4: IT' S IMPORTANT TO FEEL SOMETHING WHEN YOU KILL"
LIKE MOST TECHNOLOGIES, video game technology has changed drastically in the last few years. Arcades may look much the same on the surface as they did a decade or two ago, but the games have become far more violent, sophisticated, and addictive. Pac-Man they are not. In case you haven't made a trip to a video arcade lately, or peered over your child's shoulder while he's standing in front of the television pointing and shooting something that looks suspiciously like a real weapon, then you should. If Pong -- or, for that matter, Pac-Man and Super Mario Brothers -- is your point of reference, think again. We must assume that what we know of the more benign, outdated games of the 1970s and 1980s, even of the early 1990s, and the research regarding them, cannot be considered valid for the games that have been put on the market in the last five years. It's a whole new world, and it's evolving at a rate that is hard for parents to keep pace with.
How fast a rate? Consider this: During the last two decades interactive video games have emerged as one of the most popular forms of entertainment, particularly among teens. According to the nonprofit organization Mediascope, "Globally, annual video game revenues now exceed $18 billion. In the United States alone, video game revenues exceed $10 billion annually, nearly double the amount Americans spend going to the movies. On average, American children who have home video game systems play with them about ninety minutes a day."
The kids are changing with the technology -- how could they not be? They are riding the technology curve in a way we are not and never can. On many levels it's wonderful to have them exposed to this brave new cyberworld; the opportunities for them to learn, the resources at their fingertips, are tremendous and hard to fathom. The World Wide Web is like a vast, almost limitless encyclopedia, and unlike Encyclopaedia Britannica, kids can talk to it and it talks back. So it's especially disconcerting to see armies of these very kids wandering through cyberspace mutilating and killing everything in their path -- and having a great time doing it. It's the dark side of heightened technology, but one to which we ought to be paying much closer attention.
More than any other aspect of these new video games, it's the accuracy of the simulations -- the carnage, the blood, the guts -- that is so advanced. Realism is the Holy Grail of the video game industry. And the latest technology leaves little to the imagination -- the simulations seem less fake, and therefore more effective. Compare it, if you will, to a well-made horror movie with a very believable plot, set in a town not unlike your own, with characters that could be right out of your neighborhood. The reality of it will undoubtedly affect you, more so certainly than watching a low-budget picture like Godzilla.
So, immersed as we are in technology in all facets of our lives, it's not hard to understand why children's games are more advanced and sophisticated -- they're like everything else these days. But the fact that, in the last few years, video game manufacturers have chosen to amplify gruesome violence (note that 49 percent of young teens indicate a preference for violent games, while only 2 percent prefer educational ones), to make it a mainstay in their products, seems a direct result of where the television and movie industry have taken their content.
The relationship between viewing violent television and films and being attracted to these elevated forms of interactive violent video games is well documented. We've talked a lot about the desensitizing effect on-screen violence has on kids, and how it fosters a need for more graphic, real-life displays of carnage and mayhem to keep kids interested. The entertainment industry knows this better than anyone, and the makers of these games are way past the curve. Graphically violent video games like Doom, Postal, Duke Nukem, and Mortal Kombat serve up just what the doctor did not order.
And you can see why. The real selling point with these games is that you get to pull the trigger, you inflict the damage, rather than just watching someone else do it. As graphic as the violence is on TV and in movies, it can't quite compete with a medium where you, not an actor, can control the action. It's a whole new level of involvement -- and it's terrifying.
Any teacher or coach of young people will tell you that hands-on experience is what teaches best. Repetition of movements and the hand-eye connection are invaluable for learning most skills. And, especially with children, hands-on learning is usually a lot more fun and interesting than the alternatives. It's precisely this that makes interactive video games so potent a learning tool. As researcher Patricia Greenfield points out, "Video games are the first medium to combine visual dynamism with an active participatory role for the child." Television, film, and video game violence may all be imaginary, but the latter lets you put your hands on it, aim, and fire. We don't think we have to tell you how deadly the combination can be of viewing ultraviolent images with the amusement park fun of shooting at things until they drop.
So it's no surprise that violent video games are very habit-forming. Parents we have spoken to are alarmed at not just the violent images in the games but the amount of time their children spend playing them. If nothing else, it proves how effective these things are. More than 60 percent of children report that they play video games longer than they intend to play. The interactive quality, the intensity of the violence, the physiological reactions, all serve to connect the player's feelings of exhilaration and accomplishment directly to the violent images. And "good" feelings keep the player wanting to play. Countless parents try desperately to keep video game play within certain time limits, but it's a huge challenge ... a parental battle we often lose. Once kids get hooked, it's difficult to unhook them. Both home and arcade games make extensive use of reinforcement schedules for both the acquisition and maintenance of the habit. According to Jane Healey, in her classic book Endangered Minds, here are the basic elements that make video games addictive:
1. The player experiences feelings of mastery and control. The less sense of power the child or teen feels in his or her life, the more this element may become important as an addictive factor. (In fact, studies show that generally boys' preferences for violent video games are associated with low self-competence -- in school, in personal relationships, and in general behavior. For girls, more time playing video or computer games is associated with lower self-esteem.)
2. The level of play is exactly calibrated to the player's ability level. Rather than coping with the challenging problems in the real world, young people are easily drawn into following the more made-to-order sequence in video games.
3. The player receives immediate and continual reinforcement, which make the games particularly addictive.
4. The player can escape life and be immersed in a constructed reality that seems to be totally in his/her control. (We all know that one of the anxieties of being young is a lack of control. Parents, teachers, clergy, and caregivers tell you what to do, and it's not always very much fun. It's one reason why children have active imaginations and like to construct their own worlds. And it's usually healthy for them to do so -- if they are exercising their own imagination. Video game manufacturers understand this desire -- and they give kids all the things they want, and for as long as they're willing to stick with it.)
As children and youth are playing these games for ten or more hours a week, they are not solving and negotiating conflicts with their peers, and they are missing priceless opportunities to gain needed cooperative learning and social skills. Instead, the world constructed for them by video game manufacturers comes to determine their ability levels for successful negotiation with people in the real world. The more they become inept at dealing effectively with real-world people and situations, the more likely it is that they will lose themselves in the video games, particularly violent ones that ensure feelings of control, mastery, and exhilaration. And as the real world of slowness and struggle, decisions and demands becomes less appealing, children's psychological and physiological systems become more affected by violent video games.
In a study on arcade use among adolescents, "regular" arcade visitors varied from the more "casual" visitors (those who visited less often) in their orientation to, and experience in, arcades. Regular visitors were more likely to score positively on indices screening for addiction. This study raised important questions about children's vulnerabilities to potentially addictive technologies and their access to violent video games at arcades.
But children do not have to go to arcades to become addicted to video games. Home video games can have the same effect. "A definite drug response" is how Dr. Donald Shifrin, a pediatrician and the American Academy of Pediatrics representative on the National Television Violence Study, describes what he sees when children and teens play video games at home. "When youngsters get into video games the object is excitement. The child then builds a tolerance for that level of excitement. Now the child mimics drug-seeking behavior ... initially there's experimentation, behavior to seek the drug FOR INCREASING LEVELS OF EXCITEMENT, and then there is habituation, when more and more of the drug is ACTUALLY NECESSARY for these feelings of excitement. There is no need to have a video game system in the house, especially for young children. There is no middle ground for me on this. I view it as a black-and-white issue like helmets for bike safety. If parents want, rent a video game for a day and then return it. Everyone goes to Disneyland for a day. No one goes there DAILY."
Are children and teens who regularly play violent video games in a permanent state of arousal? We know that merely watching violent imagery physiologically arouses both children and adults. Early experiments using physiological measures of arousal such as galvanic skin response, heart rate, and respiratory changes found that children are emotionally responsive to even animated television violence. If being a spectator to the sensational arouses our children, what happens when they get to engage in the simulated slaughter?
The effects of violent video games on young adults' arousal levels, hostile feelings, and aggressive thoughts have been measured. Results indicated that college students who had played a violent virtual reality game had a higher heart rate, reported more dizziness and nausea, and exhibited more aggressive thoughts in a post-test than those who had played a nonviolent game.
Another study examined differences in cardiovascular reactions and hostility following nonviolent play and violent video game play. The subjects were thirty male college undergraduate students. Only male subjects were used because most video games are male oriented, males frequent video game arcades more often than do females, and the gender gap in video game play widens with age until the undergraduate years. Hostility and cardiovascular reactivity were examined after subjects played either a nonviolent game of billiards or a violent video game. The video game, Mortal Kombat, was presented in either a less violent (MK1) or a more violent (MK2) version. Results indicated that subjects who played the video game had higher heart rate reactivity than those who played billiards. Subjects who played the MK2 version showed greater systolic blood pressure reactivity than those who played the MKl version or billiards. Subjects who played MK2 scored higher on the hostility measures than those who played MK1, who in turn scored higher than those who played billiards.
These two studies indicate that adults, with fully developed brains and central nervous systems, can be impacted negatively by violent video games. What about children and teens whose brains and response mechanisms are in the process of development? They are much more vulnerable to physiological arousal and conditioning effects.
A real -- and the newest -- concern we have with our children's exposure to violent video games is what the devices teach them physically. The mechanical, interactive quality of a "First Person Shooter" game like Doom or 007 Golden Eye makes it so much more dangerous to society than images on a television screen, however violent. "Why?" we are constantly asked. "It's a game. It may be violent and it's probably better our children weren't exposed to it, but ... " Well, it's a lot more than that. Certain types of these "games" are actually killing simulators, and they teach our kids to kill, much the same way the astronauts on Apollo 11 learned how to fly to the moon without ever leaving the ground. Believe it or not, simulators can be that good. Sounds far-fetched, we know. But consider the following.
The military learned in World War II that there is a vast gulf, a leap, between being an ordinary citizen and being someone who can aim and fire a gun at another human being with intent to kill, even in war. They discovered that firing at bull's-eye targets in training did not properly prepare soldiers for combat. Bull's-eye targets are not humans; they are not even simulated humans. And shooting at a bull's-eye target may teach someone the mechanics of aiming a gun, pulling the trigger, and dealing with the recoil, but it doesn't teach what it takes to look at another human being in the eyes, lift up a weapon, and knowingly try to take their life. Soldiers in that war spent a lot of time firing their guns into the air or not at all. In fact, the firing rate was a mere 15 percent among riflemen, which, from a military perspective, is like a 15 percent literacy rate among librarians.
The army's first simulators used "simulated people" or silhouettes as targets, and that appears to have been sufficient to increase the firing manyfold. But pop-up targets, firing ranges, and bullets are expensive (bullets for a 9 mm pistol cost over twenty cents each). Improved technology now allows these communities to train on computer simulators -- to learn how to shoot, where to shoot, how to maneuver through possibly deadly combat situations, how to tell enemy from friend, and, most important, how to kill. The entire event of killing in combat can be simulated by a computer.
There are three things you need in order to shoot and kill effectively and efficiently. From a soldier in Vietnam to an eleven-year-old in Jonesboro, anyone who does not have all three will essentially fail in any endeavor to kill. First, you need a gun. Next you need the skill to hit a target with that gun. And finally you need the will to use that gun. The gun, the skill, and the will. Of these three factors, the military knows that the killing simulators take care of two out of three by nurturing both the skill and the will to kill a fellow human being.
Operant conditioning is a very powerful procedure of stimulus-response training, which gives a person the skill to act under stressful conditions. A benign example is the use of flight simulators to train pilots. An airline pilot in training sits in front of a flight simulator for endless, mind-numbing hours; he is taught to react in a certain way when a particular stimulus warning light goes on. When another warning light goes on, a different reaction is necessary. Stimulus-response, stimulus-response, stimulus-response. One day the pilot is actually flying a jumbo jet, the plane is going down, and three hundred people are screaming behind him. He's scared out of his wits, but he does the right thing. Why? Because he's been conditioned to respond in a particular way to this crisis situation. He reacts from a conditioned response rather than making a cerebral decision. Thinking too much in these types of situations may mean that you will be dead before you do something effective.
Today soldiers learn to fire at realistic, man-shaped silhouettes that pop up in their field of vision. This "simulated" human being is the conditioning stimulus. The trainee has only a split second to engage the target. The conditioned response is to shoot the target, and then it drops. Stimulus-response, stimulus-response, stimulus-response -- soldiers and police officers experience hundreds of repetitions of this. Later, when they're out on the battlefield or walking a beat and somebody pops up with a gun, reflexively they will shoot, and shoot to kill.
These devices are used extensively, and the scientific data on their effectiveness is exhaustive. It began with flight simulators and tank crew simulators half a century ago. Their introduction is undeniably responsible for increasing the firing rate from 15 to 20 percent in World War II to 95 percent in Vietnam. In the Falklands war, the Argentine soldiers, trained to fire at bull's-eye targets, had a firing rate of approximately 10 to 15 percent. The British, trained to kill using modern methods, had well over a 90 percent firing rate. Thus we know that, all other factors being equal, 75 percent to 80 percent of the killing on the modern battlefield is a direct result of the simulators.
Now these simulators are in our homes and arcades -- in the form of violent video games! If you don't believe us, you should know that one of the most effective and widely used simulators developed by the United States Army in recent years, MACS (Multipurpose Arcade Combat Simulator), is nothing more than a modified Super Nintendo game (in fact, it closely resembles the popular game Duck Hunt, except with a plastic M16 firing at typical military targets on a TV screen). It is an excellent, ubiquitous military marksmanship-training device. The FATS trainer (Fire Arms Training Simulator), used by most law enforcement agencies in this country, is more or less identical to the ultraviolent video arcade game Time Crisis. Both teach the user (or player) to hit a target, both help rehearse the act of killing, and both come complete with guns that have recoil -- the slide slams back when the trigger is pulled.
In a bold advertising campaign, the brochure for the home version of this game, in particular, asserts: "Time Crisis uses the revolutionary Guncon, the most advanced light gun ever made for any home system. The Guncon connects to the video output of the PlayStation and it actually stores the screen image in the gun button so players can duck and reload .... It's time we got the handguns off the streets and back where they belong -- in the hands of America's youth."
We're not the only ones suggesting that violent video games and military simulators share the same technology. The wording in this ad for the game device WingMan Force puts it as bluntly as is possible: "[WingMan Force is] based on the same exacting technology used for aerospace, medical and military stimulators. It uses high-precision steel cable drives so you can actually feel the detailed environment of your favorite games ... " The ad goes on to remind us, "Psychiatrists say it is important to feel something when you kill."
The military and law enforcement agencies across the country are none too pleased that these devices are in the hands of civilians, especially kids. In a lawsuit against the video game manufacturers that has come out of the killings in Paducah, Kentucky, the heads of several major national and international law enforcement training organizations have offered to testify that these video games are identical to law enforcement firearms training devices, except with the safety catch turned off. That should say a lot. The video game industry boasts about the real quality of their products; the military and police are wondering why on earth such technology is on the street. What more proof do we need that these games are anything but games?
Across America we are reaping the bitter harvest of this "training" as ever more kids shoot their girlfriends or their teachers or other individuals that they have grudges against. A horrific development in this is that rather than just stopping with their intended target, these kids keep firing -- and a simple grudge turns into a mass murder. The point is, these games are indeed affecting our children and we can't hide behind the myriad other excuses when kids "go off." Because when they do, they do so in all the ways these games train them -- to kill every living person in front of them until they run out of bullets or run out of targets. That results in a lot of dead bodies.
Michael Carneal, the fourteen-year-old boy who walked into a Paducah school and opened fire on a prayer group meeting that was breaking up, never moved his feet during his rampage. He never fired far to the right or left, never far up or down. He simply fired once at everything that popped up on his "screen." It is not natural to fire once at each target. The normal, almost universal, response is to fire at a target until it drops and then move on to the next target. This is the defensive reaction that will save our lives, the human instinctual reaction -- eliminate the threat quickly. Not to shoot once and then go on to another target before the first threat has been eliminated. But most video games teach you to fire at each target only once, hitting as many targets as you can as fast as you can in order to rack up a high score. And many video games give bonus effects for head shots. It's awful to note that of Michael Carneal's eight shots he had eight hits, all head and upper torso, three dead and one paralyzed. And this from a kid who, prior to stealing that gun, had never shot a real handgun in his life!
In South Carolina a boy named Wesley Schafer had put hundreds of dollars into point-and-shoot video games. One day he and a buddy of his decided it would be fun to rob the local convenience store. They walked in and Schafer pointed a .38 caliber pistol at the clerk's head. The clerk turned to look at him, and the defendant shot reflexively from a range of about six feet. The bullet hit the clerk right between the eyes and killed him. Afterward, police asked the boy what had happened and why he'd done it. Killing the clerk clearly was not part of their plan -- it was being videotaped from six different directions. Schafer responded, with great anguish and confusion, "I don't know; it was a mistake; it wasn't supposed to happen." Stimulus-response.
In the Jonesboro, Arkansas, shootings, one of the two children (eleven and thirteen) involved had a fair bit of experience shooting real guns, but the other boy, to the best of our knowledge, had none. These two avid video game players fired a combined total of twenty-seven shots from a range of over one hundred yards, and hit fifteen people. They strategically trapped their victims, lined them up, and shot with deadly accuracy. Battle-scarred veterans and military analysts reacted with amazement at the accuracy of their shooting, on one hand, and the military strategy involved in setting up their "kill zone," on the other. Both skills are taught by an array of home and arcade video games.
The incident that really brought the issue to the public's attention, though, was the Columbine High School massacre, in Littleton, Colorado. It was well documented that Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris were literally obsessed with playing the video game Doom and other such games. And they were very good at it. These boys, like the other boys mentioned, practiced for hundreds and hundreds of hours, perfecting their craft. Therefore, it should not be altogether surprising that their killing spree resembled something out of the cyberworld of a typical Doom scenario. (In fact, Eric Harris reprogrammed his edition of Doom so that it looked like his neighborhood, complete with the houses of the people he hated.) They moved from room to room, stalking their prey and killing almost everyone in their path. And, not unlike most kids' response to video game mayhem, Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris laughed the killings off.
The realism of a game like Doom, played on the home computer, can be extreme, especially with the multitude of "add-on" packages available to upgrade systems. For example, in the wake of the Columbine massacre, many in the game industry claimed that Doom, played only with a mouse or keyboard, can't possibly teach a player real combat skills. First, we have to understand that even when Doom is played with a mouse, it is still a good enough combat simulator that the Marine Corps uses a modified version of it (called Marine Doom) to teach recruits how to kill. They use it as a tactical training device, as opposed to teaching motor skills -- although when used with a pistol grip joystick it has some value there, too. Its primary value is in developing the will to kill by repeatedly rehearsing the act until it feels natural.
It's safe to say that such technology is much more dangerous in the hands of kids than among soldiers and cops -- these above examples prove that, as does common sense. There often are no safeguards at home and in arcades, no supervision, nor anyone around to put this technology into perspective for a child. In the military and law enforcement worlds, the right option is often not to shoot, and recruits receive extensive training about this. Often, recruits are reprimanded, punished, or even "failed" and kicked out for making too many mistakes -- that is, for shooting the wrong targets. But when a kid puts his quarter in a video machine, there is always the intention to shoot. There is never an incentive not to shoot. And there's always some stimulus to keep excitement high, heart rate up, thinking functions closed down. This process is extraordinarily powerful and frightening. The result is ever more homemade pseudosociopaths who kill reflexively, even when they don't intend to.
The Duke Nukem series provides a good current example of just how gruesome and explicit the violence of the home video games has recently become. In this popular "shooter" game, the player is behind a weapon of choice, shooting everything in sight to get to the next level in order to shoot everything in sight. The "shooter," Duke, who is controlled by the player and looks somewhat like the Terminator, moves through pornography shops, where he finds posters of scantily clad women he can use for target practice. In advanced levels, bonus points are awarded for the murder of female prostitutes, women who are usually naked. Duke often encounters defenseless, bound women, some of whom are even conveniently tied to columns and plead, "Kill me, kill me."
