OLGA LINNE
Public concerns on the likely effects of media on children and youth has given rise to considerable research. The first part of this article will describe the state of research about children and young people in Europe and then examine the changing face of research in Scandinavia if not necessarily the debate about violence.
In a recent survey of academic research on children and the media in the fifteen countries which currently are members of the European Union, Linne (1996) demonstrated that in the sample of one hundred and seven universities who answered this questionnaire, fifty-one universities were active in the field of Children and the Media. The countries where research about mass media and children has been most developed in the 1990s are those of north-western Europe, namely the United Kingdom, Germany, France, Denmark, Finland, Sweden, the Netherlands, Belgium and Ireland (in that rank order).
On the question of how the researchers would evaluate the development of research in their own country, Italy, Spain, Austria, Greece, Luxembourg and Portugal all reported that the state of affairs regarding research was relatively poor. The responses from the UK, Germany, the Nordic countries, the Netherlands and Ireland were much more positive. This I believe, has less to do with demographic factors such as size of population, than a combination of social and historical forces.
The questionnaires were filled in by one hundred and seven Departments of Media Studies, Media Policy, Sociology, Journalism, Psychology, Audience Research and Media Education within the European Union. The respondents were professors, directors, researchers and lecturers.
The major approaches used in the research, according to the respondents were firstly sociological, followed by social psychological and then psychological approaches. Very few mentioned a literary or humanist approach or, indeed, a political-economy approach. However, the surprising result here is not so much that the latter approaches mentioned were rarely used, but rather that the sociological had such a firm position in the 1990s. I would argue that this is a European trend rather than an American one. The sociological approach is one where researchers relate the child's media use, awareness and pleasure in a social context. The research which had been undertaken, or was in process, covered both positive and negative effects of the media. The most frequent response was that the studies had dealt with media and violence, followed by media education and media and positive effects, and subsequently media and general negative effects. Less frequent, but nevertheless evident, were research studies about media and fear, media policy and media organisations and structures, media literacy, and reception analysis.
Thus I can draw the conclusion that, contrary to the familiar assumption that research about children and the media has been concentrated only in a couple of fields, it has actually followed many different avenues. One should remember, however, that I was asking about research carried out in Europe from 1990 and onwards.
The research had also used many different theoretical frameworks, again a finding contrary to common assumptions. The reception analysis framework was often referred to as significant for current research. This is surprising, as it is a fairly new theoretical approach. The second and third most used frameworks were the more traditional 'effects' and 'uses and gratifications' traditions. However, other recent research approaches were also quite frequently used. Here I refer to cultural indicators and semiotic studies. Thus, again, contrary to what current literature about children often argues, this survey demonstrates that research about children and young people is not simply informed by traditional research frameworks.
The most frequently cited methods used were surveys, in-depth studies and literary reviews, followed by group discussions and participant observation. Interviews, using mainly closed questionnaires, were also quite often used. Laboratory experiments, which had been a research tool often used in the 1960s (for example, most of the research on children and violence on the screen was based on this method), were mentioned by only a few respondents. Again what is significant is that there is not a single research method that dominates. I would interpret this as a very positive trend as no method is perfect in itself and one might gain more knowledge and understanding using a pluralistic approach. It is pleasing to note that so few researchers are using laboratory experiments, as these have been severely criticised for their artificiality.
The most studied media was, without any doubt, television followed by video. Surprisingly enough one quarter of the respondents pointed to radio as their main medium of research. Advertising in television followed, and one should note that this makes television an even more dominant medium in research about children and the media. Around a quarter or less stated that film, video-nasties and computers in general, had also been studied. Some twenty percent mentioned that newspapers, computer games and books had been investigated.
It is interesting to see that books as one of the oldest media, still has the same interest for researchers as one of the newest, i.e. computer games. Interactive television is a new medium much discussed, but so far only eight percent of the scholars in the Higher Education Institutions of the fifteen European countries had been studying this specific medium.
The scholars' evaluation of policy implication and distribution of the research
More than half of the academics believed the research about children had policy implications for the media. The most frequent answer was that research had affected television and the school curriculum. Around ten percent believed that advertising and radio had been influenced by research and others mentioned film, books, newspapers and computer games.
Sixty-five percent of the respondents active in the field of children and media mentioned that teaching about children and the media took place in their institutions (73 percent had indicated that research was carried out).
A surprisingly large percentage of the scholars reported that they were lecturing to primary and secondary schoolteachers (41 percent). Lecturing to interest groups was also quite frequent and so was lecturing to parents. Twenty-four percent of the scholars also mentioned that they lectured to broadcasters in workshops or conferences. However, it is significant that most of these answers were given from scholars from the UK, Germany, France, the Nordic countries, the Netherlands, Belgium and Ireland. Thus the picture drawn here was mainly based on the north-west of the European countries. The situation seems to be very different in the other countries, especially the Mediterranean countries, Italy, Spain, Greece and Portugal. Portugal, like Luxembourg, reported that no research in this field had been undertaken there.
