Have you tried counter-conditioning your dogs using a positive (reward) based approach? That is, when the dogs start their behavior use a "tasty treat" to train them to turn away from the TV and sit quietly facing you on some cue. It may take several steps to train the complete behavior. I would suggest either consulting a good modern book on dog training or getting help from someone who is familiar with using reward based training methods.
A common objection to this approach is the belief that by rewarding the dogs, you would just reinforce their unwanted behavior. This reflects a common misunderstanding of dogs and a dog's attention span by humans. The link below is to a video on Dr Sophia Yin's web site where she demonstrates that it actually does not work this way.
Training Aggression? Counter-conditioning a Dog to Blowing in Face.
As Dr Yin explains in the video, the purpose of the treats in this case is to change the dog's underlying emotional state. Instead of an image on the TV being a reason to be alarmed, it becomes a "good" thing because it means a treat may follow if they behave properly.
Using aversives such as remote "shock" training collars is one of the worst ways to train a dog. It's not so much that you won't have an effect on the dog's behavior. It is that you won't know with a good degree of confidence what a dog is learning.
People, being people, think it is "obvious" that if the dog is shocked while barking it will make a direct connection between the shock and the barking. But if you view it from the dog's perspective, the dog has no idea from where or why the pain is coming. So how can you know in what ways it may change the dog's behavior?
You would also definitely increase the dog's anxiety level and that is never a good thing since it could lead to other behavior problems in another context. If a dog stops barking but then also begins to pee or poop in the house or chew or otherwise destroy property, would you be happy with the net results?
Yes, humans have used aversives as the primary training method for (probably) millennia. But this says more about how easily and completely people can misunderstand how dogs learn that it does about what training methods are most effective.
It was not until the last decade or so that behavioral research confirmed that using a reward based approach with minimal aversives produces the quickest and most consistent training results. This is becoming the standard approach with professional dog trainers. It is unfortunately taking much longer for the general public to catch up.
Update: 06 February 2014
Here is a link to a blog entry by Dr Patricia McConnell, "Simply Wrong". It begins with some observations about a particular type of shock collar she saw an ad for, the SimpleLeash. She gives examples of other interpretations a dog can make about the "shock".
From a comment by Chad:
We correct the behavior now and have for 3 years. But the behavior
remains until they are scolded they bark.
If you have not yet tried to counter-condition the behavior, then I would urge you to do so. It sounds as though all you have trained them to do is bark until you bark back at them. I think teaching them a more acceptable, alternate behavior they can engage in would be more effective.
At the shelter I volunteer at we usually use counter-conditioning with dogs who react to other dogs. It can be very effective, but can also take a lot of repetition to generalize. It depends on the dog and how consistently you can train the alternate behavior.
While it's not pertinent, I personally find it interesting that you say you "scold" them. This is so quintessentially human. We have many behaviors which are so much a part of our being that it can be very hard for us to believe they might not be the most effective way to interact with another species.
Humans talk. We love to vocalize. But there is compelling anecdotal evidence that, at least initially, it is easier for a dog to understand hand signals than verbal cues.
We also love to hug. Dogs, in general, not so much. To Hug or Not?