A game called Postal takes the horror one step further. The user gets to "go postal" and receives points for killing as many innocent victims as possible while they beg for mercy. Likewise Redneck Rampage, where you can do the same with farm animals and farmers. The latest technology permits you to scan pictures of your fellow students and teachers from your high school yearbook and "morph" them onto the faces of the people you kill. Like many "First Person Shooter" games, Quake is often played with a joystick, which is really more like a pistol grip complete with trigger, that lets the child point (and thereby move the gun on the screen) and shoot (by pulling the trigger, which causes the gun on the screen to fire and recoil). Then there is House of the Dead, in which you blow away chunks of the bodies you fire at and get clean kills only for head shots; and CarnEvil, where you fire a pump-action shotgun and learn how to handle that skill. A new game on the market, Kingpin: Life of Crime, is raising a lot of eyebrows due to its heightened realism and level of violence. Experts are saying it makes other current games look like B movies. For example, a player can shoot a character in fifteen different places "and see the damage done -- including exit wounds"; the game comes with a sound track from the popular rap group Cypress Hill; and your "enemies" like to remind you that they'll "kick your ass." One ad for the game's release is drawing a lot of fire from parental watchdog groups. It says: "You're Gonna Die."
It's interesting to note that the makers of games like Kingpin assiduously deny that their game is meant for kids or marketed to that group. Indeed, many such games carry warnings and are labeled for a "mature" audience, and they do have increasingly large adult followings. But deny it or not, these games (the word itself suggests that the core audience is young) easily get into the hands of kids. The makers of the games, distributors, store owners, and parents are not exactly as vigilant about stopping children from buying them as they would be if we were talking about, say, cigarettes or pornography. "Unfortunately, video games are stuck with the kiddie label," said Gary Eng Walk in an article in Entertainment Weekly, "and everyone ... tends to drop their guard when letting the rough stuff find its way to the under-seventeen crowd." He's right, up to a point. It's hard to deny that many video game producers have actively sought out the "kiddie" label for their products. Obviously, we can't lump all games together, but it's impossible not to see the blatant marketing to children that is going on at all levels. The language of the ads, the highly effective packaging, the million-dollar promotion campaigns are all aimed at fairly young audiences. Either that or extremely immature adults. It's worth noting that the aforementioned Duke Nukem 3-D is available at toy stores. In many toy stores the ultraviolent video games are not in a different area, hidden from innocent eyes. In fact, the larger stores arrange their video games alphabetically. Duke Nukem, rated M for mature audiences, seventeen and older, is shelved next to Eggs of Steel, a kiddie game about an animated egg. Duke action figures, which are becoming popular with boys eight years old and younger, can be ordered on-line.
The gaming industry can talk all they want about the age groups they're aiming their products at, but the truth is that if ratings were strictly enforced, they would lose countless young consumers. It's no mystery that most people don't even know a rating system exists -- it's hard to tell. Even Doug Lowenstein, of the Interactive Digital Association, admits there is a problem. "[The ratings system] simply doesn't have the visibility and the awareness it should have," he says. "When you talk to everyone from reporters to politicians, and these people think there isn't a system, then it tells you that you have work to do." Indeed.
Leafing through any game magazine can be an eye-opener. "Fatalities can be the best part of Mortal Kombat." (Mortal Kombat action toys are labeled "For children four and up.") A new game for your child's enjoyment is "as easy as killing babies with axes." Another one is "more fun than shooting your neighbor's cat." Capcom's latest Street Fighter proclaims, "The killer in me is just beginning." Robert Lindsey, head of sales and marketing for the U.S. unit of Japan's Capcom, acknowledges that teenagers are an important audience: "I refer [to] them as my early adapters -- if I get them on board, I know I'll get everyone else."
The on-line availability of violent video games is a big part of the problem. Label first-person shooter sites with any warning you want, there's still really nothing to stop a kid with access to a computer from seeing what's there, communicating with other players, and ordering an array of products. In fact, warnings can serve the opposite purpose; most kids we know see them not as a caution but as an advertisement. They want the game to be more violent, more adult. It gives the product validity. Kids have to get past the manned ticket counter to see restricted films; they have to provide proper identification that they are old enough to buy cigarettes and alcohol; but there are no such obstacles in their way if they want to learn all there is to know about Kingpin and other "mature" video games.
So with all the evidence to suggest that these games are dangerous -- that they're modeled after military killing simulators, that they are superviolent and graphic, that the user is rewarded for killing, and that kids are playing with these games way too often and for too long -- it is particularly egregious that they are being marketed to kids, and marketed in ways that highlight all that is bad for them. What kind of message does this send? Well, yet another on-line ad for Kingpin gives us a pretty good indication: "The Creators of Redneck Rampage are about to bring you a new, urban drama that finally proves that crime pays." As we ourselves tolerate these games and even label them fun, we are also telling our children that slower-paced, less emotionally arousing screen fare is boring. Arouse instead of awaken; excite instead of examine; splatter instead of study -- this is what we're telling them. And they're listening.
Stop Teaching Our Kids to Kill: A Call to Action Against TV
14 posts
• Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2
Re: Stop Teaching Our Kids to Kill: A Call to Action Against
by admin » Fri Sep 13, 2013 1:37 am
- admin
- Site Admin
- Posts: 37493
- Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am
Re: Stop Teaching Our Kids to Kill: A Call to Action Against
by admin » Fri Sep 13, 2013 1:43 am
PART 1 OF 2
5: DON'T JUST STAND THERE ... DO SOMETHING!
We are both parents -- five sons in total -- so we know firsthand the incredible challenges of raising kids in the latter part of the twentieth century. We also realize that instructing children to "just turn off" violent programming in all its forms, or "just say no" to drugs, alcohol, and premarital sex, doesn't address how complicated these issues are or the circumstances in which children face them. Although the "just turn it off" option can be part of an overall solution, it is becoming nearly impossible for kids, especially, to do so because of the proliferation of media entertainment outside the home and the peer pressure they encounter daily.
We are talking to more and more parents of all ages (and with all ages of children) who know that most of what their kids are watching and playing is not good for them. The problem is that they don't know how to tackle the issue in any meaningful way. The best intentions are great, but without practical, usable solutions, they may not make much difference. Whether their children are in their first years and are only starting to be exposed to violent entertainment, or are much older and have been exposed to it for a while, parents are feeling outmanned in this war. The size of the entertainment behemoth, the impact it has on children at all levels, and its obvious lack of restraint when it comes to airing violence, be it in movies, on television, or in video games, have grown at a bewilderingly rapid rate. Add the fact that kids are spending increasingly inordinate amounts of their time watching slasher films and playing games like Doom, and many of us just throw up our arms and surrender. Well, don't. Keeping parents, teachers -- everyone -- from raising the white flag is our whole reason for writing this book. Educating our children and shaping them into functioning, levelheaded adults must always be within our grasp. Educating ourselves on this issue is the best place to start.
That said, we can focus on the fact that as parents we do have a lot of influence and authority. It's knowing how to use our position that can make all the difference with our kids -- and on the impact of the violence they absorb.
It's important to remember that children of different ages and stages of development need slightly different rules and guidelines. The younger the child, the more important it is to protect him or her against all forms of violence in entertainment. As children develop literacy skills, higher-level thinking abilities, and more self-monitoring and self-calming capabilities, they are better equipped to discuss violent imagery, understand its impact, and, ultimately, deal with it more effectively. This is what we think all parents want for their children -- the ability to respond thoughtfully to sensational, glamorized portrayals of violence. And for that to happen, it means we have to become very involved, right from the beginning.
The big question is: How do we protect our kids and at the same time empower them to know what's going on? Or, put slightly differently, how do we protect their best interests without smothering them in the process? Start by remembering a few guidelines.
First, dealing effectively with media violence in the home is a process. If your kids have seen more than you would have liked them to -- if you think they may be lost causes -- take action anyway, knowing that steps you take now to remedy the situation will pay huge dividends in the long run. If you are new parents and want to know how to get started with your baby, begin by understanding that your ideal may not always be obtainable -- we all run into stumbling blocks, and it's not the end of the world. We have heard many colleagues who are child development specialists, doctors, psychologists, and media literacy professionals lament the amount of time their own children spend in front of the TV, or the way their kids are enamored with Hulk Hogan or with playing Duke Nukem. The point is, you can read all the pertinent studies, do everything in your power to keep violent programming at bay, and have a wonderful, loving relationship with your kids, and they'll still probably go through phases that seem a little scary to you. So it's important to remind ourselves that we, as parents, are in it for the long haul. It's the cumulative effects of our consistent attitudes, actions, and values that will educate our children, not a few isolated incidents.
Second, we want to stress the notion of perception. How do your kids perceive your stance on media violence? Children, as we have demonstrated, imitate what they see and are very affected by their surroundings. And if they don't see and hear you condemning abject, graphic screen violence, they will not comprehend why it's bad for them. They're taking their cues from you, so make it clear that violence in all its forms is unacceptable. Very young children need to hear statements like: "If people truly cared about kids they wouldn't put that on for you to watch." "You are not old enough to understand that show, so we are going to switch to another station. Let's see what else is on that will teach you good things." Older children and teens are hungry for your guidance and input, even though they take pains to act otherwise. Still, it's often hard to sit them down and discuss violent screen images without having them think you are cramping their style. But it can be done. Suggest watching movies at home together; compare older films with violence (Patton, Ben Hur, for example) to newer films (such as Die Hard 2) and discuss the differences; chat about why certain kinds of entertainment are offensive and belittling to their audiences. As we share our perceptions with our kids, they become more perceptive -- it's that simple.
Our third point has to do with power. How can we help our children feel powerful so they don't need to feed off the pseudo-power of, say, a Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle? Authentic power has nothing to do with physical force, domination, coercion, or inflicting suffering. As we help a child acquire a quiet, inner knowing of self-confidence and self-respect, TV thugs or video game madmen become less glamorous and more inane. Kids do possess a natural fascination with physical power, so why not steer them in a better direction by letting them study a martial art? Many martial arts instructors are excellent role models for teaching power and knowing the right time and place to use it. Other parents have found that when their kids develop a talent in music or art, they are more self-reliant and less screen-enamored. There are myriad ways we can build a child's confidence and sense of empowerment, and once that has been accomplished we're halfway there.
It's always a good idea to sit down with your kids and discuss the misuse of power in violent screen portrayals. As we've said, the worst kind of screen violence, the most reckless and irresponsible use of it, is when it is stylized, graphic, and there's no sense of real aftermath to the action. Children and teens both need to be continually reminded that those who are feeling small, afraid, weak, and helpless are often the first to resort to violence. And no matter how good it looks on-screen, how cool it makes the perpetrator seem, it's important for kids to understand the difference between domination over someone and control of a situation or event; that a powerful person is one who knows they always have a choice -- the choice to harm or the choice to help.
Finally, keep perspective on the situation. One divorced mother we know found out that her kids were watching all kinds of violent fare every weekend when they spent time at their father's house. She was very concerned about the situation and didn't know what to do. Our advice was simple. Start by doing what you can and then work from there. This woman was doing all the right things at her house and she did have custody of her children five out of seven days. But she made sure she carved out time with them and paved the way for discussing the issue of violent entertainment. The children were ages eight and ten when she began this "ritual," and she invited them to discuss what they watched on television at their dad's. The floodgates opened. They were consumed with what they took in on their weekend visits but knew it wasn't all good, clean fun. But like a lot of kids, they had no framework in which to discuss what they saw. Their mother talked with them, asked them questions, modeled appropriate reactions, and encouraged them to think and question everything they saw. Her children are now well-adjusted young adults with keen insights into the human condition far beyond their years. The lesson here is: don't overreact and don't ever think the game is lost.
These guidelines offer a solid framework in which to work with your children to lower their intake of violent programming and game playing. The following hints get down to the nitty-gritty of everyday life -- collectively, call them a blueprint for action on the home front.
ESTABLISH A FEW RULES AND STRIVE FOR CONSISTENCY
Until the entertainment industry gets it, either by legislative force, parental pressure, or some epiphany on their part, it's basically up to us to set boundaries for our children concerning violent entertainment. So where to start? The average American child watches four hours of television each day through the most formative years, until age eighteen. So let's start here, by decreasing the amount of time your child spends in front of the television; for when we do that we also decrease the chances of kids running into inappropriate content in the first place. We realize that reducing the amount of viewing time is perhaps the toughest part of this equation, but you'll get results. Moderate viewers who watch one or two hours of television a day are much more likely to have other areas of interest and be more successful in school than are heavy viewers. So the bottom line, as advised by the American Academy of Pediatrics, is to reduce all screen time (including TV and arcade video games, handheld video games, and computers, along with TV and video) to one or two hours a day. (There are those families that are adopting a "no television" policy with their children and getting good results. Although this is not a viable solution for many parents, and we're not saying that television is completely devoid of good programming for children, completely cutting out television from a child's diet is working for some.)
Here are some tips to making this goal a reality: Ensure that kids finish their homework before they watch television; use a timer to indicate when video game or computer play must end; create a "budget" of ten hours of screen time weekly -- and enforce it. As well, make time on the weekend to sit down as a family and figure out what the kids will watch during the upcoming week. Will a TV program or a video rental be something you want to use while you get dinner on the table some nights? Can you count on these programs or videos to be safe? Let the kids make decisions based on choices that you offer them; getting them involved in the process of choosing when and what they will watch will reinforce healthy TV and video habits. With this practice they will learn over time to monitor their own viewing and playing habits.
It's especially important to note that if a child is experiencing difficulties, such as behavior or learning problems, or hyperactivity, overuse of TV and video games usually exacerbates the problem, taxing parental patience, and adding to the child's stress. In cases such as these, the less screen time the better.
Another area that parents can concentrate on is the physical placement in the home of the television set and/or computer. Needless to say, we strongly suggest to parents that their children not have television sets in their bedrooms. We think the same when it comes to computers. Of course, there are exceptions, especially with computers, as their use pertains to learning and homework, but it really is best in most cases to avoid having children in front of either device without some kind of supervision. So put this electronic furniture in the family areas, where you can be around. You don't have to be hovering like a hawk all day and night, but it will certainly be harder for kids to spend hours a day watching violent programming or playing point-and-shoot video games. And it will definitely be easier for you to be part of the process.
A lot of people ask us about the V-chip. Can that help you set boundaries? Well, yes and no. You can block violent content, but determining what material to block may get a little confusing. You can't really rely on the TV ratings system. According to the 1998 report "State of Children's Television," which examined 1,190 shows across broadcast, cable, and public television, 75 percent of children's shows containing three or more malicious acts of violence carried no indicator of violence, such as the FV label for "fantasy violence." According to the report, the inconsistencies leave parents using the V-chip with a no-win situation.
BUILD CHILDREN'S LANGUAGE AND READING SKILLS
The best way to counter a negative is with a positive. So help your children to become articulate readers and writers. A well-developed language system gives the brain a well-developed mental function. Since the prefrontal cortex is an important component in dampening impulsive, aggressive behavior, children and teens with strong language abilities and problem-solving skills are more apt to be able to control themselves.
Some researchers believe that literacy skills actually prevent violent behavior. Consider this observation by Dr. Bruce Perry, the director of CIVITAS Child Trauma Programs at Baylor College of Medicine and Texas Children's Hospital:
This is not to say that smart, literate people do not commit crimes, but they do commit fewer than others. It should give us pause when we consider how many millions of adults in America are functionally illiterate.
It may sound like a simple solution -- too simple to be believable -- that literacy skills can act as a buffer to potentially violent behavior. But the more a child is able to verbalize and think on higher levels, the easier it will be to teach children about consequences of violence. In addition, literacy skills give kids a profound edge in coming to terms with screen portrayals of violence. A rich vocabulary along with know-how at self-expression gives kids essential tools for articulating feelings, opinions, and ideas about media violence that a less literate child does not have.
Parents hear this mantra from teachers often, but we cannot stress it enough: Read aloud to your child. This is so important, especially in a culture where the visual image has replaced listening to language. The more TV that is watched in the home, the less conversation there is. A recent Canadian study demonstrated that 40 percent of parents could not remember a time when they ate their evening meal with the TV off! And an American study has shown that 82 percent of parents of elementary school-age children do not encourage reading at home. This is way off track. If we want to help our children grow minds that can resist and understand media violence, we need to make language activities a family priority. Turn off the TV and talk and read.
When children and teens are watching TV they are usually not talking, and thus are not learning to express themselves or their ideas. They certainly are not reading and exercising their imaginations. And although they are listening to words spoken on the screen, most of what they listen to are sound bites lacking enough linguistic complexity to build their language abilities. Also, salient visual images often get in the way of paying much attention to the language. When children under research conditions watch a TV program whose audio track differs from its visual images, many times what they remember as the "story" is the visual display. TV also can't respond to the child; it can't ask or answer a question or repeat or slow down or stop to give the child time to absorb what's being said. And much of the time the images are coming in faster than the child can thoughtfully process them. The more violent the program, the more fast-paced it will be. One of the more depressing sights for us is the look of a child in front of the TV as he or she watches hours of mindless, pointless violence (or even mindless and pointless nonviolent drama or comedy). They look catatonic; they seem to register little or nothing, as if their small brains are being fried, which is similar to what's happening.
Pictures on the screen are immediately accessible. As Dr. Russell Harter, a major researcher in the area of children and literacy, points out, "Television ... is not very symbolic .... It makes things easy to understand." Language, though, in any form, whether it be print, sound, Braille, or sign language, is basically symbolic. It is a representation of concepts and thoughts whose meaning must be unlocked by the workings of the cerebral cortex. Watching pictures on the screen does not in and of itself require mental gymnastics, especially for children's developing brains. It is only when conversation is added -- a question is asked or a comment given -- that the child develops the cognitive structure to make sense of the images. A TV in the house doesn't necessarily mean that family members will stop talking to each other. But unless adults intentionally engage children in conversation about what's coming across the screen, children can grow up to prefer passive viewing to active thinking while they watch. When it's violence they're watching, the effects can be devastating.
Children at any age can be captivated by a story on audiotape. Most teens will enjoy listening to a classic such as the Lord of the Rings trilogy -- about twelve hours of mental gymnastics! Young children can learn to operate their own tape recorders and listen to twenty- to thirty-minute story tapes, readily available at libraries. As kids take in language without too many accompanying pictures, they must make up the pictures in their own minds. Even if we read a beautifully illustrated book out loud, there may be twenty or so pictures. But not every picture is given, as is the case with TV programs or movies. A daily practice of family time where books are shared and discussed goes a long way toward helping children develop both logical, sequential thinking patterns and metaphoric muscles capable of imaginative thought.
DISCUSS THE PRODUCTION TECHNIQUES USED TO MAKE VIOLENCE SEEM "COOL"
A basic notion that children need to understand as early as possible is that all media is intentionally constructed for specific audience reactions. Nowhere could this be truer than for violent entertainment. We are not advocating that you show violence to your children, but rather, when they do happen to see it, you can point out the production techniques that make it so appealing. For instance, demonstrate how background music makes the action seem thrilling, as does slow motion; show them how a close-up of a gun to someone's head plays on strong emotions such as terror; help kids understand how much the producer, director, video game designer wants to draw in an audience.
Years ago, a movie critic pointed out how the difference in point of view in horror films spoke volumes. Almost always, when the camera's point of view was the villain's or monster's, the film was sadistic, gratuitous, and of little or no value other than invoking terror in its audience. Explain this to kids; help them deconstruct on-screen violence and let them see the strings attached and why and how they're being pulled. In a sense, the emperor has no clothes, and by pointing out and talking about all the tricks and special effects, we help demystify violent imagery for kids.
The same goes for violent video games, but we're up against a bigger problem with that technology. For one thing, the whole game world is more shut off from adults than are television and movies. It's not really on our radar. We make a practice of flipping channels, going to movies, renting videos, but you won't find too many parents in video arcades or hunched over Play-Stations. What makes video games potentially more dangerous to children is that they can create their own reality with these interactive toys -- it's them and the action, no distractions. Still, take an interest in this technology. Try to sit down and play the games with your children. Point out how often women are placed in victim positions; how the pace is fast to keep you hyped up; that shooting a target over and over again is not a particularly great way to spend one's money and time. For your own sake, pick up a gaming magazine like PC Gamer and check out the ads. See what you're up against: "Gratuitous Violence Is 200 Times Faster with a D-Link Network"; "No Cure. No Hope. Only Death"; "Destroying Your Enemies Isn't Enough ... You Must Devour Their Souls." Parents we know had no idea this stuff even existed, and we can tell you that their jaws dropped when they watched, played, and read about what's going on in the video game industry today. But it spurred them to act, and it put them on more equal footing with their kids when it came time to talk about it.