There is little knowledge about research in other European countries, which are not members of the European Union. Norway and Hungary, for example, have quite a well developed research tradition in line with the other north-western European countries, but because of the former Cold War there is very little knowledge of Eastern European countries.
Eastern Europe
In a workshop (1996), arranged by the European Children's Television Centre (E.C.T.C) in Greece, I interviewed the Heads of Children's Television from Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, FYROM (Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia), and Romania. They informed me, that to the best of their knowledge, there had not been carried out any research about children and the media in their countries. This does not mean that this is absolutely correct, but if I had carried out similar interviews with the Heads of Children's programmes in north-western Europe, I know (from discussions with them) that they would be well aware of that research had been carried out in their own country, even if they would not necessarily be up to date.
In the light of this I welcome a booklet written by Irving and Tadros (1997) Children's Film and Television in Central and Eastern Europe. It does not deal with research in the twenty-one countries, but at least it informs about the legislation about violent images. Here follows a short summary.
In Albania, there is a system of self-regulating, "ensuring that violent and erotic programmes are not aired at times when children might be watching television" (Pepo, in Irving and Tadros, 1997, p. 14).
In the Republic of Azerbaijan the rules are: "For public protection, the distribution of films promoting violence and cruelty is liable for a prison term of up to two years or a fine of the equivalent of 700-800 times minimum wage" (Mirkassimov, in Irving and Tadros, 1997, p. 15). Rather harsh, it appears.
From the Republic of Belarus, Andreev informs: "Any use of mass media, literature, shows, etc., which include pornography, the worship of violence and cruelty, or anything which may offend the human dignity and influence children in any harmful way by encouraging them to break the law is punishable by the law" (Irving and Tadros, 1997, p. 16).
In Bosnia and Herzegovina, "the production and distribution of films is not governed by legislation. No special laws exist to regulate either children's film or children's television" (Selimovic, in Irving and Tadros, 1997, p. 18).
In the Republic of Bulgaria, Dereliev et al. explain that a law was passed about radio and television in 1996: "In programming scheduled between 06.00 and 23.00 it is not permitted to include shows potentially harmful to the psychological, physical, and moral development of children and young adults" (Irving and Tadros, 1997, p. 19).
The production and distribution of film are not subject to legislation in the Republic of Croatia. However, broadcasters, "must not offend the public morality, must not show pornography, accentuate violence or provoke racial, religious and ethnic hatred" (Alajbeg et al., in Irving and Tadros, 1997, p. 21).
In the Czech Republic, "the broadcasting of programmes promoting violence and sex is prohibited by Czech television, which has set up an ethics panel to make recommendations in these matters" (Bajgar et al., in Irving and Tadros, 1997, p. 23).
Estonia passed a law in 1992 and in article 48 it is stated: "It is forbidden to produce or demonstrate to children any printed material, films videos, or any other implements which propagate cruelty and violence" (Salulai et al., in Irving and Tadros, 1997, p 24).
In the Republic of Georgia minors are protected from watching pornographic or violent films by law (Chigogidze, in Irving and Tadros, 1997, p. 25).
The Hungarian Media Law of 1996 is very similar (Irving and Tadros, 1997, p. 26).
The Latvian Electronic Mass Media Act of 1995, article 18.5 states: "Between 07.00 and 22.00 programmes containing violence in visual or textual form, plots associated with the use of drugs are prohibited" (Ruben is et al., in Irving and Tadros, 1997, p. 28).
Lithuania passed a law in 1991 prohibiting "broadcasting of pornography or violence" (Luiga, in Irving and Tadros, 1997, p. 30).
The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia approved a law in 1997 and in article 35 it is stated: "Broadcasting of programmes with indecent content, and in particular with pornography or violence, shall not be permitted" (Lozanovski et al., in Irving and Tadros, 1997, p. 31).
Moldova has a new law on mass media, but which does not specifically address children. However, the public broadcaster has adopted internal regulations (Pirtac, in Irving and Tadros, 1997, p. 33).
The Broadcasting Act of 1992 in Poland also addresses violence on the screen (Grudzinska, in Irving and Tadros 1997, p. 35).
In Romania a law from 1994 prohibits pornographic and violent images (Chirila et al., in Irving and Tadros, 1997, p. 37).
In Russia the Law on Mass Media of 1991 protects children from viewing pornography and violent images (Menshikov et al., in Irving and Tadros, 1997, p. 40).
