, families, corporations and the entertainment industry to overcome the exploitation of sex and violence in the media.

The bishops encouraged individuals to take a “Renewing the Mind of the Media” pledge, trading one hour a week of media viewing for an hour in prayer for peace. More than half a million individuals pledged to “reject media that produces immoral content and demean the dignity of the human person.”

In addition to inappropriate content, another problem cited by parental advocacy groups is that current technology doesn’t safeguard the young.

Current blocking technologies, such as the V-chip, attempt to deflect inappropriate content.

The V-chip works like closed captioning to send and receive a code in the programming that indicates a particular show’s score according to a simple numerical system for violence, sex and language. The program’s signals are encoded according to their rating, and this rating is detected by the television set’s V-chip. If the program’s rating is outside the level configured by the parent as acceptable on that television, the program is blocked. The V-chip has a four-digit numerical password to prevent children from changing its settings, but critics say that the password can easily be overridden.

Critics also say that the V-chip isn’t enough.

“The principal failure of the rating system is that it is controlled by the producers of the content. They have a built-in incentive to rate their programs incorrectly,” said Isett. “Our research shows that as much as 60% to 80% of ratings for programs are incorrect. If that’s wrong, it can’t work, and if it’s not working, it’s of no utility.

“If your business is dependent upon selling advertising for a program, you want to rate it in such a way that will not prevent people from blocking it,” added Isett.

Isett said there are some technologies on the market, such as TiVo’s KidZone, which allows parents to use a third-party rating system, such as the one devised by the Parents Television Council or other television watchdog groups.

“With DVR [digital video recorder], a child has access only to recorded programs,” said Isett. “That’s a major step in the right direction.”

Another reason for hope is new legislation. On Oct. 1, the U.S. Senate unanimously passed the Child Safe Viewing Act, which requires that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) explore new technology and review current blocking devices that are designed to help parents monitor their children’s media consumption. The bill received bipartisan support in both the House and Senate.

“With over 500 channels and video streaming, parents could use a little help monitoring what their kids watch when they are not in the room,” said Sen. Mark Pryor, D-Ark., who introduced the legislation in the Senate. “Today’s technology to protect children from indecency goes above and beyond the capabilities of the V-chip. It’s time for the FCC to take a fresh look at how the market can empower parents with more tools to choose appropriate programming for their children.”

Not everyone is pleased with the bill.

“On the surface, the measure seems harmless enough, but in practice, it could have some troubling long-term free speech implications if it leads to more government meddling with parental controls and ratings systems,” said Adam Thierer of the Technology Liberation Front, a technology policy blog dedicated to keeping the government from controlling the Internet and other technologies. “Requiring blocking technologies for ‘wired, wireless and Internet platforms,’ potentially opens the door to the beginning of convergence era content regulation at the FCC.”

Isett disagreed with Thierer’s take on the legislation.

“The legislation simply instructs the FCC to prepare a report on the state of the union and what those technologies could look like,” said Isett. “There aren’t any mandates in the bill.”

“Parents deserve better resources to help protect their children from inappropriate content on television,” said Tim Winter, president of the Parents Television Council. “The current V-chip technology relies on inaccurate ratings. This legislation is an important first step toward the implementation of more functional and reliable solutions for parents and families.”

Tim Drake is based in

St. Joseph, Minnesota.