As we explain what's happening behind the scenes, kids will be less likely to take what's happening in front of them too seriously. Even very young children can be taught the concept of authorship. They hear about authors of books, but not usually about scriptwriters for violent cartoons. With teens we can remember that they like to test, question, and poke around with new ideas.
Kids don't like to be seen as the fool, either. They aren't naturally thinking through the violence-as-entertainment angle, but with a little encouragement from us, they may decide for themselves that screen violence is stupid, developed by adults to cater to the lowest common denominator and remove cash from wallets. Let's not underestimate their curiosity and adaptability, nor lower our expectations to the depths of the entertainment industry's expectations for our kids.
EXAMINE SENSATIONAL VS. SENSITIVE PORTRAYALS OF SCREEN VIOLENCE
The age and stage of development matters in the interpreting of visually violent images. If younger than eight, youngsters should not see any sensational, gratuitous violence -- ever. As children become verbally able to express ideas and analyze information, they can learn to understand, discuss, and appreciate sensitive portrayals of violence that can teach empathy and respect for life. The shooting of the dog in the movie Sounder is an example of such violence. The dog, the movie's namesake, symbolizes the unity and love of the family. When it is shot, it whimpers and runs away (and will reappear later in the story, but you don't know that at the time). There is nothing gratuitous about this scene. A child watching it can learn about suffering and cruelty. It provides parents with a wonderful opportunity to discuss the consequences of hurting an animal or a person. It can be a catalyst for good.
The movie Fresh can do the same for teens. Although rated R, most likely for a few graphically violent scenes, the film shows realistic violence with a message. Yes, the violence is graphic. But the immense consequences of the violence for a twelve-year-old boy are also shown graphically. Violent acts exact high prices. Watched with a parent or caring adult, Fresh can give a fifteen-year-old a perspective on violence that can't be found in shoot-'em-up action adventure flicks or the latest high-tech thriller. More of these types of movies need to be made -- films that parents can watch with teens and then discuss afterward, that show the human condition in all of its ugliness, but show it sensitively, without fanfare, and devoid of special effects. The response the producers obviously want to provoke is that viewers walk away shaking their heads in disgust at the villains and the harm they caused.
Most kids can't reach that level of response when violence is portrayed as glamorous. In fact, with all the sensationalistic splatter available to our kids on TV, in movies, and in video games, the only normal reaction they can have is to think it's cool to kill someone. We have discussed this previously, and it's important for parents to be aware of the differences between sensational and sensitive portrayals of violence. There are characteristics for both that are easily detected. Sensational violence features lots of action, fast-paced filming, and tons of special effects. The killing looks like fun, the perpetrator has little or no remorse for what he's done, and in the end there are no consequences. You as the viewer walk away psyched up, thrilled, feeling good. Characteristics of sensitive portrayals of violence shouldn't give you that high. Entertainment like this is more slow-moving, with more dialogue, to provoke thinking as well as feeling; the violence, and there's no need to show too much of it, should upset you and elicit compassion for what you've seen. There should be no suggestion that the suffering, murder, and mayhem is fun.
We all know the differences between good and bad portrayals of violence, and we all know it's a battle to get kids interested in something more slow-paced and thoughtful when they are surrounded by entertainment that is just the opposite. But understand that we have a choice.
DEAL DIRECTLY WITH TV NEWS PROGRAMS
We haven't tackled violence on the TV news because it is quite different from the entertainment we have been discussing. Still, it's on-screen, it can be horribly graphic, and it can be used almost purely to keep audiences in place. Also, we shouldn't overlook the fact that overexposure to violence in the news can lead to a child seeking it out in entertainment. Much of what is covered on television news involves violence and the most negative aspects of human behavior. In fact, we as adults are often stunned by the number of bloody images and bad messages that fill the average half hour of news. We often come away from it wondering if anything good happens anywhere in our world. Although the networks would like to think that they are offering us a truly balanced version of what's happening around us, we all know that that is almost never the case. Just as in fictional entertainment, violent stories and accompanying images are often used on the news to manipulate the viewer. That said, letting children, especially very young children, watch the news on a regular basis can be very harmful to their worldview.
Preschoolers are definitely not ready to watch TV news. There is no news program written for the three- to five-year-old set. And there shouldn't be. The evening news offers too many displays of graphic violence that would be very difficult to explain to a young child. It is a mistake to even have the evening news on when preschoolers are around. As we have shown earlier, for the young child, images are alive -- they have power. With children under age eight, parents might consider watching a later news program when the child is asleep, watching the news while a spouse or an older child plays with the younger child in another room, taping the news program to view later, or listening to radio news instead. Viewing news programs -- ones without violent images -- that are designed especially for children in the eight-to-ten-year range, such as Linda Ellerbee's Nick News, will keep them abreast of current events without the sensational violence. But, as with young children, there is no overwhelming reason they should see news shows produced for adults.
By age eleven or twelve, most kids will have developed the necessary language and thinking skills to analyze news programs designed for their age group. Many teachers use CNN Newsroom and World View to engage middle-school students in discussions about current events. Families can tape it and watch it at home, too, or kids can watch other news programs designed specifically for them. But be around; answer questions, ask questions, discuss the news, and help your kid put what he sees into context.
Younger teens and high school students can learn a lot from TV news if they know how to approach it. This can be a great starting point for discussing violent topics with them, providing an opportunity to expose teens to a broader view. For instance, a news report on youth gang violence provides the opportunity to discuss the realities and myths about youth violence. There are questions you can ask them, such as: Is this news story covering a violent crime important enough to take up two minutes of 40 million people's time? What do you think about what happened at Littleton, Jonesboro, Paducah? Do you really believe it's necessary to the validity of a story to repeatedly show violent, graphic images? Just as with violent entertainment, get them thinking, help them deconstruct what they see.
CHOOSE SLOWER-PACED, QUALITY SCREEN ENTERTAINMENT FOR YOUR CHILDREN
Slow down the pace of what kids watch. Select TV programs, videos, and video games that have a slower pace and require some thinking. Count the seconds between image changes. If each image changes rapidly, every two or three seconds, the pace is too quick. With image changes that vary in length, children have time to digest what they are seeing and will be conditioned to interact with what they watch rather than merely react to quick impressions.
By providing more slow-moving programs and videos for children, we are reducing their exposure to gratuitous violence, because quick pacing usually means more violent content. A movie or a TV program slow enough to be thought-provoking will probably be nonviolent or less sensationally violent. This isn't a steadfast rule, but it is true in most cases.
Also, our kids want quality. Educational, informational television programs are identified by the label Ell. An important study indicated that children are not turned off by this identification. In fact, 40 percent of ten- to seventeen-year-olds said they would be more likely to watch such a program. This was double the number who said they would be less likely to watch. Seek out entertainment for your child that depicts human diversity, contains sensitive portrayals of suffering and the human condition, reflects your family's values, supports your goals for your child, enhances your child's understanding of self and others, and inspires and encourages prosocial behaviors and attitudes.
REFUSE TO BUY OR CONDONE VIOLENT VIDEO GAMES
The trend of giving video games to toddlers, preschoolers, and elementary school children must stop. Even if parents are introducing only nonviolent video games at this stage of development, it is going to be so much more difficult to keep the kids away from violent ones. Just the nature of video games in and of themselves make them potentially addictive. Video game systems are just not developmentally appropriate for children. The concept of timeliness needs to resurface and take main stage here. What is important and timely at one stage of a child's development can be a disaster at another stage.
Children do not need video games and, in fact, the earlier they are introduced in a child's life, the more likely it is that the child will crave violent ones within a short time. Parents can make it so much easier on themselves by encouraging slower-paced computer games until the child's mental habits are set, usually somewhere around ages twelve to fourteen. The introduction of video games then will be less likely to lead to stimulus addiction and the urge for violent video games as thrill-providing devices. And there are choices: If your child has a predilection for video games at this age, we urge you to read up on and think about buying those games that do not contain gratuitous violence, those that challenge your child to think critically and creatively, and that require perseverance through a mentally challenging problem. There are games that serve as jumping-off points for further study, hobbies, or educational pastimes, games that don't require marksmanship and an ability to shrug off carnage and killing. We have a hard time recommending any type of noneducational video game, but certainly the sports games on the market -- such as basketball, baseball, car racing, or golf -- are preferable to anything with violence in it.
Does such a tactic sound radical? Parents who have taken this advice thank us profusely for the changes they see in their children. Of the hundreds of parents we know who introduced video games to their children when the kids were pre-teens or older, not one of these children became enamored by violent video games. Sure, they played them at friends' houses, even rented some and played them at home. But the overwhelming consensus after they found out what these games were about was: "These are stupid. All you do is go around shooting people. What's fun about that?" As incredible as this may sound, these kids preferred sports games and other types of games that provided a mental challenge. Why? They were not conditioned to kill during the most formative time of their brain development. Rather, their minds (and hearts) received the proper nourishment at the right times. Results were as expected: Thinking, well-functioning kids who found violence distasteful. In other words, normal children.
5: DON'T JUST STAND THERE ... DO SOMETHING!
We are both parents -- five sons in total -- so we know firsthand the incredible challenges of raising kids in the latter part of the twentieth century. We also realize that instructing children to "just turn off" violent programming in all its forms, or "just say no" to drugs, alcohol, and premarital sex, doesn't address how complicated these issues are or the circumstances in which children face them. Although the "just turn it off" option can be part of an overall solution, it is becoming nearly impossible for kids, especially, to do so because of the proliferation of media entertainment outside the home and the peer pressure they encounter daily.
We are talking to more and more parents of all ages (and with all ages of children) who know that most of what their kids are watching and playing is not good for them. The problem is that they don't know how to tackle the issue in any meaningful way. The best intentions are great, but without practical, usable solutions, they may not make much difference. Whether their children are in their first years and are only starting to be exposed to violent entertainment, or are much older and have been exposed to it for a while, parents are feeling outmanned in this war. The size of the entertainment behemoth, the impact it has on children at all levels, and its obvious lack of restraint when it comes to airing violence, be it in movies, on television, or in video games, have grown at a bewilderingly rapid rate. Add the fact that kids are spending increasingly inordinate amounts of their time watching slasher films and playing games like Doom, and many of us just throw up our arms and surrender. Well, don't. Keeping parents, teachers -- everyone -- from raising the white flag is our whole reason for writing this book. Educating our children and shaping them into functioning, levelheaded adults must always be within our grasp. Educating ourselves on this issue is the best place to start.
That said, we can focus on the fact that as parents we do have a lot of influence and authority. It's knowing how to use our position that can make all the difference with our kids -- and on the impact of the violence they absorb.
It's important to remember that children of different ages and stages of development need slightly different rules and guidelines. The younger the child, the more important it is to protect him or her against all forms of violence in entertainment. As children develop literacy skills, higher-level thinking abilities, and more self-monitoring and self-calming capabilities, they are better equipped to discuss violent imagery, understand its impact, and, ultimately, deal with it more effectively. This is what we think all parents want for their children -- the ability to respond thoughtfully to sensational, glamorized portrayals of violence. And for that to happen, it means we have to become very involved, right from the beginning.
The big question is: How do we protect our kids and at the same time empower them to know what's going on? Or, put slightly differently, how do we protect their best interests without smothering them in the process? Start by remembering a few guidelines.
First, dealing effectively with media violence in the home is a process. If your kids have seen more than you would have liked them to -- if you think they may be lost causes -- take action anyway, knowing that steps you take now to remedy the situation will pay huge dividends in the long run. If you are new parents and want to know how to get started with your baby, begin by understanding that your ideal may not always be obtainable -- we all run into stumbling blocks, and it's not the end of the world. We have heard many colleagues who are child development specialists, doctors, psychologists, and media literacy professionals lament the amount of time their own children spend in front of the TV, or the way their kids are enamored with Hulk Hogan or with playing Duke Nukem. The point is, you can read all the pertinent studies, do everything in your power to keep violent programming at bay, and have a wonderful, loving relationship with your kids, and they'll still probably go through phases that seem a little scary to you. So it's important to remind ourselves that we, as parents, are in it for the long haul. It's the cumulative effects of our consistent attitudes, actions, and values that will educate our children, not a few isolated incidents.
Second, we want to stress the notion of perception. How do your kids perceive your stance on media violence? Children, as we have demonstrated, imitate what they see and are very affected by their surroundings. And if they don't see and hear you condemning abject, graphic screen violence, they will not comprehend why it's bad for them. They're taking their cues from you, so make it clear that violence in all its forms is unacceptable. Very young children need to hear statements like: "If people truly cared about kids they wouldn't put that on for you to watch." "You are not old enough to understand that show, so we are going to switch to another station. Let's see what else is on that will teach you good things." Older children and teens are hungry for your guidance and input, even though they take pains to act otherwise. Still, it's often hard to sit them down and discuss violent screen images without having them think you are cramping their style. But it can be done. Suggest watching movies at home together; compare older films with violence (Patton, Ben Hur, for example) to newer films (such as Die Hard 2) and discuss the differences; chat about why certain kinds of entertainment are offensive and belittling to their audiences. As we share our perceptions with our kids, they become more perceptive -- it's that simple.
Our third point has to do with power. How can we help our children feel powerful so they don't need to feed off the pseudo-power of, say, a Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle? Authentic power has nothing to do with physical force, domination, coercion, or inflicting suffering. As we help a child acquire a quiet, inner knowing of self-confidence and self-respect, TV thugs or video game madmen become less glamorous and more inane. Kids do possess a natural fascination with physical power, so why not steer them in a better direction by letting them study a martial art? Many martial arts instructors are excellent role models for teaching power and knowing the right time and place to use it. Other parents have found that when their kids develop a talent in music or art, they are more self-reliant and less screen-enamored. There are myriad ways we can build a child's confidence and sense of empowerment, and once that has been accomplished we're halfway there.
It's always a good idea to sit down with your kids and discuss the misuse of power in violent screen portrayals. As we've said, the worst kind of screen violence, the most reckless and irresponsible use of it, is when it is stylized, graphic, and there's no sense of real aftermath to the action. Children and teens both need to be continually reminded that those who are feeling small, afraid, weak, and helpless are often the first to resort to violence. And no matter how good it looks on-screen, how cool it makes the perpetrator seem, it's important for kids to understand the difference between domination over someone and control of a situation or event; that a powerful person is one who knows they always have a choice -- the choice to harm or the choice to help.
Finally, keep perspective on the situation. One divorced mother we know found out that her kids were watching all kinds of violent fare every weekend when they spent time at their father's house. She was very concerned about the situation and didn't know what to do. Our advice was simple. Start by doing what you can and then work from there. This woman was doing all the right things at her house and she did have custody of her children five out of seven days. But she made sure she carved out time with them and paved the way for discussing the issue of violent entertainment. The children were ages eight and ten when she began this "ritual," and she invited them to discuss what they watched on television at their dad's. The floodgates opened. They were consumed with what they took in on their weekend visits but knew it wasn't all good, clean fun. But like a lot of kids, they had no framework in which to discuss what they saw. Their mother talked with them, asked them questions, modeled appropriate reactions, and encouraged them to think and question everything they saw. Her children are now well-adjusted young adults with keen insights into the human condition far beyond their years. The lesson here is: don't overreact and don't ever think the game is lost.
These guidelines offer a solid framework in which to work with your children to lower their intake of violent programming and game playing. The following hints get down to the nitty-gritty of everyday life -- collectively, call them a blueprint for action on the home front.
ESTABLISH A FEW RULES AND STRIVE FOR CONSISTENCY
Until the entertainment industry gets it, either by legislative force, parental pressure, or some epiphany on their part, it's basically up to us to set boundaries for our children concerning violent entertainment. So where to start? The average American child watches four hours of television each day through the most formative years, until age eighteen. So let's start here, by decreasing the amount of time your child spends in front of the television; for when we do that we also decrease the chances of kids running into inappropriate content in the first place. We realize that reducing the amount of viewing time is perhaps the toughest part of this equation, but you'll get results. Moderate viewers who watch one or two hours of television a day are much more likely to have other areas of interest and be more successful in school than are heavy viewers. So the bottom line, as advised by the American Academy of Pediatrics, is to reduce all screen time (including TV and arcade video games, handheld video games, and computers, along with TV and video) to one or two hours a day. (There are those families that are adopting a "no television" policy with their children and getting good results. Although this is not a viable solution for many parents, and we're not saying that television is completely devoid of good programming for children, completely cutting out television from a child's diet is working for some.)
Here are some tips to making this goal a reality: Ensure that kids finish their homework before they watch television; use a timer to indicate when video game or computer play must end; create a "budget" of ten hours of screen time weekly -- and enforce it. As well, make time on the weekend to sit down as a family and figure out what the kids will watch during the upcoming week. Will a TV program or a video rental be something you want to use while you get dinner on the table some nights? Can you count on these programs or videos to be safe? Let the kids make decisions based on choices that you offer them; getting them involved in the process of choosing when and what they will watch will reinforce healthy TV and video habits. With this practice they will learn over time to monitor their own viewing and playing habits.
It's especially important to note that if a child is experiencing difficulties, such as behavior or learning problems, or hyperactivity, overuse of TV and video games usually exacerbates the problem, taxing parental patience, and adding to the child's stress. In cases such as these, the less screen time the better.
Another area that parents can concentrate on is the physical placement in the home of the television set and/or computer. Needless to say, we strongly suggest to parents that their children not have television sets in their bedrooms. We think the same when it comes to computers. Of course, there are exceptions, especially with computers, as their use pertains to learning and homework, but it really is best in most cases to avoid having children in front of either device without some kind of supervision. So put this electronic furniture in the family areas, where you can be around. You don't have to be hovering like a hawk all day and night, but it will certainly be harder for kids to spend hours a day watching violent programming or playing point-and-shoot video games. And it will definitely be easier for you to be part of the process.
A lot of people ask us about the V-chip. Can that help you set boundaries? Well, yes and no. You can block violent content, but determining what material to block may get a little confusing. You can't really rely on the TV ratings system. According to the 1998 report "State of Children's Television," which examined 1,190 shows across broadcast, cable, and public television, 75 percent of children's shows containing three or more malicious acts of violence carried no indicator of violence, such as the FV label for "fantasy violence." According to the report, the inconsistencies leave parents using the V-chip with a no-win situation.
BUILD CHILDREN'S LANGUAGE AND READING SKILLS
The best way to counter a negative is with a positive. So help your children to become articulate readers and writers. A well-developed language system gives the brain a well-developed mental function. Since the prefrontal cortex is an important component in dampening impulsive, aggressive behavior, children and teens with strong language abilities and problem-solving skills are more apt to be able to control themselves.
Some researchers believe that literacy skills actually prevent violent behavior. Consider this observation by Dr. Bruce Perry, the director of CIVITAS Child Trauma Programs at Baylor College of Medicine and Texas Children's Hospital:
A striking example of the role of cognitive development (development of a literate population) on violence comes from historical accounts of violence. In the year 1340 in Amsterdam, the murder rate was in excess of 150 murders per 100,000 people. Two hundred years later the murder rate was below 5 per 100,000 people. Clearly this is not a genetic phenomenon. The genetics of the population of Amsterdam likely did not change much in two hundred years. This marked decrease in the incidence of murderous violence is likely due to the development of a higher percentage of individuals in that society having better developed cortices -- more capable of abstract cognition, and thus more capable of modulation of aggressive and violent impulses. The sociocultural phenomenon underlying the development of healthier and more capable cortices was, without question, literacy. The introduction of the printing press allowed the percentage of literate (i.e., cortically-enriched, cognitively capable) individuals to dramatically increase. Over a few generations, the impact of a number of bright, abstract individuals transformed their society.