The Slovak Republic has an Audiovisual Law from 1995. The protection of children from violent images on the screen has not until recently been acknowledged as problem in Slovak-produced shows. However Grujbarova argues: "Violent scenes are appearing more often, in imported television programmes and in foreign television programmes available through satellite or re-transmitted on cable. Without legislative initiative we can take only administrative measures ... in the form of licence terms or recommendations for broadcasters ... aimed to prevent excesses of violent contents or forms on screen" (Irving and Tadros, 1997, p. 43).
In the Republic of Slovenia the public broadcaster RTV is preparing to accept a set of International regulations using the European Broadcasting Union model (Irving and Tadros, 1997, p. 45).
Finally, in the Ukraine there are no specific laws mentioning violence on the screen (Polishchuk, in Irving and Tadros, 1997, p. 47).
Thus it appears that the majority of Eastern European countries recently have adopted legislation against the showing of violent images on the screen, at least during certain time periods.
It is also important to remember that after the first World Summit on Television and Children, in Melbourne, Australia, in 1995, a Children's Television Charter was accepted by many television networks all over the world. The Charter is written down in seven bullet points stressing: high quality; the right to see and express the children's own culture, language and life experiences; and that governments, production, distribution and funding organisations should support indigenous children's television. Paragraph 4 explicitly refers to violence and sex: "Children's programmes should be wide-ranging in genre and context, but should not include gratuitous scenes of violence and sex."
Research about violence on the screen: a case study of Scandinavia
The argument this part of the article will pursue, is that although research about images of violence in the media has been on the agenda over four decades, the evidence about the impact of violence on the screen varies, not only from researcher to researcher, but between research communities. The research efforts have been differently framed and the emphasis and interpretations of the results have led to different arguments.
In this case study I will analyse how research traditions have changed in Scandinavia from the 1960s to the 1990s. It is significant that the most prominent research theories oriented in the USA: the Catharsis Hypothesis, the Aggressive Cue model, the Observational Learning Theory, the Reinforcement Model and the Cultivation Model (De Fleur and Ball-Rokeach, 1982). Four out of these five models or theories assume that mediated violence can influence aggressive behaviour (the Catharsis Hypothesis being the exception).
These theories had a great impact on European research in general, and also in Scandinavia. Researchers in Scandinavia in the 1960s especially favoured the models which argued for the impact of violence of the media on young people. This might appear rather absurd when one considers the difference in media proliferation between the Scandinavian countries and the USA at that time. Denmark had from 1951 to 1986 only one television channel and three radio channels, all following the public service broadcasting model and financed by license fees (DR) (Nordahl Svendsen, 1989). Television in Sweden was similarly introduced as a public service medium (in 1956) and granted a monopoly of broadcasting (SR). A second television channel was opened in 1969 within the same corporation (SR), also without advertising. In Norway only one public institution existed with one radio channel and one television channel (Ostbye, 1992).
Times have changed. In Denmark, Nordahl Svendsen (1989) reports that, apart from the new channel TV 2, which is financed through advertising (3/4) and a licence fee (1/4), Danes can now receive nine local television channels. Satellite television can be received by 61 percent (1994), and 53 percent of Danes (1994) can choose to watch Swedish television channels and 48 percent German television channels. There are (1995) two terrestrial channels, three satellite channels and two satellite/pay channels.
In Norway, a second television channel was established in 1992. In a country where the population was used to receiving only one television channel (apart from roughly one-quarter of the Norwegians who also in earlier days could receive Swedish television), its citizens could suddenly choose between two domestic channels, and, in addition, five satellite channels from Britain, France, Germany and the rest of Scandinavia and two satellite/pay-TV channels.
In Sweden the developments were similar. In 1985, the first Swedish households were connected to cable on a commercial basis. In 1994, 60 percent of the population had access to satellite, and "in the late 1980s satellite channels intended for Swedish audiences -- TV3, TV4, TV5 Nordic, SF-Succe and Film-Net -- became available to cabled households" (Cronholm, 1993, p. 5). In 1995 there were three terrestrial channels, five satellite channels and four satellite/pay-TV channels.
McQuail's argument (1990) that the developments of broadcasting in Europe have gone from the "old order" of national monopolies to the "new order" of duopolistic system, can now be applied to the Scandinavian countries.
It is important to describe the changing media systems in Scandinavia. Research is never free-floating, but must be seen in the context of the society, as the media systems are highly significant part of that society. This must be of special importance when discussing the discourses of research on violence on television, because one valid argument appears to be that the discourses would vary with the amount of television a society offers its citizens, and that the quantity of television, theoretically, if not necessarily, might influence the availability of violent images.
