Violence on the Tube
One Saturday morning many years ago, I was watching an episode of the 'Roadrunner' on
television. As Wile E. Coyote was pushed off of a cliff by the Roadrunner for the fourth
or fifth time, I started laughing uncontrollably. I then watched a 'Bugs Bunny' show and
started laughing whenever I saw Elmer Fudd shoot Daffy Duck and his bill went twirling
around his head. The next day, I pushed my brother off of a cliff and shot my dog to see
if its head would twirl around.
Obviously, that last sentence is not true. Some people believe that violence on the
tube is one of the main factors that leads to real-life violence, but in my opinion,
television is just a minor factor that leads to real-life violence and that it is the
parents responsibility to teach kids the difference.
According to Rathus in Psychology in the New Millennium, observational learning may
account for most human learning (239). Observational learning extends to observing
parents and peers, classroom learning, reading books, and learning from media such as
television and films. Nearly all of us have been exposed to television, videotapes, and
films in the classroom. Children in day-care centers often watch Sesame Street. There
are filmed and videotaped versions of great works of literature such as Orson Welles'
Macbeth. Nearly every school shows films of laboratory experiments.
But what of our viewing outside of the classroom? Television is also one of our major
sources of informal observational learning. According to Sweet and Singh, viewing habits
range from the child who watches no television at all to the child who is in front of the
television nearly all waking hours. They say that on average, children aged 2 to 11
watch about 23 hours of television per week, and teenagers watch about 22 hours per week
(2). According to these figures,
children spend less time in the classroom than they do watching television. During these
hours of
viewing, children are constantly being shown acts of violence.
Why? Simple: violence sells.
People are drawn to violence in films, television dramas, books, professional wrestling
and boxing, and reports of crime and warfare. Does violence do more than sell, however?
Do media portrayals of violence beget violence in the streets and in the home?
It seems clear enough that there are connections between violence in the media and real
violence. In the 1990's, for example, audiences at films about violent urban youth such
as Colors, Boyz N the Hood, and Juice have gotten into fights, shot one another, and
gone on rampages after the showings. The MTV cartoon characters, Beavis and Butt-head,
who comment on rock videos and burn and destroy things, may have been connected with the
death of a 2-year-old and a burned room in Ohio. The victims 5-year-old brother, who
set the blaze that killed the 2-year-old,
had begun playing with fire after he observed Beavis and Butt-head to say that fire is
fun. A few more examples are shown on the picture to the left (Leland 47). Obviously,
these are just a few isolated incidents. If everyone acted this way after watching
violence then we would really have a problem.
Children are routinely exposed to murders, beatings, and sexual assaults just by turning
on the television set. The public is wary of it, of course. Psychologists, educators,
and parent groups have raised many questions about the effects of media violence. For
example, does media violence cause real violence? If there are causal connections
between media violence and real violence, what can parents and educators do to prevent
the fictional from spilling over into the real world?
Media violence affects children through observational learning, disinhibition,
increasing arousal and priming aggressive thoughts, and desensitization. The Mean World
Syndrome, which suggests that children who watch a lot of violence on television may
begin to believe that the world is as mean and dangerous in real life as it appears on
television, and hence, they begin to view the world as a much more mean and dangerous
place, is another way in which media violence affects children (Murray 9).
Children learn from observing the behavior of their parents and other adults.
Television violence supplies models of aggressive "skills." Acquisition of these skills,
in turn, enhances children's aggressive competencies. In fact, children are more likely
to imitate what their parents do than heed what they say. If adults say they disapprove
of aggression but smash furniture or slap each other when frustrated, children are likely
to develop the notion that aggression is the way to handle frustration. Classic
experiments have shown that children tend to imitate the aggressive behavior they see on
television, whether the models are cartoons or real people. In one such experiment, a
child watches a film where an adult beats up on a life-size doll. The child is then put
in a room with the same doll and is observed. The child almost always beats up on the
doll in the same ways as seen in the film.
The expression of "skills" may be inhibited by punishment or by the expectation of
punishment. Conversely, media violence may disinhibit the expression of aggressive
impulses that would otherwise have been controlled, especially when media characters "get
away" with violence or are rewarded for it. 73% of violent acts in programs went
unpunished ("Telecommunications: Clinton Backs Antiviolence Chip" 536).
Media violence and aggressive video games increase viewers' levels of arousal. In the
vernacular, television "works them up." We are more likely to engage in dominant forms
of behavior, including aggressive behavior, under high levels of arousal. Media violence
has cognitive effects that also prime aggressive ideas and memories. Media violence
provides scripts ,
or ideas on how to behave in situations that seem to parallel those they have observed.
Desensitization suggests that children who watch a lot of violence on television may
become less sensitive to violence in the real world around them, less sensitive to the
pain and suffering of others, and more willing to tolerate ever-increasing levels of
violence in our society. We become used to, or habituated to, many stimuli that impinge
on us repeatedly. Repeated exposure to television violence may therefore decrease
viewers' emotional response to real violence. If children come to perceive violence as
the norm, their own attitudes toward violence may become less condemnatory and they may
place less value on constraining aggressive urges.
The question repeatedly arises as to whether media violence should be curtailed in an
effort to stem community violence. Because of constitutional guarantees of free
expression, current restraints on media depictions of violence are voluntary. Films,
perhaps, are more violent than they have ever been, but television stations now and then
attempt to tone down the violence in shows intended for children.
Still, our children are going to be exposed to a great deal of media violence. If not
in Saturday morning cartoon shows, then in evening dramas and in the news. Or they'll
hear about violence from friends, watch children get into fights, or read about violence
in the newspapers. Even if all those sources of violence were somehow hidden from view,
they would learn of violence in Hamlet, Macbeth, and even in the Bible. Thus, the
notion of preventing children from being exposed to violent models is impractical. We
might also want our children to learn some aggressive skills so that they can defend
themselves against bullies and rapists.
What, then, should be done? First of all, consider whether we are overestimating the
threat. Although media violence contributes to aggressive behavior, it does not
automatically trigger aggressive behavior. Many other factors, including the quality of
the home environment, are involved. A loving, comfortable home life is not likely to
feed into aggressive tendencies.
In conclusion, it is parents' and educators' responsibility to inform children that the
violent behavior they observe in the media does not represent the behavior of most
people. Also, the apparently aggressive behaviors they watch are not real. They reflect
camera tricks, special effects, and stunts. Another important thing to tell children is
that most people resolve conflicts by nonviolent means. Since it is impossible to censor
television because of first amendment rights and television is a small contributor to
real-life violence, parents should concert their efforts towards spending time with their
children and actually watching a violent show with their children and discussing in depth
what is being shown. If children consider violence inappropriate, they will probably not
act aggressively, even if they have acquired aggressive skills. For in the words of
Andrew Greeley, "Music, film, and television reflect behavior rather than cause it." (C2)
If I had known all this years before, maybe my brother wouldn't have a headache all the
time and my dog's head wouldn't be facing the wrong way.
|