This is not to say that smart, literate people do not commit crimes, but they do commit fewer than others. It should give us pause when we consider how many millions of adults in America are functionally illiterate.
It may sound like a simple solution -- too simple to be believable -- that literacy skills can act as a buffer to potentially violent behavior. But the more a child is able to verbalize and think on higher levels, the easier it will be to teach children about consequences of violence. In addition, literacy skills give kids a profound edge in coming to terms with screen portrayals of violence. A rich vocabulary along with know-how at self-expression gives kids essential tools for articulating feelings, opinions, and ideas about media violence that a less literate child does not have.
Parents hear this mantra from teachers often, but we cannot stress it enough: Read aloud to your child. This is so important, especially in a culture where the visual image has replaced listening to language. The more TV that is watched in the home, the less conversation there is. A recent Canadian study demonstrated that 40 percent of parents could not remember a time when they ate their evening meal with the TV off! And an American study has shown that 82 percent of parents of elementary school-age children do not encourage reading at home. This is way off track. If we want to help our children grow minds that can resist and understand media violence, we need to make language activities a family priority. Turn off the TV and talk and read.
When children and teens are watching TV they are usually not talking, and thus are not learning to express themselves or their ideas. They certainly are not reading and exercising their imaginations. And although they are listening to words spoken on the screen, most of what they listen to are sound bites lacking enough linguistic complexity to build their language abilities. Also, salient visual images often get in the way of paying much attention to the language. When children under research conditions watch a TV program whose audio track differs from its visual images, many times what they remember as the "story" is the visual display. TV also can't respond to the child; it can't ask or answer a question or repeat or slow down or stop to give the child time to absorb what's being said. And much of the time the images are coming in faster than the child can thoughtfully process them. The more violent the program, the more fast-paced it will be. One of the more depressing sights for us is the look of a child in front of the TV as he or she watches hours of mindless, pointless violence (or even mindless and pointless nonviolent drama or comedy). They look catatonic; they seem to register little or nothing, as if their small brains are being fried, which is similar to what's happening.
Pictures on the screen are immediately accessible. As Dr. Russell Harter, a major researcher in the area of children and literacy, points out, "Television ... is not very symbolic .... It makes things easy to understand." Language, though, in any form, whether it be print, sound, Braille, or sign language, is basically symbolic. It is a representation of concepts and thoughts whose meaning must be unlocked by the workings of the cerebral cortex. Watching pictures on the screen does not in and of itself require mental gymnastics, especially for children's developing brains. It is only when conversation is added -- a question is asked or a comment given -- that the child develops the cognitive structure to make sense of the images. A TV in the house doesn't necessarily mean that family members will stop talking to each other. But unless adults intentionally engage children in conversation about what's coming across the screen, children can grow up to prefer passive viewing to active thinking while they watch. When it's violence they're watching, the effects can be devastating.
Children at any age can be captivated by a story on audiotape. Most teens will enjoy listening to a classic such as the Lord of the Rings trilogy -- about twelve hours of mental gymnastics! Young children can learn to operate their own tape recorders and listen to twenty- to thirty-minute story tapes, readily available at libraries. As kids take in language without too many accompanying pictures, they must make up the pictures in their own minds. Even if we read a beautifully illustrated book out loud, there may be twenty or so pictures. But not every picture is given, as is the case with TV programs or movies. A daily practice of family time where books are shared and discussed goes a long way toward helping children develop both logical, sequential thinking patterns and metaphoric muscles capable of imaginative thought.
DISCUSS THE PRODUCTION TECHNIQUES USED TO MAKE VIOLENCE SEEM "COOL"
A basic notion that children need to understand as early as possible is that all media is intentionally constructed for specific audience reactions. Nowhere could this be truer than for violent entertainment. We are not advocating that you show violence to your children, but rather, when they do happen to see it, you can point out the production techniques that make it so appealing. For instance, demonstrate how background music makes the action seem thrilling, as does slow motion; show them how a close-up of a gun to someone's head plays on strong emotions such as terror; help kids understand how much the producer, director, video game designer wants to draw in an audience.
Years ago, a movie critic pointed out how the difference in point of view in horror films spoke volumes. Almost always, when the camera's point of view was the villain's or monster's, the film was sadistic, gratuitous, and of little or no value other than invoking terror in its audience. Explain this to kids; help them deconstruct on-screen violence and let them see the strings attached and why and how they're being pulled. In a sense, the emperor has no clothes, and by pointing out and talking about all the tricks and special effects, we help demystify violent imagery for kids.
The same goes for violent video games, but we're up against a bigger problem with that technology. For one thing, the whole game world is more shut off from adults than are television and movies. It's not really on our radar. We make a practice of flipping channels, going to movies, renting videos, but you won't find too many parents in video arcades or hunched over Play-Stations. What makes video games potentially more dangerous to children is that they can create their own reality with these interactive toys -- it's them and the action, no distractions. Still, take an interest in this technology. Try to sit down and play the games with your children. Point out how often women are placed in victim positions; how the pace is fast to keep you hyped up; that shooting a target over and over again is not a particularly great way to spend one's money and time. For your own sake, pick up a gaming magazine like PC Gamer and check out the ads. See what you're up against: "Gratuitous Violence Is 200 Times Faster with a D-Link Network"; "No Cure. No Hope. Only Death"; "Destroying Your Enemies Isn't Enough ... You Must Devour Their Souls." Parents we know had no idea this stuff even existed, and we can tell you that their jaws dropped when they watched, played, and read about what's going on in the video game industry today. But it spurred them to act, and it put them on more equal footing with their kids when it came time to talk about it.
As we explain what's happening behind the scenes, kids will be less likely to take what's happening in front of them too seriously. Even very young children can be taught the concept of authorship. They hear about authors of books, but not usually about scriptwriters for violent cartoons. With teens we can remember that they like to test, question, and poke around with new ideas.
Kids don't like to be seen as the fool, either. They aren't naturally thinking through the violence-as-entertainment angle, but with a little encouragement from us, they may decide for themselves that screen violence is stupid, developed by adults to cater to the lowest common denominator and remove cash from wallets. Let's not underestimate their curiosity and adaptability, nor lower our expectations to the depths of the entertainment industry's expectations for our kids.
EXAMINE SENSATIONAL VS. SENSITIVE PORTRAYALS OF SCREEN VIOLENCE
The age and stage of development matters in the interpreting of visually violent images. If younger than eight, youngsters should not see any sensational, gratuitous violence -- ever. As children become verbally able to express ideas and analyze information, they can learn to understand, discuss, and appreciate sensitive portrayals of violence that can teach empathy and respect for life. The shooting of the dog in the movie Sounder is an example of such violence. The dog, the movie's namesake, symbolizes the unity and love of the family. When it is shot, it whimpers and runs away (and will reappear later in the story, but you don't know that at the time). There is nothing gratuitous about this scene. A child watching it can learn about suffering and cruelty. It provides parents with a wonderful opportunity to discuss the consequences of hurting an animal or a person. It can be a catalyst for good.
The movie Fresh can do the same for teens. Although rated R, most likely for a few graphically violent scenes, the film shows realistic violence with a message. Yes, the violence is graphic. But the immense consequences of the violence for a twelve-year-old boy are also shown graphically. Violent acts exact high prices. Watched with a parent or caring adult, Fresh can give a fifteen-year-old a perspective on violence that can't be found in shoot-'em-up action adventure flicks or the latest high-tech thriller. More of these types of movies need to be made -- films that parents can watch with teens and then discuss afterward, that show the human condition in all of its ugliness, but show it sensitively, without fanfare, and devoid of special effects. The response the producers obviously want to provoke is that viewers walk away shaking their heads in disgust at the villains and the harm they caused.
Most kids can't reach that level of response when violence is portrayed as glamorous. In fact, with all the sensationalistic splatter available to our kids on TV, in movies, and in video games, the only normal reaction they can have is to think it's cool to kill someone. We have discussed this previously, and it's important for parents to be aware of the differences between sensational and sensitive portrayals of violence. There are characteristics for both that are easily detected. Sensational violence features lots of action, fast-paced filming, and tons of special effects. The killing looks like fun, the perpetrator has little or no remorse for what he's done, and in the end there are no consequences. You as the viewer walk away psyched up, thrilled, feeling good. Characteristics of sensitive portrayals of violence shouldn't give you that high. Entertainment like this is more slow-moving, with more dialogue, to provoke thinking as well as feeling; the violence, and there's no need to show too much of it, should upset you and elicit compassion for what you've seen. There should be no suggestion that the suffering, murder, and mayhem is fun.
We all know the differences between good and bad portrayals of violence, and we all know it's a battle to get kids interested in something more slow-paced and thoughtful when they are surrounded by entertainment that is just the opposite. But understand that we have a choice.
DEAL DIRECTLY WITH TV NEWS PROGRAMS
We haven't tackled violence on the TV news because it is quite different from the entertainment we have been discussing. Still, it's on-screen, it can be horribly graphic, and it can be used almost purely to keep audiences in place. Also, we shouldn't overlook the fact that overexposure to violence in the news can lead to a child seeking it out in entertainment. Much of what is covered on television news involves violence and the most negative aspects of human behavior. In fact, we as adults are often stunned by the number of bloody images and bad messages that fill the average half hour of news. We often come away from it wondering if anything good happens anywhere in our world. Although the networks would like to think that they are offering us a truly balanced version of what's happening around us, we all know that that is almost never the case. Just as in fictional entertainment, violent stories and accompanying images are often used on the news to manipulate the viewer. That said, letting children, especially very young children, watch the news on a regular basis can be very harmful to their worldview.
Preschoolers are definitely not ready to watch TV news. There is no news program written for the three- to five-year-old set. And there shouldn't be. The evening news offers too many displays of graphic violence that would be very difficult to explain to a young child. It is a mistake to even have the evening news on when preschoolers are around. As we have shown earlier, for the young child, images are alive -- they have power. With children under age eight, parents might consider watching a later news program when the child is asleep, watching the news while a spouse or an older child plays with the younger child in another room, taping the news program to view later, or listening to radio news instead. Viewing news programs -- ones without violent images -- that are designed especially for children in the eight-to-ten-year range, such as Linda Ellerbee's Nick News, will keep them abreast of current events without the sensational violence. But, as with young children, there is no overwhelming reason they should see news shows produced for adults.
By age eleven or twelve, most kids will have developed the necessary language and thinking skills to analyze news programs designed for their age group. Many teachers use CNN Newsroom and World View to engage middle-school students in discussions about current events. Families can tape it and watch it at home, too, or kids can watch other news programs designed specifically for them. But be around; answer questions, ask questions, discuss the news, and help your kid put what he sees into context.
Younger teens and high school students can learn a lot from TV news if they know how to approach it. This can be a great starting point for discussing violent topics with them, providing an opportunity to expose teens to a broader view. For instance, a news report on youth gang violence provides the opportunity to discuss the realities and myths about youth violence. There are questions you can ask them, such as: Is this news story covering a violent crime important enough to take up two minutes of 40 million people's time? What do you think about what happened at Littleton, Jonesboro, Paducah? Do you really believe it's necessary to the validity of a story to repeatedly show violent, graphic images? Just as with violent entertainment, get them thinking, help them deconstruct what they see.
CHOOSE SLOWER-PACED, QUALITY SCREEN ENTERTAINMENT FOR YOUR CHILDREN
Slow down the pace of what kids watch. Select TV programs, videos, and video games that have a slower pace and require some thinking. Count the seconds between image changes. If each image changes rapidly, every two or three seconds, the pace is too quick. With image changes that vary in length, children have time to digest what they are seeing and will be conditioned to interact with what they watch rather than merely react to quick impressions.
By providing more slow-moving programs and videos for children, we are reducing their exposure to gratuitous violence, because quick pacing usually means more violent content. A movie or a TV program slow enough to be thought-provoking will probably be nonviolent or less sensationally violent. This isn't a steadfast rule, but it is true in most cases.
Also, our kids want quality. Educational, informational television programs are identified by the label Ell. An important study indicated that children are not turned off by this identification. In fact, 40 percent of ten- to seventeen-year-olds said they would be more likely to watch such a program. This was double the number who said they would be less likely to watch. Seek out entertainment for your child that depicts human diversity, contains sensitive portrayals of suffering and the human condition, reflects your family's values, supports your goals for your child, enhances your child's understanding of self and others, and inspires and encourages prosocial behaviors and attitudes.
REFUSE TO BUY OR CONDONE VIOLENT VIDEO GAMES
The trend of giving video games to toddlers, preschoolers, and elementary school children must stop. Even if parents are introducing only nonviolent video games at this stage of development, it is going to be so much more difficult to keep the kids away from violent ones. Just the nature of video games in and of themselves make them potentially addictive. Video game systems are just not developmentally appropriate for children. The concept of timeliness needs to resurface and take main stage here. What is important and timely at one stage of a child's development can be a disaster at another stage.
Children do not need video games and, in fact, the earlier they are introduced in a child's life, the more likely it is that the child will crave violent ones within a short time. Parents can make it so much easier on themselves by encouraging slower-paced computer games until the child's mental habits are set, usually somewhere around ages twelve to fourteen. The introduction of video games then will be less likely to lead to stimulus addiction and the urge for violent video games as thrill-providing devices. And there are choices: If your child has a predilection for video games at this age, we urge you to read up on and think about buying those games that do not contain gratuitous violence, those that challenge your child to think critically and creatively, and that require perseverance through a mentally challenging problem. There are games that serve as jumping-off points for further study, hobbies, or educational pastimes, games that don't require marksmanship and an ability to shrug off carnage and killing. We have a hard time recommending any type of noneducational video game, but certainly the sports games on the market -- such as basketball, baseball, car racing, or golf -- are preferable to anything with violence in it.
Does such a tactic sound radical? Parents who have taken this advice thank us profusely for the changes they see in their children. Of the hundreds of parents we know who introduced video games to their children when the kids were pre-teens or older, not one of these children became enamored by violent video games. Sure, they played them at friends' houses, even rented some and played them at home. But the overwhelming consensus after they found out what these games were about was: "These are stupid. All you do is go around shooting people. What's fun about that?" As incredible as this may sound, these kids preferred sports games and other types of games that provided a mental challenge. Why? They were not conditioned to kill during the most formative time of their brain development. Rather, their minds (and hearts) received the proper nourishment at the right times. Results were as expected: Thinking, well-functioning kids who found violence distasteful. In other words, normal children.
- admin
- Site Admin
- Posts: 37493
- Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am
Re: Stop Teaching Our Kids to Kill: A Call to Action Against
by admin » Fri Sep 13, 2013 1:44 am
PART 2 OF 2
CHAPTER 5 CONT'D.
LISTEN TO YOUR CHILD
Listen to what your children are saying about violence. How are they interpreting it? One mother was overwhelmed when her son said, "I want to kill myself." Why wouldn't she be? She later realized that he was equating "self" with an action figure in a video game he had been playing regularly. Her little boy just parroted what he had been exposed to and failed to understand what he was really saying. However, that should be a clear demonstration to his mom that something is amiss.
In an article about the process of healing in a violent world, author Beverly Robertson Jackson tells this rather disturbing story of a concerned mother:
These are warning signs, and they should be warning parents of what their children are all about. Kids are not great at masking their emotions, so if your child is saying things about violence that give you pause, pick up on it and act accordingly. With this in mind, it is rather astonishing to think what Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris, the two boys who went on a killing rampage in Littleton, were doing right under the noses of their parents. They played hundreds of hours of the video game Doom, set up a racist Web site, built pipe bombs in the garage, armed themselves to the teeth with semiautomatic weapons, and talked to almost anyone who would listen about how they wanted to kill. Was anyone listening? Fifteen lives may have been saved if there had been.
CONFRONT PEER PRESSURE
Peer pressure is perhaps our biggest stumbling block to getting kids on the right track, and this is true with almost everything bad for them. One new father we know despaired that any of his efforts to keep his child away from video games and on-screen violence would result in the boy being an outcast with his classmates. It's hard to come to school and be one of the only kids who haven't seen RoboCop or played Doom or watched every episode of Buffy the Vampire Slayer. Kids want to fit in, and they see this as one major way of doing that. What we as parents must do is teach them not to play that game -- not to care so much about what their friends think that it controls their tastes and what they want to do with their time. You'd be surprised at how little peer pressure really matters, especially with kids under the age of thirteen, once parents actually try to do something about it.
Children are extremely adaptable. If we take a stand in our homes, children respect that. The "Everyone else gets to watch it" or "Everyone else plays those games" arguments can be countered by explaining that in your home you do things certain ways for certain reasons. Your child may resist at first, but many parents we know have found that to their surprise, the kids give up the battle to be "like everyone else" and acquiesce to parents' standards.
The developmental tasks during childhood revolve around building a strong self-identity and social skills. If children are excluded from social interactions because they don't know the latest media-violent enabler in the form of a toy, TV program, movie or video game, their world does not collapse. They don't lose face. In fact, they usually learn valuable lessons and gain the respect of their peer group.
What parents need to focus on is not so much whether the child is missing out on a culturally induced childhood "necessity," but rather on building the child's sense of identity and resiliency. If all parents started addressing this problem, our kids wouldn't have nearly as much problem with peer pressure. Peer groups would take their cues about what's important from parental values, not from hawkers of violent media.
Take special care with young teens. From about ages eleven to sixteen, kids want to be like their peers and around their peers as much as possible. Parental influence takes a backseat. What we have instilled up to this point in a child's life almost seems to go underground, fermenting somewhere in the depths, but not clearly visible. Have a look at the advertising of certain violent films, TV shows, and, especially, video games, and you'll see that it zeroes right in on this age group's isolation, rebelliousness, and sense of powerlessness. This stuff is not easy for parents to contend with when trying to get through to their kids.
Parents need to pick all of their battles, including those that pertain to their teenagers' viewing and playing habits. Parents who have had success dealing with peer pressure at this age have found themselves making compromises: "I won't let you go see Scream with your friends, but remember, I am letting you stay overnight at Pete's tomorrow night." "No, I am still blocking MTV, but I did buy you that CD I wasn't so crazy about." "As I keep telling you, I won't buy violent video games, but I will upgrade your system so you can get better sports games." If we link the "no" with a "yes," chances are their arguments will be shorter and we will win the important battles.
Peer pressure has been an excuse for kids since the beginning of time. We wouldn't let our kids buy guns if they said everyone had one; we wouldn't let them deal drugs because their friends did; and we wouldn't let them jump off the Brooklyn Bridge even if it was all the rage. So we absolutely should not let down our guard when it comes to watching and playing graphically violent fare. Abstaining won't kill our kids, or anyone else.
We would never be so arrogant or reckless as to suggest that it's easy to keep impressionable kids' heads on straight as they face a barrage of very violent programming and video games. It's not easy. The above recommendations are at least a start, though (see the Resources for more information). If nothing else, we hope that they empower parents in this issue, letting them know that there are things that can be done right in the home to lessen the effects that violence as entertainment has on kids. We also hope that parents understand that there are no hard-and-fast rules here, except that an enlightened, intelligent, and loved child is our best defense against rising youth crime rates.
Moving from the home front, let's have a look at the public barometer regarding this issue, and what we can do to push forward. As important as it is to effect change in your own children, it's also key to know where we stand in the fight against those segments of the entertainment industry that are peddling violence. We need to empower kids, but we also need to empower ourselves if we are to make a difference.
As sad as it is that it took a tragedy like the incident in Littleton to wake America and the world up from their collective sleep regarding the issue of violent entertainment, much good has happened since that awful day in April 1999. For one thing, there virtually isn't a newspaper, magazine, radio station, or TV station that hasn't run at least one story on the possible effects of onscreen violence on today's youth. The issue has taken a front seat with the public in a way it never has before. Of course, there are people, many of them in the entertainment industry itself, who still deny that there is any plausible connection between violent programming and video games and the escalating rate of youth violence. But there are many more out there who have read the facts, seen the evidence, and know something is very wrong. Among them is President Clinton. In the wake of Littleton he made it a priority to address the issue, and for the time being he has been consistently vigilant about calling the entertainment industry on the carpet to accept some responsibility. God knows, he's up against some tough lobbies, but so were the people and politicians who took on the tobacco and automobile industries. Clinton has recently ordered the Federal Trade Commission and the Justice Department to look at whether the makers of violent television, movies, and video games are "improperly" marketing this violence to children. We'll see what comes of it, but it's a solid step forward.