Public concern about media violence and its alleged effects, was evident in Scandinavia. In Sweden, for example, the Swedish branch of The Save the Children Fund ran two campaigns against violence on television during the 1970s, and actions have been taken by parent associations and groups concerned with children. However, writing in 1977 von Feilitzen noted: "the judgment is commonly made that the Scandinavian countries, particularly perhaps Sweden and Norway, have the least television violence in the world" (p. 61).
This appears paradoxical. Given that the media systems at the time were so restricted, and that the output of violent programmes was rather small, why did researchers, The Save the Children Fund, other organisations, parents and general debaters worry so much? The answer comes promptly in von Feilitzen's argument:
Even if Swedish television is on an average less 'hard' (violent) than in many other countries, such series have also been broadcast which are high on the American violence ratings, such as Kojak, Baretta, and Rockford (von Feilitzen et al., 1977, p. 62).
One can question how violent the above-mentioned programmes actually were compared with the satellite programmes and video-nasties of later decades, but it is essential to realise that this argument was considered to be an urgent one then, as it also appears to be today in both Western and Eastern Europe.
However, there is another trend in the early Scandinavian research, apart from the focus on the seemingly rather low output of violent programmes. Most of the early Scandinavian research reports are summaries of foreign studies, above all American ones. The media systems in the USA and Scandinavia were, of course, very different in those days. However, this did not appear to bother Bruun Pedersen from Denmark (1984), who concluded:
It is unthinkable that something would appear which changed the main research evidence we have referred to earlier: 'violence on television has harmful effects on children and young people'. It is about time that we proceed from this conclusion and establish controls on this, because in a very few years the violence influence from television will have a scope much larger than today. We should be prepared for when that time comes (Bruun Pedersen, 1984, p. 77).
On the whole Scandinavian researchers at the time were not afraid of applying foreign research evidence to the Scandinavian setting. The main arguments were that foreign programmes with violent images were part of the Scandinavian output and that the few Scandinavian studies undertaken agreed with International research. However, already in 1977, Vaagland from Norway argued: "It is risky to use American results as a base for arguing about violence on Norwegian television" (p. 3).
The other classical discourse was over the question of whether researchers had agreed on the results from the research or not. This is obviously connected to the debate about how applicable research from other countries is. Bruun Pedersen (1984) from Denmark clearly gave his opinions about the relevance of the research.
One who didn't agree was Vaagland (1977) who pointed out that politicians and other moral entrepreneurs had accepted the conclusions from foreign studies without asking questions about the methods used. For example, he was critical of laboratory experiments with young children which tested levels of aggression in children's behaviour after viewing violence. Aggression was defined as beating an inflatable Bobodoll without any negative consequences for the child.
Vaagland's position thus is fairly similar to the critical position of some British scholars working in this field at the time. Halloran (1978) pointed out that much of the research on violence had been carried out in the USA and that cross-cultural generalisations were not really valid because the USA, media-wise and otherwise, historically and at the present time, differed from what was prevalent in many other countries.
Although the first Scandinavian studies pointed to the importance of parental influence and the child's background and also the relatively limited number of violent incidents on television (Linne, 1969; Vaagland, 1977), and thus were less alarmist than many results of studies from the USA, the debates continued. The effects that were mostly discussed in the Scandinavian violence debates at this time were children's imitation of violence; modelling; reinforcement of existing violent tendencies, fear and desensitisation (Linne, 1982).
As there were so few Scandinavian studies carried out, most of the debates in the early years were not only influenced, but based on American models and paradigms. The more critical British tradition at the time, here illustrated by Halloran's work, was much less influential on this specific issue.
Recent trends in Scandinavian research
In 1993, a major book on violence and the media based on Scandinavian research was published (von Feilitzen, Forsman and Roe). The chapters were written by fourteen scholars from the Nordic countries, who all either studied violence in the media for a considerable time, or had written their doctoral theses on the subject. It is interesting to note that most entries do not deal with violence on television, but rather analyse violence in videos, films, computer games, music videos, or pornography.
Many different dimensions have been covered in these studies about video violence. However, I would argue that the most interesting dimension, seen in the light of this paper, is not much dealt with. Only one of the articles discusses the effects of watching video violence. More essays point to how video violence is used by different subgroups in a socio-cultural content. The research about video violence has thus to a great extent taken another path than was expected when one refers to the early concerns about videos. Perhaps this can be explained by a new framework.
It also seems clear that those major Scandinavian film scholars, currently studying violence in films are more interested in discussing and analysing subcultures, narratives, genres and the cultural and historical contexts, than even approaching the traditional questions about harmful effects of viewing these violent films.
Jensen (1993) asserts that during the last decade violence-as-moving-image has found a new medium to be developed in, namely computer or video games, and that this specific medium appears to celebrate violence. The screen is swarming with street-fighters, aliens and combat soldiers with pump-guns. It is also a medium which is gender specific. Reception and media ethnographic studies as well as direct observation confirm that this is "a man's world" (p. 151). Jensen claims that there is very little research about computer games in the Nordic countries and that the scarce International research has been based on traditional effects models and psychological theories, "without attempting to understand and describe the phenomenon in its social and cultural context" (p. 152). The social context in this case is Denmark and Jensen writes about masculinity, and power plays, after having described the various genres and narratives. His conclusion is that the fascination for young men in playing these games is that they are a play room where one can create one's own power. "A possibility to live where one has the power -- rather than where one is powerless" (Jensen, 1993, p. 170).
In the very beginning of Forsman's article about violence in music videos he manifestly positions himself declaring: "It is often claimed that music videos contain more sex and violence than other television genres. Sweepingly it is maintained that the 'violent narrative style' creates everything from concentration problems to perpetrators of violent acts. It is not only from the USA we hear statements like this; even in Sweden there exist new moralistic doomsday prophets and crusades against all imaginable popular and youth cultures" (Forsman, 1993, p. 175). He then studies narratives and genres and concludes that violence taken up by researchers -- is that of reception analysis and the nature of 'pleasure' derived from viewing. We have already reported a similar trend evident in the research of 15 European countries. Forsman also adds the possibility that violence is used by television channels and the rock music industry as a way to attract younger audiences.
Similarly, Svensson (1993) affirms in his study of pornographic violence that it is currently often claimed that pornographic film reaches more people today then ever before, because of the home video market, and the expansion of cable-television. Pornographic films are also regularly broadcast on satellites. He argues that there are interesting similarities between the debate about 'extreme violence' and 'pornographic violence' and that in both cases the debates about harmful effects are mixed up with demands for more censorship. He concludes that there is no clear research evidence that pornography causes violent crimes, including rape. Svensson does not believe that research about the effects of pornography should be used as an argument for censorship of pornography in societies. This should be a political and not a research decision. He concludes that censorship against pornography is not necessarily beneficial because, in his view, the increased censorship is more dangerous than are the possible harmful effects of pornography.
These studies are all concerned with 'extremely violent' images, as the scholars point out. What emerges from this last-mentioned collection of studies is an apparent consensus not to discuss 'harmful' or other effects of computer games, violent music videos or pornographic videos. From a interpretative perspective, they analyse this intriguing world of violent images and their function for subcultures. There also appears to be a consensus in their condemnation of 'moral crusaders' who are looked upon as being against popular and youth cultures. As the scholars, not only those just mentioned, but also those who have studied 'extreme violence' in videos and films, frequently refer to the 'moral crusaders' in their texts, we must assume, that the debates about harmful effects of different forms of media violence, have continued in the Scandinavian societies.
How are we to explain that researchers in the Scandinavian societies during the period of restricted media policy, few television channels, no satellites, hardly any video, few films with 'extreme violence' and no violent music videos or computer games or pornographic video images, whatsoever, discussed and studied media effects and were extremely wary of the future development of the media, whereas many researchers now when these night-marish developments appear to have happened, are instead studying the images, rather than the effects of the images?
Other Scandinavian research, however, has a different emphasis. Anita Werner (1994) in Children in the Television Age gives a conservative estimate that 0.1 per cent of boys in Norway can be affected by media violence and behave with increased aggression. Ragnhild Bjornebekk (1994), also from Norway, points out that the debate about violence and its effects has been with us for many years but that the results are contradictory and probably says more about the person writing than something important about the function of violence for children and young people.
Von Feilitzen gives a list of other important factors relating to aggression and violence that research has pointed out: "The child's and adolescent's personality, capacities, and earlier aggression; conditions in family, school, and peer groups (for example, aggression at home, a school that does not encourage one's capacity, lack of popularity among peers); socio-cultural background and societal conditions (although the last-mentioned conditions have not been empirically studied). Thus, the 'entertainment violence' plays in the long (as in the short) run only a contributing role and comes in as a faint reinforcement in a syndrome of other far more important circumstances" (Feilitzen, 1994, p. 149). She also points out that: "Sweden has had only a slight increase in the number of violent crimes. On the other hand, we have had a substantial increase in theft and other economic criminality" (von Feilitzen, 1994, p. 152).
Bjornebekk (1994) argues that, in contrast to the USA, children as murderers or perpetrators of serious violence are uncommon in England and Norway and that the rise in crime in both countries, are mostly related to property. Von Feilitzen (1994) states: "In sum, different persons experience excitement, violence, horror, and power -- as well as other media and cultural contexts -- very differently, need it differently, and attach different meanings to it" (von Feilitzen, 1994, p. 159).