Some entertainment companies aren't waiting for legislation. Disney, for example, has ordered all violent video games out of their numerous premises. Would that others would take the same initiative. Soon they may have no choice. But in the past, many in the entertainment industry have demonstrated only arrogance in the face of mounting public outcry over the issue, dragging in the First Amendment whenever it was convenient to protect their bottom line. They have consistently shifted the responsibility away from themselves and right in the laps of their audience. When confronted with allegations of negligence, their first response is invariably "It's the parents' responsibility to keep an eye on what their kids watch and play with." Yes, it is the parents' responsibility. But it is also the parents' responsibility to protect their kids from guns, tobacco, alcohol, pornography, drugs, and explosives. And in all of these areas the community at large helps parents in their struggle to do this. Our society has deemed that marketing and selling .44 Magnums, cigarettes, booze, X-rated films and literature, cocaine, and dynamite to children is illegal. Knowing this, and faced with what we've demonstrated on page after page of this book, we must ask why, in this one, vital area, parents should be left on their own. The answers we're all getting are not cutting it.
The entertainment industry has gone out of its way over the years to convince us that their violent programming and games are really just good, clean fun. Incidents in Littleton, Paducah, and Jonesboro, for example, give us good reason to doubt that logic. Just turning on the television or playing a video game or two does the same. "We wouldn't sell it if people didn't buy it" is another favorite response. This is pimp logic. Drug dealer logic. Except that even pimps and drug dealers generally won't try to market to small children, and they don't claim a constitutional right to sell their products to our kids. Surely these "guardians of the public airwaves," an industry that markets products to children, can be held to a higher moral standard than this.
We've demonstrated how we can effect change in the home, but we must also be vigilant about getting the entertainment industry to own up to their end of the responsibility, just as the tobacco industry had to respond to the effects their product has on people. There are several ways to accomplish this, all of them effective.
We must start by educating parents on a national level. Like the campaign to convince Americans to "buckle up," or the campaign to warn us against the dangers of drunk driving, there must be an educational campaign, on the TV, in ads, in print media, everywhere, to inform parents of the potential harm associated with exposing kids to media violence. We've made some headway in the last few years, but there are just too many parents who are still completely uninformed about the issue. Even the tobacco and alcohol industries accept the need for warning labels on their products, and it is time for the TV, movie, and video game industries to rise up to at least this moral standard. The warnings, when there are warnings, and the rating systems on all of this material are not enough as they now exist. They are also not that truthful.
Most adults know that there are things they can have but their kids can't. Many adults smoke a cigar, drink a beer, shoot a gun, drive a car, or have sex; but they all recognize that these things are not desirable for their children. Now they need to begin to understand that violence, whether it is "professional wrestling" or Natural Born Killers or the video game Postal, is another product that may be okay for them but is potentially harmful for their kids.
Education about media and violence does make a difference. Individuals of all walks of life, from judges to mothers, can begin to take effective action once they understand the role of screen violence in fostering and feeding violent crime. For example, a juvenile court judge in Florida, after hearing the facts on this issue, is now including in his sentencing such things as: community service at animal control centers, humane societies, and hospices to give youthful offenders some personal experience of death; removal of all point-and-shoot games from the home -- and prohibition from being in the presence of these at friends' homes, malls, and so forth; and no viewing of R-rated media. The point is, educating the public at large is a giant first step toward getting changes made.
Would we be content with "self-regulation" and "voluntary restraints" to prevent the alcohol, tobacco, gun, drug, or pornography industries from marketing their products to our kids or grandkids? No. Then why should we be content with voluntary restraints and self-regulation to limit the entertainment industry from marketing their violent products to our kids? Again, why, in this one industry, with this one product, should the rules be different?
Congress has already initiated legislation to curb children's access to explicitly violent movies and video games. In June 1999, legislation sponsored by Representative Henry Hyde of Illinois was designed to restrict violent material from being made available to minors, much as current law shelters them from obscene material. The legislation was defeated by a two-thirds majority, but this wasn't a bad performance considering that the legislation was appearing for the first time, on short notice, and having been opposed by such a powerful industry. Also, there is another scheme floating around the Senate called the "21st-Century Media Responsibility Act." This comprehensive bill, sponsored by Senator John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Senator Joseph Lieberman (D-Conn.), would require makers of music CDs, movies, and video games to share a similar rating system that suggests an appropriate age and description of content. If this bill passes, any retailers who sell "mature" games, CDs, and movies to minors will face $10,000 fines.
Under this kind of legislation, we would treat screen violence in much the same way that we treat sexually obscene material: adults can have access to it, but anyone who provides it to kids can be subject to prosecution. Many years ago, Hustler magazine reprinted a picture from Soldier of Fortune magazine showing a real soldier with his brains blown out. The caption said: "This is the real obscenity." (Hustler is another manufacturer that does not claim any "right" to sell their product to your kids; they accept restraints on their industry, but the TV, movie, and video game industries fall short of even the moral standard set by Hustler.) Not to defend pornographers, but when it comes to what constitutes obscenity, Hustler may just have a point. Sex -- granted, not quite Hustler-style -- will be a normal, healthy part of most adult lives, but there is no place in any life for violence. Just one single act of violence in a lifetime can destroy the lives of the victim and the perpetrator and their families. The ultimate obscenity may well be violence, and perhaps it is time for us to initiate legislation that recognizes this fact.
It has been said that the law is the best teacher. This means, for example, that the ultimate purpose of seat belt laws is to educate and inform citizens about something that is important to all of us. The possibility of getting a ticket is not what makes most people buckle up their kids; they do it because they love their kids and they want to protect them. But the existence of seat belt laws serves as a powerful means to educate citizens about their responsibilities. The very existence of the law shows that our whole society says this is the right thing to do. Similar legislation in the realm of screen violence can have the same effect.
Legislative initiatives do not have to happen in Washington. Every city, county, and state in America has all the authority it needs to help parents in the struggle to protect their kids from the toxic effects of screen violence. For example, Mason City, Iowa, has embraced a plan by their mayor to rid the town of violent video games, vowing "zero tolerance" for these murder simulators.
Another approach to legislative initiatives is the 'R' means 'R' law. President Clinton has said: "I also want to challenge the owners of movie theaters and video stores, distributors -- anyone at any point of sale -- to enforce the rating systems on the products that you sell. Check the IDs, draw the line. If underage children are buying violent video games or getting into R-rated movies, the rating system should be enforced to put a stop to it." What he is asking for is really only common sense. Why bother having such systems and warnings in place if they are patently ignored by everyone? We check IDs for alcohol, tobacco, guns, pornography, and fireworks, and we fine retailers who fail to do so. President Clinton went on to say, "And if, as many of us suspect, there is still too much gratuitous violence in PG-13-rated movies, the rating systems themselves should be reevaluated." Indeed, the rating system we enforce has to be a good one; and this from the mouth of one of the most pro-Hollywood presidents we have ever had.
Colorado Attorney General Ken Salazar has recommended legislation "requiring businesses that sell or rent violent or graphic videos to set up zones limiting access to minors." In the wake of the Littleton shootings similar legislation has been initiated at state and local levels across America. Under such legislation, a sixteen-year-old cannot buy an R-rated movie, and a twelve-year-old cannot rent a PG-13 movie, without parental consent. And if you buy your child a ticket to the latest animated feature at the local multiplex, the theater owner has a responsibility to create an environment in which the child cannot accidentally or intentionally go next door and be exposed to a hardcore "slasher" film.
One legislative initiative, proposed in the state of Washington, is a tax on violent media. Our society determined, earlier in this century, that in America adults have a constitutional right to buy and drink alcohol. But the government also has a right to tax this product, and tobacco, and many other products, in order to recover some of the costs associated with the products' impact on society. Money is usually the incentive for pushing violent entertainment in all its forms; hitting back in the pocketbook would probably be very effective -- and it would send out the message that these products are dangerous and do have consequences when sold to kids.
Another piece of legislation, proposed by two leading trial lawyers, is one establishing that media entities can be held accountable, in civil litigation, for the pain and suffering that can be linked to a specific source of media violence. We already do have this right, but state and federal legislation to this effect would be very useful. Jack Thompson, the attorney in the $130 million lawsuit against the media in the Paducah school shootings, states that such a statutory provision "would be the most powerful deterrent of all and not subject to prosecutorial will: creation of a tort claim by anyone suffering an injury at the hands of someone trained by a video game."
Civil litigation is really just another form of education. It is how we educate an industry. Because of our litigation system we have the safest cars and the best-trained cops in history. Lawsuits, or even the threat of them, help keep businesses and government from acting recklessly. So maybe one solution is to sue the makers of violent entertainment when it is clear that their product was in some way responsible for violence in the real world. They sell violence in order to make money. If they are full members of the marketplace, if they are going to take a profit, then the health of the society demands that they be fully liable to civil lawsuits, just like anyone else who provides a product or service in our nation. Is it easy to prove their complicity in most instances? No, and it never will be. But when a young boy, obsessed with point-and-shoot video games, obsessed with movies about young boys getting revenge on their classmates, picks up a real weapon for the first time and, with deadly accuracy, blows away a bunch of kids in school, it's probably safe to say that the makers of his obsessions have some real responsibility for his actions. That's what the families of Michael Carneal's victims are saying in Paducah with their lawsuit against the entertainment industry.
Ultimately, the only thing that rating systems in TV, movies, and video games have achieved is an admission from the entertainment industry that we need to protect kids from some of their products -- and now this admission is being recognized. The FCC and the attorney general are investigating; they will have the option to subpoena the industry's secret files, and they can see if the industry has intentionally bypassed their own rating systems. If so, then they are clearly negligent and liable.
You see, in a free market our ultimate safeguard is civil liability. If you intentionally, negligently market a harmful product (alcohol, tobacco), and especially if you market it to kids (unsafe cribs, toys), then you will pay. Period.
The violent video games in particular, especially the ones where you hold a gun in your hand, will almost definitely not be found to have First Amendment protection, and that leaves them highly vulnerable. They are appliances, firearms trainers at best, murder simulators at worst. Even a book, Hitman, when its guidance and training was followed to commit real murders, was found by the Supreme Court to be subject to civil liability. If they are willing to hammer the written word (which clearly does fall under the First Amendment) when it teaches adults to kill, how can anyone possibly expect that children's access to these killing simulators will fall under the First Amendment?
In New York, a father taught his eight-year-old how to use and fire a gun. When the kid used that training to kill someone, the father was convicted of manslaughter. The father was using free speech to train his son, but what he trained the son to do was not acceptable by society, and he is now a convicted felon because of it. The extension of this legal process to the designers, manufacturers, and distributors of firearms trainers and murder simulators should be obvious.
It doesn't help their defense that the violent video game manufacturers are selling their product to children as, literally, "killing simulators" -- we described earlier their blatant advertising. How will they deny their own responsibility when a kid like Michael Carneal in Paducah uses what he's learned from their games to actually kill real humans? How will they defend themselves when a company like id Software licenses their product to the marines as a trainer, or when the army uses a slightly modified Super Nintendo system as a marksmanship trainer? They can't have it both ways. The concept of needing to protect children is completely embedded in science, law, and our culture. Any industry that tries to go against science, law, and culture is, quite simply, Doomed.
Another key reason to condemn the actions of that segment of the entertainment industry that markets violence is the simple fact that they have the option to market something other than violence. The alcohol, tobacco, and firearms industries by their natures have to market harmful products. That is, if they cannot sell alcohol, tobacco, or firearms, they cannot sell anything and must go out of business. But the video game industry can market nonviolent games (there are many good ones), and they can thrive and prosper without the violent games. They just choose not to do so. Often the representatives of the video game industry, in defense, claim that their major market is adults and that violent games are only a tiny fraction of their inventory. If that's true, then it would cost them very little to accept regulation in marketing violence to kids. And yet they fight, tooth and nail, any attempt to regulate the sale of violent games to kids.
These are two reasons (marketing to minors and viable alternatives) why those who peddle violence to kids, whether on TV, in movies, or in video games, are truly in deep trouble when they find themselves before American juries in product liability lawsuits. Those associated with the entertainment industry must stop trying to defend the indefensible, and recognize the direction in which the law is likely to go in this area. They should start doing what they can to protect themselves from the reasonable demands of society to seek redress against the people who helped to bring about violent criminal acts. That is probably why Disney pulled violent games from their hotels and theme parks, and why Walmart and Montgomery Ward have stopped selling violent video games, period. In the near future it will be extraordinarily expensive to get liability insurance for a business that designs, manufactures, or markets violent video games. That is what product liability lawsuits can accomplish.
The head of one state trial lawyers association believes that many media lawsuits have paid off for the plaintiffs. We just never hear about it because they settle out of court, paying the victims (or their survivors) large sums of money, once a month, for the rest of their lives, provided they keep their mouths shut. The only way to prevent this strategy of buying silence is to be sure that others know that victims have a right to their day in court. And that brings us back to education -- the lawsuits are a message to the makers of violent entertainment, and to others who have suffered due to the industry's negligence.
The "death rattle," the last sound that leaves the body before death, is also a term that anthropologists use as a metaphor for an intense resistance to the obvious. Could it be that the purveyors of violent entertainment are hearing it? Dr. Jennifer James, an anthropologist and Seattle Times columnist, explains the phenomenon this way:
One way that you, the Citizen and parent, can speed this process is to give "fair warning" to businesses that market violence. If a mall, a store, or an arcade has adult violent video games, and if a movie theater creates an environment in which kids can get into R-rated films, then send them a letter about it. Talk to the manager and the owners and tell them that they will be subject to civil liability if they continue being negligent about enforcing restrictions. Discuss it with other parents. Certainly boycott the theaters and arcades until some action is taken.
And don't stop there. In the past few years, law students have brought about the release of prisoners from death row. They have, as part of their education, taken on the research and the legal steps to prove the innocence of several such prisoners. As part of their preparation for actually practicing law, these students have provided a socially significant benefit to society, both by freeing innocent prisoners and by calling attention to improper police tactics and practices.
What if groups of economics students at some institution such as MIT or the University of Chicago took on the task of identifying those corporations that benefited the most from selling violent entertainment to children? Their information could be posted on a Web site, exposing the company, the estimate of gross sales made on their violent products, the assumptions used in making the estimates, and so on. This could be an ongoing research project, perhaps updated quarterly or semiannually. There could be a Top 10 or Top 20 list of companies who benefit from selling violence to our kids. This information is out there somewhere as a part of the public record, but who knows about it? It needs to be teased out from a mountain of data somewhere and posted to focus public attention.
Most people don't understand that the FCC exists to serve us, not the industry. Phone Bill Kennard, the current chairman of the FCC, and ask him this question: Who owns "the airwaves"? He will have to admit that we, the people, do. What this means is that we have important influence. When we make a noise, it will be taken seriously. For instance, stations must provide quality educational programming for children or else they cannot get their licenses renewed. We can challenge stations at the local level in a way that is more difficult to do through a national organization. Just by picking up the phone and voicing concerns about what we are seeing (or not seeing) on our hometown channels, we can rattle cages enough to make important changes for our kids.
Anyone with a computer and some friends -- or from the PTA or a religious or service organization -- and a bit of know-how can set up an E-mail group to start circulating information. People could send opinion pieces and letters of complaint en masse, voicing their joint concerns and demanding changes. Since it is very easy to set up collective mailing lists, in one evening, around a social event, the members of such a group could each send messages to the presidents and CEOs of entertainment companies, alerting them that there are concerned citizens out there who find on-screen violence marketed and sold to children offensive and wrong. At the same time, with the same keystroke, a copy of this message could be sent to senators and representatives, at both the state and federal levels. This would educate legislators about the will of their constituents.
Such action, multiplied on a national level, could mean several million E-mail messages received by the leaders of the entertainment industry in America, who would then only be lying to themselves when they claimed they were giving the people what they wanted. This would be several million E-mail messages to legislators, who would then have the backing to stand up to the special interest groups.
This is exactly the technique used by some very notable citizens to call for an entertainment industry "Code of Conduct." On July 21, 1999, former Education Secretary William J. Bennett and a bipartisan coalition of U.S. Senators unveiled on the Web (www.media-appea1.org) "a signed public appeal ... calling on the entertainment industry to adopt a voluntary code of conduct to protect children and curb excessive media violence and sex." No less than Jimmy Carter, Gerald R. Ford, Colin Powell, Norman Schwarzkopf, Mario Cuomo, Steve Allen, Naomi Judd, and many other politicians and entertainers have signed the petition and strongly urged other concerned Americans to do likewise. The "Web petition" itself will reach millions -- the news coverage about it will add to that number. While this group, admittedly, isn't your everyday collection of ordinary citizens, their method of calling attention to this issue can be adopted by anyone with Web access.
Media events are an excellent way of drawing attention to an issue. While a march on Capitol Hill would be one very powerful way to send politicians a message about violent entertainment, don't discount smaller events. Groups or individuals could sponsor gatherings in front of theaters or video game arcades to protest a new, particularly violent film or game that's been marketed to children. Or organize sit-ins at the offices of television stations, movie companies, and video game manufacturers. The point is, we have power as individuals and as groups, and we should take advantage of it.
The issue of violence in our culture, and the selling of violence to children for profit, needs to become a true national issue, where the voices of the parents, teachers, and child-care professionals are clearly heard by all, transcending the sound bites and the stonewalling of years past. The issue of media violence should become a part of the presidential race for the first presidency of the next century. In 1992, the leaders of President Clinton's successful campaign had a sign hanging on the wall for all to see, reminding them of what was key in the campaign: "It's the economy, stupid." What if, in the presidential campaign of 2000, the reminder became: "It's the violence, stupid"?
Remember the old saying "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results"? Have we been collectively insane over the past fifty years? If you flip through the Resources in this book and scan the chronology of research, congressional debates, and other documentation that has gone into attempting to deal with media violence since 1952, you should be outraged. How is it that millions of dollars and an uncountable amount of hours and energy have been put to work against TV, movie, and video game violence for decades ... and things have only gotten worse? Screen violence has escalated beyond all sense of human civility and decency. Where does it end?
As we now reap the tragic harvest of our past impotence, we know in our minds and hearts that we cannot afford to go down the same road as before. We are now at an important crossroads, and so much of our children's future depends on what we do, or don't do, today. We have our marching orders: It is time for the people to lead. We cannot wait for legislatures to act. We cannot wait for judicial systems. And we certainly cannot wait for the entertainment industry to change course. Save for a few conscientious factions of that industry, the vast majority will have to be brought to their knees financially and in every other way before they'll stop teaching our kids to kill.
We have waited long enough. It is past time. It is time for each of us to take action, trusting that it will make a huge difference, because it will.
CHAPTER 5 CONT'D.
LISTEN TO YOUR CHILD
Listen to what your children are saying about violence. How are they interpreting it? One mother was overwhelmed when her son said, "I want to kill myself." Why wouldn't she be? She later realized that he was equating "self" with an action figure in a video game he had been playing regularly. Her little boy just parroted what he had been exposed to and failed to understand what he was really saying. However, that should be a clear demonstration to his mom that something is amiss.
In an article about the process of healing in a violent world, author Beverly Robertson Jackson tells this rather disturbing story of a concerned mother:
I took my two-year-old son, Tim, on a field trip with his older brother, and he experienced an unexpected traumatic reminder. As we boarded the bus for the field trip, Tim went into hysterics. Because he was just beginning to talk, it was not easy to understand the nature of his terror. After calm coaxing he uttered the word "Kuger." The other children informed me that he thought the man across the aisle was Freddy Krueger.... Although Tim had never seen a horror movie, he had seen television commercials advertising such movies. In addition, he had not seen or interacted with many White males in his short lifetime. Thus he generalized his fear of Freddy Krueger to this encounter.