The changed face of Scandinavian research
I introduced some trends in the research debate about violence on television in the 1970s in Scandinavia. One was the discussion over whether one could apply research violence findings from other countries (mostly from the USA) to the Scandinavian context. Most common among researchers at the time was a clear acceptance that one could, building on the argument that the Scandinavian countries imported fiction films and programmes from the USA. Only occasionally were there voices of dissent from this view.
In the 1990s the situation is completely contradictory, because now only occasionally we hear arguments agreeing that findings from the USA could be imported to the Nordic context.
One reason for this is that today there exists much more Scandinavian-based research in comparison with some twenty years ago -- research which on the whole has demonstrated much less spectacular effects than was assumed. At the same time there is a growing awareness among social science scholars not to study the media in isolation, but in its social context. Another argument from the 1970s dealt with the question whether researchers had agreed amongst themselves on the validity of the (foreign) findings and there were strong arguments that there existed a consensus among the majority of the scholars for doing so. Again occasional voices protested and criticised the American research as being psychologistic, artificial and parochial. However, building on the conviction of the validity of the (foreign) research, Scandinavian scholars demanded that 'something had to be done' and requested more censorship.
This argument was coupled with the fear of an expanding media system which in the future would allow more violent images to be imported. Although the researchers from the 1970s anticipated (and feared) media development and media expansion, they did not suspect what an enormous explosion of media was to follow. For example, in 1981, the Danish Media Commission, voted against for establishing a Nordic satellite channel (NORDSAT). The decision was partly based on the arguments that the channel would carry imported programmes from the USA and that Scandinavian viewers would prefer American fiction programmes to Scandinavian programmes.
Now in the 1990s the Nordic countries have experienced rapid media development and there has also been rapid development of research on the media (Carlsson, 1995).
However, the most intriguing and rather unexpected trend is that direct/sole television causal effects on violent behaviour are not even mentioned in the literature from the 1990s. All the research findings, when mentioning violence on television, treats television as a possible contributory factor in real-life violence but never as the sole cause. Viewing violence on television might, at the most, contribute 0.1% to 10% to the level of violence in society (Werner, 1994; von Feilitzen, 1994) and the groups who can be affected by violence seem to grow smaller and smaller (Linne, 1995).
There are also voices from Scandinavia denying any harmful effects of watching violence on television. Thus when the Scandinavian countries only had one public broadcasting channel each or two (in Sweden), and then very restrictive policies about the import of violent programmes, the 'moral panics' among the researchers seem to have been much more explicit than now. This trend is extremely clear when one is analysing studies concerning 'extreme violence', from video nasties, to horror films, to violent images in music, to pornographic violent images and violent computer games. The researchers studying these areas and themes were not interested in questions about effects, but they studied the content, the images and how different sub-groups used the media material and negotiated the texts. It is evident that today much more research is carried out about the media than only a decade ago and this is probably due to the proliferation of old and new media. Contrary to what one could have predicted, however, the research in the 1990s is not at all as dominated by effects studies.
Have the researchers in Scandinavia changed paradigms or at least attitudes? It is important here to remember, that most researchers during the early years were trained as social scientists and that in Scandinavia at the time, social sciences were very influenced by the American behaviourist traditions. Most of the voices from Scandinavia from the 1990s, working in the effects tradition, proceed much more carefully than their early colleagues. Undoubtedly this is also based on the fact that the research community actually knows more about the media surrounding us, than they did in the 1970s. There is a growing hesitation to explain complicated social phenomena to one powerful single cause. The other part of the answer is that there are now many more voices in the 1990s -- among these are scholars trained in other disciplines, mostly the humanities. Having another background their research interests have been geared in other directions. There is still a paradox in the Scandinavian scenario, namely the frequent mention of never ending 'moral panics'.
In the very early years it appears that scholars participated and argued for more censorship, but in the 1990s most of the researchers quoted are opposed to more censorship, even though they are discussing 'extreme violence' and not the 'Kojak-type' violence.
The 'moral entrepreneurs' seem thus no longer to be the researchers, but parents, politicians, journalists, and generally concerned public debaters. While, in the 1970s, the arguments were that research had proved that it was dangerous for children and young people to watch violence (or at least large amounts of violence) on television, the majority of the research community today would avoid statements like this. This, of course, might cause frustrations for 'the concerned' who are convinced that the tide of violent images must have some direct causal effect on children and young people. When the Scandinavian researchers point out that 0.1 percent to 10 percent of the build up of aggression might be contributed by watching violent television, films, videos, etc., they cannot predict which of the children will be affected. This, coupled with a growing hesitation to explain complicated social issues with one cause, might be another reason for most media scholars in the 1990s in the Scandinavian countries to study constructions and narratives of media images and how the media are used and negotiated by different subcultures, rather than to continue to concentrate on the elusive effects of violent media. After having examined the Scandinavian countries as a case study, we now return to the general European picture. Here we look at how academics themselves evaluate the research that has been undertaken in this field.