These are warning signs, and they should be warning parents of what their children are all about. Kids are not great at masking their emotions, so if your child is saying things about violence that give you pause, pick up on it and act accordingly. With this in mind, it is rather astonishing to think what Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris, the two boys who went on a killing rampage in Littleton, were doing right under the noses of their parents. They played hundreds of hours of the video game Doom, set up a racist Web site, built pipe bombs in the garage, armed themselves to the teeth with semiautomatic weapons, and talked to almost anyone who would listen about how they wanted to kill. Was anyone listening? Fifteen lives may have been saved if there had been.
CONFRONT PEER PRESSURE
Peer pressure is perhaps our biggest stumbling block to getting kids on the right track, and this is true with almost everything bad for them. One new father we know despaired that any of his efforts to keep his child away from video games and on-screen violence would result in the boy being an outcast with his classmates. It's hard to come to school and be one of the only kids who haven't seen RoboCop or played Doom or watched every episode of Buffy the Vampire Slayer. Kids want to fit in, and they see this as one major way of doing that. What we as parents must do is teach them not to play that game -- not to care so much about what their friends think that it controls their tastes and what they want to do with their time. You'd be surprised at how little peer pressure really matters, especially with kids under the age of thirteen, once parents actually try to do something about it.
Children are extremely adaptable. If we take a stand in our homes, children respect that. The "Everyone else gets to watch it" or "Everyone else plays those games" arguments can be countered by explaining that in your home you do things certain ways for certain reasons. Your child may resist at first, but many parents we know have found that to their surprise, the kids give up the battle to be "like everyone else" and acquiesce to parents' standards.
The developmental tasks during childhood revolve around building a strong self-identity and social skills. If children are excluded from social interactions because they don't know the latest media-violent enabler in the form of a toy, TV program, movie or video game, their world does not collapse. They don't lose face. In fact, they usually learn valuable lessons and gain the respect of their peer group.
What parents need to focus on is not so much whether the child is missing out on a culturally induced childhood "necessity," but rather on building the child's sense of identity and resiliency. If all parents started addressing this problem, our kids wouldn't have nearly as much problem with peer pressure. Peer groups would take their cues about what's important from parental values, not from hawkers of violent media.
Take special care with young teens. From about ages eleven to sixteen, kids want to be like their peers and around their peers as much as possible. Parental influence takes a backseat. What we have instilled up to this point in a child's life almost seems to go underground, fermenting somewhere in the depths, but not clearly visible. Have a look at the advertising of certain violent films, TV shows, and, especially, video games, and you'll see that it zeroes right in on this age group's isolation, rebelliousness, and sense of powerlessness. This stuff is not easy for parents to contend with when trying to get through to their kids.
Parents need to pick all of their battles, including those that pertain to their teenagers' viewing and playing habits. Parents who have had success dealing with peer pressure at this age have found themselves making compromises: "I won't let you go see Scream with your friends, but remember, I am letting you stay overnight at Pete's tomorrow night." "No, I am still blocking MTV, but I did buy you that CD I wasn't so crazy about." "As I keep telling you, I won't buy violent video games, but I will upgrade your system so you can get better sports games." If we link the "no" with a "yes," chances are their arguments will be shorter and we will win the important battles.
Peer pressure has been an excuse for kids since the beginning of time. We wouldn't let our kids buy guns if they said everyone had one; we wouldn't let them deal drugs because their friends did; and we wouldn't let them jump off the Brooklyn Bridge even if it was all the rage. So we absolutely should not let down our guard when it comes to watching and playing graphically violent fare. Abstaining won't kill our kids, or anyone else.
We would never be so arrogant or reckless as to suggest that it's easy to keep impressionable kids' heads on straight as they face a barrage of very violent programming and video games. It's not easy. The above recommendations are at least a start, though (see the Resources for more information). If nothing else, we hope that they empower parents in this issue, letting them know that there are things that can be done right in the home to lessen the effects that violence as entertainment has on kids. We also hope that parents understand that there are no hard-and-fast rules here, except that an enlightened, intelligent, and loved child is our best defense against rising youth crime rates.
Moving from the home front, let's have a look at the public barometer regarding this issue, and what we can do to push forward. As important as it is to effect change in your own children, it's also key to know where we stand in the fight against those segments of the entertainment industry that are peddling violence. We need to empower kids, but we also need to empower ourselves if we are to make a difference.
As sad as it is that it took a tragedy like the incident in Littleton to wake America and the world up from their collective sleep regarding the issue of violent entertainment, much good has happened since that awful day in April 1999. For one thing, there virtually isn't a newspaper, magazine, radio station, or TV station that hasn't run at least one story on the possible effects of onscreen violence on today's youth. The issue has taken a front seat with the public in a way it never has before. Of course, there are people, many of them in the entertainment industry itself, who still deny that there is any plausible connection between violent programming and video games and the escalating rate of youth violence. But there are many more out there who have read the facts, seen the evidence, and know something is very wrong. Among them is President Clinton. In the wake of Littleton he made it a priority to address the issue, and for the time being he has been consistently vigilant about calling the entertainment industry on the carpet to accept some responsibility. God knows, he's up against some tough lobbies, but so were the people and politicians who took on the tobacco and automobile industries. Clinton has recently ordered the Federal Trade Commission and the Justice Department to look at whether the makers of violent television, movies, and video games are "improperly" marketing this violence to children. We'll see what comes of it, but it's a solid step forward.
Some entertainment companies aren't waiting for legislation. Disney, for example, has ordered all violent video games out of their numerous premises. Would that others would take the same initiative. Soon they may have no choice. But in the past, many in the entertainment industry have demonstrated only arrogance in the face of mounting public outcry over the issue, dragging in the First Amendment whenever it was convenient to protect their bottom line. They have consistently shifted the responsibility away from themselves and right in the laps of their audience. When confronted with allegations of negligence, their first response is invariably "It's the parents' responsibility to keep an eye on what their kids watch and play with." Yes, it is the parents' responsibility. But it is also the parents' responsibility to protect their kids from guns, tobacco, alcohol, pornography, drugs, and explosives. And in all of these areas the community at large helps parents in their struggle to do this. Our society has deemed that marketing and selling .44 Magnums, cigarettes, booze, X-rated films and literature, cocaine, and dynamite to children is illegal. Knowing this, and faced with what we've demonstrated on page after page of this book, we must ask why, in this one, vital area, parents should be left on their own. The answers we're all getting are not cutting it.
The entertainment industry has gone out of its way over the years to convince us that their violent programming and games are really just good, clean fun. Incidents in Littleton, Paducah, and Jonesboro, for example, give us good reason to doubt that logic. Just turning on the television or playing a video game or two does the same. "We wouldn't sell it if people didn't buy it" is another favorite response. This is pimp logic. Drug dealer logic. Except that even pimps and drug dealers generally won't try to market to small children, and they don't claim a constitutional right to sell their products to our kids. Surely these "guardians of the public airwaves," an industry that markets products to children, can be held to a higher moral standard than this.
We've demonstrated how we can effect change in the home, but we must also be vigilant about getting the entertainment industry to own up to their end of the responsibility, just as the tobacco industry had to respond to the effects their product has on people. There are several ways to accomplish this, all of them effective.
We must start by educating parents on a national level. Like the campaign to convince Americans to "buckle up," or the campaign to warn us against the dangers of drunk driving, there must be an educational campaign, on the TV, in ads, in print media, everywhere, to inform parents of the potential harm associated with exposing kids to media violence. We've made some headway in the last few years, but there are just too many parents who are still completely uninformed about the issue. Even the tobacco and alcohol industries accept the need for warning labels on their products, and it is time for the TV, movie, and video game industries to rise up to at least this moral standard. The warnings, when there are warnings, and the rating systems on all of this material are not enough as they now exist. They are also not that truthful.
Most adults know that there are things they can have but their kids can't. Many adults smoke a cigar, drink a beer, shoot a gun, drive a car, or have sex; but they all recognize that these things are not desirable for their children. Now they need to begin to understand that violence, whether it is "professional wrestling" or Natural Born Killers or the video game Postal, is another product that may be okay for them but is potentially harmful for their kids.
Education about media and violence does make a difference. Individuals of all walks of life, from judges to mothers, can begin to take effective action once they understand the role of screen violence in fostering and feeding violent crime. For example, a juvenile court judge in Florida, after hearing the facts on this issue, is now including in his sentencing such things as: community service at animal control centers, humane societies, and hospices to give youthful offenders some personal experience of death; removal of all point-and-shoot games from the home -- and prohibition from being in the presence of these at friends' homes, malls, and so forth; and no viewing of R-rated media. The point is, educating the public at large is a giant first step toward getting changes made.
Would we be content with "self-regulation" and "voluntary restraints" to prevent the alcohol, tobacco, gun, drug, or pornography industries from marketing their products to our kids or grandkids? No. Then why should we be content with voluntary restraints and self-regulation to limit the entertainment industry from marketing their violent products to our kids? Again, why, in this one industry, with this one product, should the rules be different?
Congress has already initiated legislation to curb children's access to explicitly violent movies and video games. In June 1999, legislation sponsored by Representative Henry Hyde of Illinois was designed to restrict violent material from being made available to minors, much as current law shelters them from obscene material. The legislation was defeated by a two-thirds majority, but this wasn't a bad performance considering that the legislation was appearing for the first time, on short notice, and having been opposed by such a powerful industry. Also, there is another scheme floating around the Senate called the "21st-Century Media Responsibility Act." This comprehensive bill, sponsored by Senator John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Senator Joseph Lieberman (D-Conn.), would require makers of music CDs, movies, and video games to share a similar rating system that suggests an appropriate age and description of content. If this bill passes, any retailers who sell "mature" games, CDs, and movies to minors will face $10,000 fines.
Under this kind of legislation, we would treat screen violence in much the same way that we treat sexually obscene material: adults can have access to it, but anyone who provides it to kids can be subject to prosecution. Many years ago, Hustler magazine reprinted a picture from Soldier of Fortune magazine showing a real soldier with his brains blown out. The caption said: "This is the real obscenity." (Hustler is another manufacturer that does not claim any "right" to sell their product to your kids; they accept restraints on their industry, but the TV, movie, and video game industries fall short of even the moral standard set by Hustler.) Not to defend pornographers, but when it comes to what constitutes obscenity, Hustler may just have a point. Sex -- granted, not quite Hustler-style -- will be a normal, healthy part of most adult lives, but there is no place in any life for violence. Just one single act of violence in a lifetime can destroy the lives of the victim and the perpetrator and their families. The ultimate obscenity may well be violence, and perhaps it is time for us to initiate legislation that recognizes this fact.
It has been said that the law is the best teacher. This means, for example, that the ultimate purpose of seat belt laws is to educate and inform citizens about something that is important to all of us. The possibility of getting a ticket is not what makes most people buckle up their kids; they do it because they love their kids and they want to protect them. But the existence of seat belt laws serves as a powerful means to educate citizens about their responsibilities. The very existence of the law shows that our whole society says this is the right thing to do. Similar legislation in the realm of screen violence can have the same effect.
Legislative initiatives do not have to happen in Washington. Every city, county, and state in America has all the authority it needs to help parents in the struggle to protect their kids from the toxic effects of screen violence. For example, Mason City, Iowa, has embraced a plan by their mayor to rid the town of violent video games, vowing "zero tolerance" for these murder simulators.
Another approach to legislative initiatives is the 'R' means 'R' law. President Clinton has said: "I also want to challenge the owners of movie theaters and video stores, distributors -- anyone at any point of sale -- to enforce the rating systems on the products that you sell. Check the IDs, draw the line. If underage children are buying violent video games or getting into R-rated movies, the rating system should be enforced to put a stop to it." What he is asking for is really only common sense. Why bother having such systems and warnings in place if they are patently ignored by everyone? We check IDs for alcohol, tobacco, guns, pornography, and fireworks, and we fine retailers who fail to do so. President Clinton went on to say, "And if, as many of us suspect, there is still too much gratuitous violence in PG-13-rated movies, the rating systems themselves should be reevaluated." Indeed, the rating system we enforce has to be a good one; and this from the mouth of one of the most pro-Hollywood presidents we have ever had.
Colorado Attorney General Ken Salazar has recommended legislation "requiring businesses that sell or rent violent or graphic videos to set up zones limiting access to minors." In the wake of the Littleton shootings similar legislation has been initiated at state and local levels across America. Under such legislation, a sixteen-year-old cannot buy an R-rated movie, and a twelve-year-old cannot rent a PG-13 movie, without parental consent. And if you buy your child a ticket to the latest animated feature at the local multiplex, the theater owner has a responsibility to create an environment in which the child cannot accidentally or intentionally go next door and be exposed to a hardcore "slasher" film.
One legislative initiative, proposed in the state of Washington, is a tax on violent media. Our society determined, earlier in this century, that in America adults have a constitutional right to buy and drink alcohol. But the government also has a right to tax this product, and tobacco, and many other products, in order to recover some of the costs associated with the products' impact on society. Money is usually the incentive for pushing violent entertainment in all its forms; hitting back in the pocketbook would probably be very effective -- and it would send out the message that these products are dangerous and do have consequences when sold to kids.
Another piece of legislation, proposed by two leading trial lawyers, is one establishing that media entities can be held accountable, in civil litigation, for the pain and suffering that can be linked to a specific source of media violence. We already do have this right, but state and federal legislation to this effect would be very useful. Jack Thompson, the attorney in the $130 million lawsuit against the media in the Paducah school shootings, states that such a statutory provision "would be the most powerful deterrent of all and not subject to prosecutorial will: creation of a tort claim by anyone suffering an injury at the hands of someone trained by a video game."
Civil litigation is really just another form of education. It is how we educate an industry. Because of our litigation system we have the safest cars and the best-trained cops in history. Lawsuits, or even the threat of them, help keep businesses and government from acting recklessly. So maybe one solution is to sue the makers of violent entertainment when it is clear that their product was in some way responsible for violence in the real world. They sell violence in order to make money. If they are full members of the marketplace, if they are going to take a profit, then the health of the society demands that they be fully liable to civil lawsuits, just like anyone else who provides a product or service in our nation. Is it easy to prove their complicity in most instances? No, and it never will be. But when a young boy, obsessed with point-and-shoot video games, obsessed with movies about young boys getting revenge on their classmates, picks up a real weapon for the first time and, with deadly accuracy, blows away a bunch of kids in school, it's probably safe to say that the makers of his obsessions have some real responsibility for his actions. That's what the families of Michael Carneal's victims are saying in Paducah with their lawsuit against the entertainment industry.
Ultimately, the only thing that rating systems in TV, movies, and video games have achieved is an admission from the entertainment industry that we need to protect kids from some of their products -- and now this admission is being recognized. The FCC and the attorney general are investigating; they will have the option to subpoena the industry's secret files, and they can see if the industry has intentionally bypassed their own rating systems. If so, then they are clearly negligent and liable.
You see, in a free market our ultimate safeguard is civil liability. If you intentionally, negligently market a harmful product (alcohol, tobacco), and especially if you market it to kids (unsafe cribs, toys), then you will pay. Period.
The violent video games in particular, especially the ones where you hold a gun in your hand, will almost definitely not be found to have First Amendment protection, and that leaves them highly vulnerable. They are appliances, firearms trainers at best, murder simulators at worst. Even a book, Hitman, when its guidance and training was followed to commit real murders, was found by the Supreme Court to be subject to civil liability. If they are willing to hammer the written word (which clearly does fall under the First Amendment) when it teaches adults to kill, how can anyone possibly expect that children's access to these killing simulators will fall under the First Amendment?
In New York, a father taught his eight-year-old how to use and fire a gun. When the kid used that training to kill someone, the father was convicted of manslaughter. The father was using free speech to train his son, but what he trained the son to do was not acceptable by society, and he is now a convicted felon because of it. The extension of this legal process to the designers, manufacturers, and distributors of firearms trainers and murder simulators should be obvious.
It doesn't help their defense that the violent video game manufacturers are selling their product to children as, literally, "killing simulators" -- we described earlier their blatant advertising. How will they deny their own responsibility when a kid like Michael Carneal in Paducah uses what he's learned from their games to actually kill real humans? How will they defend themselves when a company like id Software licenses their product to the marines as a trainer, or when the army uses a slightly modified Super Nintendo system as a marksmanship trainer? They can't have it both ways. The concept of needing to protect children is completely embedded in science, law, and our culture. Any industry that tries to go against science, law, and culture is, quite simply, Doomed.
Another key reason to condemn the actions of that segment of the entertainment industry that markets violence is the simple fact that they have the option to market something other than violence. The alcohol, tobacco, and firearms industries by their natures have to market harmful products. That is, if they cannot sell alcohol, tobacco, or firearms, they cannot sell anything and must go out of business. But the video game industry can market nonviolent games (there are many good ones), and they can thrive and prosper without the violent games. They just choose not to do so. Often the representatives of the video game industry, in defense, claim that their major market is adults and that violent games are only a tiny fraction of their inventory. If that's true, then it would cost them very little to accept regulation in marketing violence to kids. And yet they fight, tooth and nail, any attempt to regulate the sale of violent games to kids.
These are two reasons (marketing to minors and viable alternatives) why those who peddle violence to kids, whether on TV, in movies, or in video games, are truly in deep trouble when they find themselves before American juries in product liability lawsuits. Those associated with the entertainment industry must stop trying to defend the indefensible, and recognize the direction in which the law is likely to go in this area. They should start doing what they can to protect themselves from the reasonable demands of society to seek redress against the people who helped to bring about violent criminal acts. That is probably why Disney pulled violent games from their hotels and theme parks, and why Walmart and Montgomery Ward have stopped selling violent video games, period. In the near future it will be extraordinarily expensive to get liability insurance for a business that designs, manufactures, or markets violent video games. That is what product liability lawsuits can accomplish.
The head of one state trial lawyers association believes that many media lawsuits have paid off for the plaintiffs. We just never hear about it because they settle out of court, paying the victims (or their survivors) large sums of money, once a month, for the rest of their lives, provided they keep their mouths shut. The only way to prevent this strategy of buying silence is to be sure that others know that victims have a right to their day in court. And that brings us back to education -- the lawsuits are a message to the makers of violent entertainment, and to others who have suffered due to the industry's negligence.
The "death rattle," the last sound that leaves the body before death, is also a term that anthropologists use as a metaphor for an intense resistance to the obvious. Could it be that the purveyors of violent entertainment are hearing it? Dr. Jennifer James, an anthropologist and Seattle Times columnist, explains the phenomenon this way:
Anthropologists who witness death and dying rituals report that many cultures believe they have to use rituals ... to help the spirit move on to the next dimension, essentially helping the mind let go .... Our cultural and individual belief systems often do the same, intense resistance before transformation. If you think about the responses of some to civil rights in the 1960's or to women's rights, if you think about claims of tobacco manufacturers [or] producers of violent media ... they all made or make the most absurd claims .... Whenever you encounter absurd rationalizations coupled with intense resistance, in yourself or others, the next move may be a letting go of the position once held so intensely. The noise, the death rattle, is the last effort to maintain a failing point of view.
One way that you, the Citizen and parent, can speed this process is to give "fair warning" to businesses that market violence. If a mall, a store, or an arcade has adult violent video games, and if a movie theater creates an environment in which kids can get into R-rated films, then send them a letter about it. Talk to the manager and the owners and tell them that they will be subject to civil liability if they continue being negligent about enforcing restrictions. Discuss it with other parents. Certainly boycott the theaters and arcades until some action is taken.
And don't stop there. In the past few years, law students have brought about the release of prisoners from death row. They have, as part of their education, taken on the research and the legal steps to prove the innocence of several such prisoners. As part of their preparation for actually practicing law, these students have provided a socially significant benefit to society, both by freeing innocent prisoners and by calling attention to improper police tactics and practices.
What if groups of economics students at some institution such as MIT or the University of Chicago took on the task of identifying those corporations that benefited the most from selling violent entertainment to children? Their information could be posted on a Web site, exposing the company, the estimate of gross sales made on their violent products, the assumptions used in making the estimates, and so on. This could be an ongoing research project, perhaps updated quarterly or semiannually. There could be a Top 10 or Top 20 list of companies who benefit from selling violence to our kids. This information is out there somewhere as a part of the public record, but who knows about it? It needs to be teased out from a mountain of data somewhere and posted to focus public attention.
Most people don't understand that the FCC exists to serve us, not the industry. Phone Bill Kennard, the current chairman of the FCC, and ask him this question: Who owns "the airwaves"? He will have to admit that we, the people, do. What this means is that we have important influence. When we make a noise, it will be taken seriously. For instance, stations must provide quality educational programming for children or else they cannot get their licenses renewed. We can challenge stations at the local level in a way that is more difficult to do through a national organization. Just by picking up the phone and voicing concerns about what we are seeing (or not seeing) on our hometown channels, we can rattle cages enough to make important changes for our kids.
Anyone with a computer and some friends -- or from the PTA or a religious or service organization -- and a bit of know-how can set up an E-mail group to start circulating information. People could send opinion pieces and letters of complaint en masse, voicing their joint concerns and demanding changes. Since it is very easy to set up collective mailing lists, in one evening, around a social event, the members of such a group could each send messages to the presidents and CEOs of entertainment companies, alerting them that there are concerned citizens out there who find on-screen violence marketed and sold to children offensive and wrong. At the same time, with the same keystroke, a copy of this message could be sent to senators and representatives, at both the state and federal levels. This would educate legislators about the will of their constituents.
Such action, multiplied on a national level, could mean several million E-mail messages received by the leaders of the entertainment industry in America, who would then only be lying to themselves when they claimed they were giving the people what they wanted. This would be several million E-mail messages to legislators, who would then have the backing to stand up to the special interest groups.
This is exactly the technique used by some very notable citizens to call for an entertainment industry "Code of Conduct." On July 21, 1999, former Education Secretary William J. Bennett and a bipartisan coalition of U.S. Senators unveiled on the Web (www.media-appea1.org) "a signed public appeal ... calling on the entertainment industry to adopt a voluntary code of conduct to protect children and curb excessive media violence and sex." No less than Jimmy Carter, Gerald R. Ford, Colin Powell, Norman Schwarzkopf, Mario Cuomo, Steve Allen, Naomi Judd, and many other politicians and entertainers have signed the petition and strongly urged other concerned Americans to do likewise. The "Web petition" itself will reach millions -- the news coverage about it will add to that number. While this group, admittedly, isn't your everyday collection of ordinary citizens, their method of calling attention to this issue can be adopted by anyone with Web access.
Media events are an excellent way of drawing attention to an issue. While a march on Capitol Hill would be one very powerful way to send politicians a message about violent entertainment, don't discount smaller events. Groups or individuals could sponsor gatherings in front of theaters or video game arcades to protest a new, particularly violent film or game that's been marketed to children. Or organize sit-ins at the offices of television stations, movie companies, and video game manufacturers. The point is, we have power as individuals and as groups, and we should take advantage of it.
The issue of violence in our culture, and the selling of violence to children for profit, needs to become a true national issue, where the voices of the parents, teachers, and child-care professionals are clearly heard by all, transcending the sound bites and the stonewalling of years past. The issue of media violence should become a part of the presidential race for the first presidency of the next century. In 1992, the leaders of President Clinton's successful campaign had a sign hanging on the wall for all to see, reminding them of what was key in the campaign: "It's the economy, stupid." What if, in the presidential campaign of 2000, the reminder became: "It's the violence, stupid"?
Remember the old saying "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results"? Have we been collectively insane over the past fifty years? If you flip through the Resources in this book and scan the chronology of research, congressional debates, and other documentation that has gone into attempting to deal with media violence since 1952, you should be outraged. How is it that millions of dollars and an uncountable amount of hours and energy have been put to work against TV, movie, and video game violence for decades ... and things have only gotten worse? Screen violence has escalated beyond all sense of human civility and decency. Where does it end?
As we now reap the tragic harvest of our past impotence, we know in our minds and hearts that we cannot afford to go down the same road as before. We are now at an important crossroads, and so much of our children's future depends on what we do, or don't do, today. We have our marching orders: It is time for the people to lead. We cannot wait for legislatures to act. We cannot wait for judicial systems. And we certainly cannot wait for the entertainment industry to change course. Save for a few conscientious factions of that industry, the vast majority will have to be brought to their knees financially and in every other way before they'll stop teaching our kids to kill.
We have waited long enough. It is past time. It is time for each of us to take action, trusting that it will make a huge difference, because it will.
- admin
- Site Admin
- Posts: 37493
- Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am
Re: Stop Teaching Our Kids to Kill: A Call to Action Against
by admin » Fri Sep 13, 2013 1:49 am
RESOURCES
A DEFINITION OF MEDIA VIOLENCE
The following is a definition of media violence. Not the only one, mind you, but one that we find gives fairly clear guidelines on a complicated issue. Let it act as a useful lens for viewing any type of entertainment or playing the hundreds of video games that exist on the market.
Violence is the intentional use of force to harm a human being or animal. Its outcome is injury -- physical or psychological, fatal or nonfatal. It is true that violence is a part of the real world. However, we do not take our children to see autopsies performed as entertainment, nor do we invite someone into our living room to kill, brutally beat, or rape another person for our children to witness for their amusement.
Therefore, portrayals of violence in the media that glamorize and/or sensationalize violent acts toward other human beings or animals and show them as acceptable behavior provide a socially aberrant environment in which it is difficult to raise emotionally healthy children. Also, the prevalence of violence on television in itself imparts an implicit acceptability to the vicarious experience of violence and pushes the boundaries of cultural norms into the realm of social deviancy. From a synthesis of the research we find that harmful media violence includes:
• Plots that are driven by quick-cut scenes of gratuitous violent acts delivered in a rapid-fire frequency with graphic, salient technical effects.
• Graphic, sadistic revenge, torture techniques, inhumane treatment of others in a context of humor, trivialization, glibness and/or raucous "fun."
• Explicitly depicted violent acts shown through special effects, camera angles, background music, or lighting to be glamorous, heroic, "cool," and worthy of imitation.
• Depictions of people holding personal and social power primarily because they are using weapons, or using their bodies as weapons, and dominating other people through the threat of violence or through actual violence.
• Extraneous, graphic, gory, detailed violent acts whose intent is to shock.
• Violent acts shown as an acceptable way to solve problems or presented as the primary problem-solving approach.
• News programs that explicitly detail murder and rape, with information and graphic images not necessary for understanding the central message.
It should be noted, however, that any form of aggression on the screen has the potential to make children more aggressive. The more graphic and horrific the violence, the more likely the negative effects. Research clearly demonstrates that sensational media violence causes children and teens to become more aggressive and mean, creating fear, a lack of sensitivity to all forms of violence, and an increased appetite for violence -- in real life and on the screen. An early preference for violent programming is a strong indicator of aggressive and antisocial behavior as an adult. Sensational portrayals, then, offer children a justification for violent acts in real life and perpetuate socially dangerous attitudes, behaviors, and values.
VOICES OF CONCERN ABOUT ON-SCREEN VIOLENCE
Throughout this book we have cited the work of many organizations that have contributed to the scholarship on the subject of violent entertainment and its negative effects on children. While we do not have the room to name every group that has commented on the issue, we present here a list of the major organizations -- as well as how to contact them, and the specifics on the stands they take -- that have set the tone and lent strong backing to our argument.
The American Medical Association (AMA)
515 North State St.
Chicago, IL 60610
312-464-5563
http://www.ama-assn.org
In 1952, an editorial in the Journal of the American Medical Association raised the topic of TV violence as a health issue. The editorial ran during the first Congressional hearings on the impact of television on delinquency.
At its 1976 meeting, the American Medical Association adopted a policy supporting research on the impact of TV violence. Also adopted at that meeting was a resolution that declared the AMA's "recognition of the fact that TV violence is a risk factor threatening the health and welfare of young Americans, indeed our future society."
In 1982, the AMA reaffirmed " ... its vigorous opposition to television violence and its support for efforts designed to increase the awareness of physicians and patients that television violence is a risk factor threatening the health of young people."
In 1996, the AMA developed a guidebook for physicians with the goal of helping their patients understand the harmful effects of media violence. A portion of the summary in that guidebook reads:
"Television and other forms of visual media play an enormous role in everyday life, particularly in the lives of children and adolescents. While television serves in the education and socialization of children, there are also a number of health problems associated with the excessive watching of television, independent of content. In addition, an extensive body of research amply documents a strong correlation between children's exposure to media violence and a number of behavioral and psychological problems, primarily increased aggressive behavior. The evidence further shows that these problems are caused by the exposure itself. Physicians have important roles to play in diminishing children's involvement with violent media by serving as educators, advisors, and advocates .... There is an established body of evidence documenting the troubling behavioral effects of repeated exposure to media violence .... This guide offers physicians an overview of the health consequences of such exposure and how to understand the findings in relation to general societal violence, child development, and learning."
The American Psychological Association (APA)
750 First St. NE
Washington, DC 20002-4242
202-336-5500
http://www.apa.org
The American Psychological Association is the nation's largest scientific and professional organization representing psychology and the world's largest association of psychologists. The APA's membership includes more than 102,000 researchers, educators, clinicians, consultants, and students.
In 1993, the APA's Commission on Violence and Youth stated: "There is absolutely no doubt that higher levels of viewing violence on television are correlated with increased acceptance of aggressive attitudes and increased aggressive behavior. Three major national studies ... reviewed hundreds of studies to arrive at the irrefutable conclusion that viewing violence increases violence. In addition, prolonged viewing of media violence can lead to emotional desensitization toward violence .... We call upon the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to review, as a condition for license renewal, the programming and outreach efforts and accomplishments of television stations in helping to solve the problem of youth violence. This recommendation is consistent with the research evidence indicating television's potential to broadcast stations to 'serve the educational and informational needs of children,' both in programming and in outreach activities designed to enhance the educational value of programming. We also call on the FCC to institute rules that would require broadcasters, cable operators and other telecasters to avoid programs containing an excessive amount of dramatized violence during 'child viewing hours' between 6 A.M. and 10 P.M."
The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP)
141 Northwest Point Blvd.
Elk Grove Village, IL 60009-0927
847-981-7873
http://www.apa.org
In 1997 the American Academy of Pediatrics presented the following statement to the U.S. Senate:
"The American Academy of Pediatrics, an organization of 53,000 pediatricians, offers this statement on behalf of the children and adolescents of this country. The level of violence to which they are exposed through the media has reached such horrific proportions, health professionals, parents, legislators and educators agree that something has to be done. The problem of violence on television may not appear as compelling or as urgent as immunizations, the risk of AIDS for adolescents or the need for health insurance for all children. However, in terms of overall childhood morbidity and mortality, it breeds so many problems in our society that child health experts are very concerned. Although no one holds television responsible as the sole instigator of violence, the influence of television is a factor.
"The American Academy of Pediatrics states without hesitation that televised violence has a clear and reproducible effect on the behavior of children. Televised violence contributes to the unwholesome social environment in which we live, the frequency with which violence is used to resolve conflict, and the passivity with which violence is perceived. Both epidemiological and experimental studies have demonstrated a clear relationship in children between the viewing of televised violence and violent or aggressive behavior."
The National Association for the Education of Young Children
(NAEYC)
1509 16th St. NW
Washington, DC 20036-1426
202-232-8777 or 800-424-2460
http://www.naeyc.org
In 1996, the National Association for the Education of Young Children, an organization of over one hundred thousand early childhood educators, issued a position statement, "Violence in the Lives of Children," which, in part, states:
"The culture of violence is mirrored in and influenced by the media. As a result of the deregulation of the broadcasting industry, children's television and related toys have become more violent. Research is clear that the media, particularly television and films, contribute to the problem of violence in America. Research demonstrates that children who are frequent viewers of violence on television are less likely to show empathy toward the pain and suffering of others and more likely to behave aggressively."
The statement went on to call for early childhood educators " ... to generate a sense of public outrage that motivates actions that will eliminate violence in the lives of children, families, and communities, along with restricting the marketing of violence through linkup of media, toys, and licensed products."
American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
(AACAP)
3615 Wisconsin Ave. NW
Washington, DC 20016
202-966-7300
http://www.aacap.org
This national organization, representing 6,900 psychiatrists who specialize in working with children and adolescents, produces policies and research reports on media violence. Their Media Committee periodically publishes reviews of children's films. Below is an excerpt from one of the "Facts for Families" taken from their Web site.
"American children watch an average of three to four hours of television daily. Television can be a powerful influence in developing valuing systems and shaping behavior. Ultimately, much of today's television programming is violent. Hundreds of studies of the effects of TV violence on children and teenagers have found that children may: (1) become 'immune' to the horror of violence; (2) gradually accept violence as a way to solve problems; (3) imitate the violence they observe on television; and (4) identify with certain characters, victims and/or victimizers.
"Extensive viewing of television violence by children causes greater aggressiveness. Sometimes, watching a single violent program can increase aggressiveness. Children who view shows in which violence is very realistic, frequently repeated or unpunished, are more likely to imitate what they see. Children with emotional, behavioral, learning or impulse control problems may be more easily influenced by TV violence. The impact of TV violence may be immediately evident in the child's behavior or may surface years later, and young people can even be affected when the family atmosphere shows no tendency toward violence. "
The National Parent/Teacher Association (National PTA)
330 North Wabash Ave., Suite 2100
Chicago, IL 60611
800-307-4782
FAX: 312-670-6783
http://www.pta.org
The National Parent/Teacher Association, representing 6.5 million members, plays a pivotal role in informing and educating us about media violence. Visiting their Web site, parents can find a wealth of helpful information, including information on the rating systems, practical ideas for critical viewing, and activity sheets for dealing with media violence. The National PTA has consistently issued strong statements against TV violence, video game violence, and video game sites.
In 1993, the Convention Resolutions Committee reviewed their resolution "Violence in TV Programming," adopted in 1975. It stands in effect today.
STATEMENT ON VIOLENCE IN TV PROGRAMMING
"Whereas, children spend countless unsupervised hours watching TV; and whereas, the choice of program offerings often is less desirable, with much emphasis on violence; and whereas, children are known to imitate observed behavior and actions; and whereas, statistics reveal an alarming increase in crime committed by younger and younger children; and whereas, the Surgeon General's report states that there can be a cause-and-effect relationship between watching violence on TV and aggressive behaviors in children and young people; and whereas, at this time TV programming is self-regulated by the broadcasting industry through the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) TV Code, a voluntary code not subscribed to by all stations and the provisions of which are repeatedly violated; be it therefore resolved, that the National PTA urge its state congresses, districts, councils and local units to observe and monitor TV programming and commercials in their areas; and where an excessive amount of violence in programming is seen to make known their views with documented reporting to sponsors of the program, with copies to the local TV stations, to the TV networks, to the NAB, to the Federal Communications Commission, and to their elected representatives; and be it further resolved, that the National PTA demand from the networks and local stations reduction in the amount of violence shown on television programs and commercials during the entire day, with particular attention to viewing hours between 2:00 P.M. and 10:00 P.M. and weekend morning hours, when impressionable children and young people are most likely to be watching; and be it further resolved, that the National PTA through its state congresses, districts, councils, and local units demand, if the self-regulation of programming and commercials by the broadcasting industry does not result in better TV programming with less emphasis on violence, that the Federal Communications Commission establish and enforce regulations limiting the number and percentage of programs of violence to be presented each day."
STATEMENT ON VIOLENCE IN VIDEO GAMES AND OTHER INTERACTIVE MEDIA (ADOPTED BY THE 1994 CONVENTION DELEGATES)
"Whereas, the term 'video games' is defined broadly to include any interactive computer game including all software and hardware and future developments in video game technology and interactive media; and whereas, research studies have found that, at least in the short term, children who play violent video games are significantly more aggressive afterwards than those who play less violent video games; and whereas, studies show that violent TV programs and video games have similar effects in raising children's subsequent levels of aggression; and whereas, research shows violent video games can suppress children's inclination towards engaging in pro-social behaviors; therefore be it resolved, that the National PTA, through its constituent bodies, work to educate and to increase awareness of the impact of violent video games and other interactive media; and be it further resolved, that the National PTA, through its constituent bodies, support federal legislation to provide for the development of ratings or other appropriate information systems by a commission independent of the industry to inform parents and consumers about the content of video games and other interactive media; and be it further resolved, that the National PTA and its constituent bodies actively support efforts to end the violence in video games and other interactive media that desensitize consumers to the value of life, human or animal."
STATEMENT ON VIDEO GAME SITES (ADOPTED BY THE 1982 BOARD OF DIRECTORS; LAST REVIEW, 1998 BY THE CONVENTION RESOLUTIONS COMMITTEE)
"National PTA is concerned about video game sites which may have an adverse effect on many of the young people who frequent such establishments. Initial studies have shown that game sites are often in close proximity to schools.
"In many cases there is not adequate control of access by school-age children during school hours, which compounds the problems of school absenteeism and truancy.
"Where little or no supervision exists, drug selling, drug use, drinking, gambling, increased gang activities, and other such behavior may be seen. Where there is diligent supervision and adequate lighting, however, the interest of the customers centers on the games and the quality of play seems to be the major concern of the youthful participants.
"State PTAs should encourage their units, councils and districts to become aware of and to educate their membership and the community regarding activities of young people at business establishment having video game machines and the impact these activities have on school attendance, alcohol and drug activity.
"PTAs should study the impact of video game arcades and other establishments where games are located. They should also work for the best possible solution that allows for reasonable use by children and youth, and at the same time does not encroach on the right of merchants to conduct their businesses."
A CHRONOLOGY OF MAJOR FINDINGS, STATEMENTS, AND ACTIONS ON MEDIA VIOLENCE, 1952-1999
Television and entertainment violence and its effects on children has been an issue since the middle of the century, although you'd barely know it. It seems that every time it captures the national consciousness, usually due to some horrendous act of schoolyard violence or a skyrocketing youth aggravated assault rate, it is presented as if it's never been discussed before. Herewith, a chronology of major findings, statements, and actions regarding media violence from 1952 to the present day. Much, if not all, of this regards television, as opposed to film and video games. Collectively, this places our fight in context, for without understanding the history of this issue, we will forever be starting over when confronting it.
1952: The U.S. House of Representatives conducts the first House committee hearings on TV violence and its impact on children. These are the first of many hearings to occur over the following decades.
1954: The U.S. Senate conducts the first Senate committee hearings on the role of television in juvenile crime.
1961: Federal Communications Commission chairman Newton N. Minow tells the National Association of Broadcasters that American TV is a "vast wasteland."
1969: The National Commission on the Causes and Prevention of Violence cites TV violence as a contributor to violence in our society.
1972: The surgeon general's office issues a report citing a link between TV/movie violence and aggressive behavior.
1975: The National Parent/Teacher Association adopts a resolution demanding that networks and local TV stations reduce the amount of violence in programs and commercials.
1976: The House of Delegates of the American Medical Association adopts a resolution "to actively oppose TV programs containing violence, as well as products and/or services sponsoring such programs," in "recognition of the fact that TV violence is a risk factor threatening the health and welfare of young Americans, indeed our future society."
1979: Parents of a fifteen-year-old convicted of murdering a neighbor initiate the first known lawsuit against TV networks (Zamora v. CBS, et al.), for inciting their son to violence. The suit is unsuccessful.
1982: The National Institute of Mental Health issues an extensive report stating that there is a clear consensus on the strong link between TV violence and aggressive behavior.
1984: The attorney general's Task Force on Family Violence states that evidence is overwhelming that TV violence contributes to real violence.
Leonard Eron and L. Rowell Huesmann, in a twenty-two-year study that tracked 875 boys and girls from ages eight to thirty, find that those who watched more violent television as children are more likely as adults to commit serious crimes and to use violence to punish their own children.
The American Academy of Pediatrics' Task Force on Children and Television cautions physicians and parents that TV violence promotes aggression.
1985: The American Psychological Association's Commission on Youth and Violence cites research showing a link between TV violence and real violence.
1987: Canadian broadcasters institute a voluntary code on TV violence that discourages broadcasting violent programming early in the evening.
1989: The National PTA again calls for the TV industry to reduce the amount of violence in programs.
1990: The Television Violence Act (TVA) gives three major networks (ABC, CBS, and NBC) an antitrust exemption so they can formulate a joint policy on violence.