A European scenario
In the survey referred to earlier (Linne, 1996), where I had received answers from one hundred and seven Higher Education Institutions in the fifteen member states of the European Community, forty-five percent of the scholars said that they themselves had carried out a study about violence and the media or written on the theme.
I asked the last-mentioned academics to evaluate the linkage between media violence and violence in society: "What is your personal opinion based on your interpretation of the research evidence on the causal link between violence in the media and violence in society"? Twenty-two percent of the scholars stated: "there is an evident causal link" . Thirty-three percent said: "there is a vague causal link only for some children". Four percent answered: "there is no causal link". Twenty-nine percent of the scholars chose to tick: "the question about violence in the media is too simplistic to explain complicated social phenomena". Two percent of them discussed "multi causality" and ten percent did not answer the question. The answers can be interpreted as an indication of the well-known divide in the research community.
On the other hand, only a fifth of the researchers active in the field in 1995 (when they answered the questionnaire) believed "there is an evident causal link".
The vast majority of the scholars were more in doubt. Thirty-three percent each went either for the "vague causal link" or find it "too simplistic to explain complicated social phenomena" with one cause -- the media -- or denied all causal links (four percent).
I also asked about policy implications of the research on violence for the mass media industry in the academics' own country. Forty-seven percent of the scholars answered that they believed the research had policy implications for the industry.
On an open question twenty-four percent mentioned legislation and again twenty-four percent stated that research contributed to debates about violence on the screen. Fourteen percent mentioned that new guidelines had been adopted in their country and ten percent that scheduling had been changed. The rest of the answers deal with that teachers and parents now know more about the elusive question about violence on the screen and therefore could guide the children better. Other scholars mention that the research had instigated important debates about censorship and advertising.
I also asked if scholars applied research evidence from other countries to explain effects of mediated violence in their own counties. Forty-nine percent of the academics said they did. Most of the answers came from the countries which had not been able to carry out research in their own environment -- mostly the Mediterranean countries.
Finally I asked which country, in their view, had produced useful research about children and mediated violence. The fifteen European Community countries were listed and I had added the US, Canada and Australia, as these countries often are referred to in relation to violence on the screen. The majority, sixty-seven percent, of the European scholars pointed to that relevant research had been carried out in the UK, a country where scholars persistently have argued against the direct/causal effects of violence on the screen to violence acts in the society (Halloran, 1978; Murdock and McCron, 1979; Howitt and Cumberbatch, 1975; Buckingham, 1993; Gauntlett, 1995; Barker and Petley, 1997). However, almost the same number of scholars (65 percent) mentioned research carried out in the US, a country where research often has argued for causal effects (Bandura, 1968; De Fleur and Ball-Rokeach, 1982; Comstock, 1990; Gerbner, 1994).
The third most frequent mentioned country was Sweden (forty-three percent), which is on one hand quite surprising as it has a relatively small population, but on the other hand research about violence in the media has been a persistent theme. Germany followed in fourth place (thirty-nine percent), Australia in fifth position (thirty-seven percent). Canada came in surprisingly low in the sixth position (thirty-one percent). The Netherlands followed with twenty-six percent and Denmark and Finland received twenty percent and eighteen percent respectively. Ireland and Italy each were referred to by six percent, Austria and Spain by four percent and Belgium by two percent. Greece, Luxembourg, Portugal were not mentioned at all. Two percent of the academics mentioned research from Japan.
Overall, the academics in the European community reported that little research had taken place in the Mediterranean countries and much more in the north-west of Europe. The question of the relevance of research about violence and the media mirrors the indigenous academics description. Given that it is important to carry out research in a societal context, as research never is free-floating or indeed "objective", it appears that it would be of the utmost importance for the European countries, especially those around the Mediterranean and the countries from Eastern Europe to research images about violence. There were more voices from the north-western part of Europe who mentioned that relevant research about violence had been carried out in the UK and Scandinavia and more of the voices from the southern part of Europe who mentioned research from the US. As the case study from Scandinavia demonstrated, it might not be wise just to adopt research paradigms and research evidence from one country to the other.
As a result of this present research I would, therefore, recommend that the first priority should be that research in these countries should be encouraged by the European Community and UNESCO in order that a body of research, relevant to each country, can be built up. I would add that this research needs to be undertaken carefully with the specific socio-historic needs of those countries taken into account. This is the only way in which we can build up a more systematic and relevant bank of knowledge, on which it would be possible to base decisions.
_______________
References
Barker, M. and Petley, J. (Eds.) (1997). Ill Effects. The Media/Violence Debate. Routledge.
Bjornebekk, R. (1994). Violence on the Screen. Film Magazine, No. 48, 2/94. Oslo.
Bruun Pedersen, J. (1984). Violence on the Screen. Gyldendals Pedagogic Library.
Buckingham, D. (1993). Children Talking Television. The Falmer Press.
Carlsson, U. (1995). Interview with Ulla Carlsson, Nordicom, Goteborg University.
Comstock, G. (1990). Deceptive Appearances. Television Violence and Aggressive Behaviour. Journal of Adolescent Health Care, 11, 31-44.
Cronholm, M. (1993). SR/PUB 1969-1993. 25 Years of Broadcasting Research in the Audience and Programme Research Department of Sveriges Radio. Swedish Broadcasting Corporation.
De Fleur, M.L. and Ball-Rokeach, S. (1982). Theories of Mass Communication, 4th Edition. Longman.
Feilitzen, C. von, Filipson, L. and Schyller, I. (1977). Open Your Eyes to Children's Viewing. Swedish Broadcasting Corporation.
Feilitzen, C. von, Filipson, L., Rydin, I. and Schyller, I. (1989). Children and Young People in the Media Age. Tema Information.
Feilitzen, C. von, Forsman, M. and Roe, K. (1993). Some Concepts and Approaches to the Debate about Violence on Television. In Feilitzen, C. von, Forsman, M. and Roe, K. (Eds.) Violence from All Directions. Brutus Ostlings Publishing House Symposion, 9-24.
Feilitzen, C. von. (1993). Violence -- Seen in Many Perspectives. In Feilitzen, C. von, Forsman, M. and Roe, K. (Eds.). Op. cit., 25-48.
Feilitzen, C. von. (1994). Media Violence -- Research Perspectives in the 1980s. In Hamelink, C. and Linne, O. (Eds.). Mass Communication Research. On Problems and Policies. Ablex, 147-170.
Forsman, M. (1993). The Violent Images in Rock 'n'. On the Violent Contents and the Violence Aesthetic in Music Videos. In Feilitzen, C. von, Forsmann, M. and Roe, K. (Eds.) Op. cit., 175-201.
Gauntlett, D. (1995). Moving Experiences. Understanding Television's Influences and Effects. Academia Research Monograph 13.
Gerbner, G. (1994). The Politics of Media Violence: Some Reflections. In Hamelink, C. and Linne, O. (Eds.). Mass Communication Research. On Problems and Policies. Ablex, 147-170.
Halloran, J.D. (1978). Mass Communication: Symbol or Cause of Violence? International Social Science Journal, 30 (4), 816-834.
Howitt, D. and Cumberbatch, G. (1975). Mass Media, Violence and Society. London. Paul Elek.
Irving, J. and Tadros, C. (1997). Children's Film and Television in Central and Eastern Europe. International Centre of Films for Children and Young People.
Jensen, E). (1993). Powerplay -- Masculinity, Power and Violence in Computer Games. In Feilitzen, C. von, Forsman, M. and Roe, K. (Eds.). Op. cit., 151-173.
Linne, O. (1969). Children's Reactions to Violence on Television. Stockholm, Swedish Broadcasting Corporation.
Linne, O. (1982). Children at the Screen -- on Children's Viewing Habits and Experiences. Mass Culture and the Media. Copenhagen, No. 4, 9-26.
Linne, O. (1995). Media Violence Research in Scandinavia. Nordicom-Information, No. 3-4, 3-13.
Linne, O. (1996). Children and the Media. An Inventory of the State of the Art of European Research and Teaching, Centre for Mass Communication Research, University of Leicester, UK.
Murdock, G. and McCron, R. (1979). The Television and Delinquency Debate. Screen Education, 55-68.
McQuail, D. et al. (1990). Caging the Beast: Constructing a Frame-Work for the Analysis of Media Change in Western Europe. European Journal of Communication, Vol. 5, No. 2-3.
Nordahl Svendsen. E. (1989). The Media Research in Danish Radio. Nordicom-Information. No. 3. 3-10.
Svensson. K. (I 993). The Violence of Pornography. In Feilitzen. C. von. Forsman. M. and Roe. K. (Eds.). Op. cit., 313-330.
Vaagland. O. (1977). Violence on Television and Aggressive Behaviour. Report No. 2. Centre for Media Research. University of Bergen.
Werner. A. (1994). Children in the Television Age. Gyldendal.
Ostbye. H. (1992). Norwegian Media in the 1980s. Structural Changes. Stable Consumption. Nordicom-Information. No.1. 3-18.