1991: Former FCC chairman Newton Minow declares: "In 1961 I worried that my children would not benefit much from television, but in 1991 I worry that my children will actually be harmed by it."
1992: The Journal of the American Medical Association publishes Dr. Brandon Centerwall's study concluding that "the introduction of television into the United States in the 1950s caused a subsequent doubling of the homicide rate," and "if, hypothetically, television technology had never been developed, there would today be 10,000 fewer murders each year in the United States, 70,000 fewer rapes, and 700,000 fewer injurious assaults."
The American Psychological Association report "Big World, Small Screen" concludes that the forty years of research on the link between TV violence and real-life violence has been ignored. It goes on to state that the "scientific debate is over," and calls for federal policy to protect society.
Days before the House of Representatives hearings on TV violence, and having been forced to do so by the 1990 Television Violence Act, the broadcast industry releases a set of "voluntary" industry guidelines (called "principles") on violence.
1993: In June, major TV networks announce their agreement to air parental advisories when shows deemed violent are aired.
The National Council for Families and Television holds the industrywide Leadership Conference on Violence in Television Programming.
The Departments of Justice, Education, and Health and Human Services sponsor a major conference, calling for TV networks to consider the social effects of media violence when designing programming.
1994: The Center for Media and Public Affairs conducts a study of television violence and finds that from 1992 to 1994, depictions of serious violence on television increased 67 percent.
1998: The National Television Violence Study concludes that 60 percent of all TV programs are violent and that "there are substantial risks of harmful effects from viewing violence throughout the television environment."
The publication of "Children and Media Violence: A Yearbook from the UNESCO International Clearinghouse on Children and Violence on the Screen." It reviews worldwide studies of media violence from twenty-five countries and outlines the world's concern about the "global aggressive culture" being formed by violent television, particularly violent U.S. television and film.
1999: President Clinton initiates a study by the FTA and the Attorney General of the strategies of marketing violent media to children.
WHERE TO VOICE YOUR CONCERNS
As its subtitle says, this book is a call to action. Here's where to call, write, fax, E-mail, and visit for action on this issue. We suggest contacting the following television broadcast and cable networks, major movie studios, theaters, pertinent organizations, government offices, and toy companies to voice your concerns about violent entertainment. But we also encourage you to let those people and organizations know when they're helping to make a positive difference.
TELEVISION STATIONS
(Note: The Telecommunications Act of 1996 requires television stations to make available a staff person to act as a liaison with viewers who want to comment on children's programs.)
ABC
Audience Information Dept.
77th West 66th St., 9th Floor
New York, NY 10023
212-456-7477
ABC Entertainment
2040 Avenue of the Stars
Los Angeles, CA 90067
310-557-5413 or 800-213-6222
A&F/Arts and Entertainment
235 East 45th St.
New York, NY 10017
212-210-1340
AMC/American Movie Classics
1111 Stewart Ave.
Bethpage, NY 11714
516-364-2222
CBS
Audience Services
530 West 57th St.
New York, NY 10019
212-975-3247
CNN
One CNN Center
Atlanta, GA 30348-5366
404-827-1500
COM/Comedy Central
Attention: Dennay Riley
1775 Broadway
New York, NY 10019
212-767-8600
Discovery Channel
7700 Wisconsin Ave., Suite 700
Bethesda, MD 20814
301-986-0444
Disney Channel
3800 West Alameda Ave.
Burbank, CA 91505
800-822-8648
FAX: 818-842-1024
ESPN
935 Middle St.
Bristol, CT 06010
860-585-2236
FOX Broadcast Studios
PO Box 900
Beverly Hills, CA 90213
310-369-1000
HBO/Home Box Office
1100 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10036
212-512-1000
Lifetime
Viewer Services
309 West 49th St.
New York, NY 10019
212-424-7000
MTV (owns VH-1 and Nickelodeon)
Viewer Comments
1515 Broadway, 24th Floor
New York, NY 10036
212-258-8000
NBC
30 Rockefeller Plaza
New York, NY 10112
212-664-2333
NICK/Nickelodeon
1515 Broadway, 42nd Floor
New York, NY 10036
212-258-7500
PBS
Attention: Program Information
1320 Braddock PI.
Alexandria, VA 22314
703-739-5000
SHO/Showtime
1633 Broadway
New York, NY 10019
212-708-1600
TNN (The Nashville Network)
2806 Opryland Drive
Nashville, TN 37214
615-883-7000
TNT/Turner Network TV
1050 Techwood Drive NW
Atlanta, GA 30318
404-885-4538
USA Network
Viewer Response
1230 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10020
212-408-9100
VH-1/Contemporary Music Videos
1515 Broadway
New York, NY 10036
212-258-7800
MAJOR STUDIOS: MOTION PICTURES, HOME VIDEOS, TV MOVIES
Columbia Pictures Entertainment Company, or
Sony Pictures Entertainment, Inc., or
Tri-Star Pictures
10202 West Washington Blvd.
Culver City, CA 90232
310-244-4000
MGM Communications Co.
Attention: William Mitchell
2500 Broadway St.
Santa Monica, CA 90404-3061
310-449-3000
Paramount Communications, Inc.
Publicity Department
1515 Broadway
New York, NY 10036
212-846-4320
Paramount Pictures and Home Videos
Bluhdorn Building
5555 Melrose Ave.
Hollywood, CA 90038-3917
323-956-5000
The Samuel Goldwyn Company
10203 Santa Monica Blvd.
Los Angeles, CA 90067-6403
310-552-2255
The Samuel Goldwyn Company
Attention: Publicity Department
1133 Broadway
New York, NY 10010
212-367 -9435
Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corporation
10201 West Pico Blvd.
Los Angeles, CA 90035
310-369-1000
Universal Pictures
100 Universal City Plaza
Universal City, CA 91608
818-777-1000
The Walt Disney Company
500 South Buena Vista St.
Burbank, CA 91521
818-560-1581
Warner Brothers, Inc. (a division of Time Warner, Inc.)
4000 Warner Blvd.
Burbank, CA 91522
818-954-6000
THEATERS
Cineplex Odeon Corporation
1303 Yonge St.
Toronto, Ontario
Canada M4T 2Y9
416-323-6600
General Cinema Corporation
Director of Operations
1280 Boylston St.
Chestnut Hill, MA 02467
800-992-0084
For comments on the film rating system:
Motion Picture Association of America, Inc.
Jack Valenti, President
1600 Eye St. NW
Washington, DC 20006
202-293-1966
For comments on the video and computer game rating system:
Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB)
845 3rd Ave.
New York, NY 10022
800-771-3772
http://www.ersb.org
VIDEO RENTAL COMPANIES
Blockbuster Videos
Corporate Office
1201 Elm St.
Dallas, TX 75270
214-854-3000
Tower Records/Video
Customer Comments/Video Rental
MTS, Inc.
2500 Del Monte St., Building C
West Sacramento, CA 95691-9001
916-373-2500 or 800-541-0070
VIDEO AND COMPUTER GAMES
Nintendo of America, Inc.
Corporate Communication Manager
4820 150th Ave. NE
Redmond, WA 98052
425-882-2040
FAX: 425-882-3585
Sega of America
650 Townsend St., Suite 650
San Francisco, CA 94065
415-701-6000
To voice your opinion about a coin-operated video game parental advisory system, contact:
American Amusement Machine Association (AAMA)
450 East Higgins Rd., Suite 201
Elk Grove Village, IL 60007
847-290-9088
http://www.com-op.org
The AAMA is a nonprofit trade association that represents approximately 120 manufacturers, distributors, and parts suppliers of coin-operated amusement equipment.
International Association of Family Entertainment Centers
(IAFEC)
36 Symonds Rd.
Hillsborough, NH 03244
603-464-6498
E-mail: [email protected]
GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS
Federal Communications Commission
Mass Media Bureau
Complaints/Enforcement Division
Political Programming Branch, Room 3443
445 12th St. SW
Washington, DC 20554
202-418-1430
The President of the United States
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
Washington, DC
202-456-1414
TOY MANUFACTURERS AND RETAILERS
Lewis Galoob Toys
500 Forbes Blvd.
San Francisco, CA 94080
650-952-1678
Hasbro Toy Group
1027 Newport Ave.
Pawtucket, RI 02862
401-431-8697
Mattel Toys
333 Continental Blvd.
El Segundo, CA 90245
310-252-2000
Saban Entertainment
400 West Alameda Ave.
Burbank, CA 91505
818-972-4800
Toys R Us Corporate Office
CEO Robert Nakasone
461 From Rd.
Paramus, NJ 07652
210-262-7800
MEDIA LITERACY AND VIOLENCE PREVENTION ORGANIZATIONS
We're not alone out there. There are several worthwhile watchdog groups that have been fighting the good fight for years. The following is a list of media literacy and violence prevention organizations, along with their statements of purpose.
Americans for Responsible Television
(The Dove Foundation)
4521 Broadmoor SE
Grand Rapids, MI 49512
616-514-5000 or 800-968-8437
http://www.dove.org
Established to encourage and promote the creation, production, and distribution of wholesome family entertainment, the Dove Foundation, free from commercial pressures, awards a blue-and-white Dove Seal to any movie or video that is rated "family friendly" by its film review board.
Atrium Society Publications
PO Box 816
Middlebury, VT 05753
800-848-6021
http://www.atriumsoc.org
The Atrium Society offers understanding about the conditioned mind, "which has brought us to a state of unparalleled conflict and devastation that we experience in the world today." Its intent is to bring the issue of conditioning, and the tremendous conflict conditioning creates, to the forefront of awareness and consideration. Resources include a series of books for youth on understanding and handling violence; books for parents, such as Growing Up Sane: Understanding the Conditioned Mind; audio/videotapes; teacher training workshops; and seminars to address the primary causes of conflict.
Canadians Concerned About Violence in Entertainment
(C-CAVE)
416-961-0853
FAX: 416-929-2720
E-mail: [email protected]
Founded in 1983 in collaboration with the U.S.-based National Coalition on Television Violence, Canadians Concerned About Violence in Entertainment provides public education on the results of media violence research and believes the public has a right to know that the overwhelming weight of research points toward harmful effects. The organization functions primarily as a working group through media interviews and the provision of information to journalists and other members of the media. CCAVE maintains links with a broad coalition of groups, both nationally and internationally.
Center for Media Literacy
4727 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 403
Los Angeles, CA 90010
800- 226- 9494
FAX: 323-931-4474
http://www.medialit.org
The Center for Media Literacy distributes a broad range of media literacy education books, kits, and videos for parents and teachers, including the highly acclaimed Beyond Blame: Challenging Violence in the Media. This kit applies the principles of media literacy education to violence reduction and prevention. It contains lesson plans, ready-to-use handouts, and audio/video resources for all age groups. A comprehensive catalog of all resources offered is available.
Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence
Institute for Behavorial Sciences
University of Colorado, Boulder
Campus Box 442
Boulder, CO 80309-0442
303-492-8147
The Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence provides guidance on research, effective programs, and policy actions that improve the effectiveness of antiviolence interventions. Among the reports available is What Works in Reducing Adolescent Violence: An Empirical Review of the Field by Patrick Tolan and Nancy Guerra.
Center for Successful Parenting
1917 East 116th Street
Carmel, IN 46032
317-581-5355
Fax: 317-581-5399
E-mail: [email protected].
Founded in 1997, the Center for Successful Parenting is presently focused on media violence because the founders believe that protecting children from the negative impact of media violence is key for adults of the next generation to be mentally and socially healthy. The group is organizing the ever-growing body of research demonstrating the negative effects of media violence, along with a national parent awareness campaign.
Committee for Children
2203 Airport Way S., Suite 500
Seattle, WA 98134
800-634-4449
The Committee for Children is an international nonprofit organization whose mission is to promote the safety, well-being, and social development of children by creating quality educational programs for educators, families, and communities. The prekindergarten-to-grade 9 violence prevention curriculum, Second Step, teaches children prosocial skills and includes a companion program for parent education at the elementary level. Second Step implementation has taken place in approximately ten thousand schools across North America. A study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (May 27, 1997) demonstrates Second Step's effectiveness in changing children's behavior.
Cultural Environment Movement (CEM)
PO Box 40285
Philadelphia, PA 19106
E-mail: [email protected]
The Cultural Environment Movement is a nonprofit coalition of independent organizations and individual supporters in every state of the United States and in fifty-seven other countries on six continents, united in working for freedom, fairness, gender equity, general diversity, and democratic decision-making in media ownership, employment, and representation. The organization supports, and if necessary organizes, local and national media councils, study groups, citizen groups, minority and professional groups, and other forums of public discussion, policy development, representation, and action. Not waiting for a blueprint, it creates and experiments with methods of community and citizen participation in local, national, and international media policy-making.
The Fathers' Network
PO Box 800-SH
San Anselmo, CA 94979
415-453-2839
http://www.menstuff.org
The goal of this organization is to increase fathers' involvement in parenting and to promote fulfilling relationships between fathers and children. Much useful information can be found on their Web site for men who want to make a difference in a child's life.
GrowSmartBrains
PO Box 311
Redmond, WA 98073-0311
206-654-2994
http://www.GrowSmartBrains.com
Author Gloria DeGaetano and her staff of highly trained educators and consultants offer research-based, application-rich workshops across the United States and Canada for corporations, school districts, social service, and parent organizations. Emphasis is on the impact of screen technologies on brain development and the problematic effects of violent entertainment on children's learning and behavior. GrowSmartBrains provides manuals (in English and Spanish) and educational audio- and videotapes, including Maximizing Your Child's Potential: Healthy Brain Development in a Media Age, a forty-minute video for parents of young children.
Heavy Freight Films
811 First Avenue, Suite 425
Seattle, WA 98104
Contacts:
Richard Hazzard, M.Ed.
206-755-3118
FAX: 206-621-1193
Sandy Cioffi
206-322-1332
FAX: 206-322-1341
Two of Washington State's leading media literacy specialists founded Heavy Freight Films with the intention of creating unique opportunities for individual and social change through media education, addressing issues such as violence prevention, youth leadership, and community involvement. Their projects include consulting with school districts for adopting media literacy standards, extensive teacher training programs, conducting innovative film schools for youth, and community film projects with professional filmmakers mentoring youth in film production. One video production, Terminal 187, produced by and for youth, is an excellent, compelling examination of the consequences of violence for anyone who cares about kids.
Institute on Violence and Destructive Behavior
1265 University of Oregon
Eugene, OR 97403-1265
541-346-3591
http://interact.uoregon.edulivdb/ivdb.html
The Institute on Violence and Destructive Behavior is doing some of the most seminal research in the area of violence prevention today. Its mission is to empower schools and social service agencies to address violence and destructive behavior, at the point of school entry and beyond, in order to ensure safety and to facilitate the academic achievement and healthy social development of children and youth. Key target areas addressed are antisocial behavior, school failure, delinquency, violence, gang membership, and at-risk conditions. Call for a list of publications and research studies currently available.
Lion and the Lamb Project
4300 Montgomery Ave., Suite 104
Bethesda, MD 20814
301-654-3091
FAX: 301-718-8192
http://www.lionlamb.org
The Lion and the Lamb Project provides information about the effects of violent entertainment, toys, and games on children's behavior for parents, teachers, day-care providers, social workers, psychologists, grandparents, and others -- anyone interested in teaching values of nonviolence to children. They offer four different types of workshops, along with a Parent Action Kit, which provides suggestions for selecting age-appropriate, nonviolent toys and games, and tips for resolving family conflicts peacefully at home and on the playground.
Media Awareness Network
1500 Merivale Rd., 3rd Floor
Nepean, ON
Canada K2E 6Z5
613-224-7721
FAX: 613-224-1958
E-mail: [email protected]
http://www.media-awareness.ca
The Media Awareness Network (MNet) is a nonprofit organization promoting media education among children and young people. MNet's award-winning Web site is one of the largest educational Web sites in Canada. It provides parents, educators, and community leaders with free, copyright-cleared on-line resources and information on a variety of issues related to children and the media, including media violence, advertising to children, and children and the Internet.
Media Education Foundation
26 Center St.
Northampton, MA 01060
413-584-8500
E-mail: [email protected]
http://www.igc.org/mef
video orders: 800-897-0080
Directed by well-known media scholar and author Sut Jhally, this foundation produces and distributes award-wining resources for students of media literacy, educators, parents, and community leaders. The Killing Screens: Media and the Culture of Violence is an educational video that examines the psychology, sociology, and politics of media violence. In the video, paced for high school and college students, Dr. George Gerbner addresses the issue of living and growing within a cultural environment of pervasive violent representation. Social critic Neil Postman says of this video: "If every American could see The Killing Screens there would ensue a revolution in the content of popular media."
Mediascope, Inc.
12711 Ventura Blvd., Suite 440
Studio City, CA 91604
818-508-2080
http://www.mediascope.org
Mediascope is a national, nonprofit research and public policy organization working to raise awareness about the influence of media on society. Founded in 1992, the organization works with the entertainment industry to encourage responsible depictions of health and social issues, particularly as they relate to children and adolescents. They address such topics as media violence, ratings, teen sexuality, effects of video games, artists' rights and responsibilities, and substance abuse. Mediascope's resources and services are used by screenwriters, journalists, researchers, producers, media critics, educators, lawyers, media executives, legislators, government officials, advocacy groups, and students.
MediaWise
PO Box 6145
Kansas City, KS 66106
913-831-3221
FAX: 913-831-0262
Media Wise operates through a broad-based coalition of community groups to reduce the impact and incidence of violence in the media through public awareness, education, and community action without invading First Amendment rights. They provide programs and services to help children, youth, and adults become discriminating media consumers by learning how to analyze, evaluate, and interpret the messages and images delivered by the various forms of media in our society. They offer MediaSmarts, an innovative video-based media literacy and antiviolence curriculum for use in middle schools or by youth-serving agencies.
Mothers Against Violence in America (MAVIA)
105-14th Ave., Suite 2A
Seattle, WA 98122
206-323-2303
800-897-7697
FAX: 206-323-2132
http://www.mavia.org
Mothers Against Violence in America is a national, nonprofit, nonpartisan educational organization dedicated to reducing violence by and against children. Founded in 1994, with over thirty-five thousand members, MAVIA encourages prevention investment in young people before they are affected by violence, and advocates for changes that support a safer environment. MAVIA's innovative programs, such as Students Against Violence Everywhere (SAVE) and violent video game legislative initiatives, have been praised by President and Mrs. Clinton as exemplary models of grassroots activism.
National Alliance for Non-Violent Programming (NANP)
122 North Elm St., Suite 300
Greensboro, NC 27401
336-370-0392
FAX: 336-370-0407
E-mail: [email protected]
A network of national not-for-profit organizations including the American Medical Women's Association, Jack and Jill of America, Jewish Women International, the National Association of Women Business Owners, National Council of LaRaza, and Soroptimist of the Americas, the National Alliance for Non-Violent Programming's reach into communities extends to over two million citizens at the grassroots level. NANP researches and recommends noncensorial resources, workshops, and educational materials appropriate for children and youth, parents, teachers, caregivers, service organizations, violence prevention efforts, and the faith community. Once a community initiative is launched, NANP provides technical assistance and support to ensure sustainability.
National Coalition on Television Violence (NCTV)
51332 Newport Ave.
Bethesda, MD 20816
E-mail: [email protected]
http://www.nctvv.org
Since 1980 the National Coalition on Television Violence has been providing useful information regarding the amount of TV violence, the accuracy of rating systems, and practical tips for citizen advocacy. Directed by MaryAnn Banta, the organization responds to E-mail and acts as a clearinghouse to direct inquires to the most helpful resources available nationwide.
National Institute on Media and the Family
606 24th Ave. S., Suite 606
Minneapolis, MN 55454
888-672-5437
FAX: 612-672-4113
http://www.mediafamily.org
The National Institute son Media and the Family is a nonprofit organization whose mission is to maximize the benefits and minimize the harm of media on children and families through research, education, and advocacy. The organization provides a range of educational resources for parents, teachers, and community leaders, including a comprehensive alternative rating system for violent media and Media Wise, a multimedia resource kit that provides innovative, action-oriented solutions to the question "What can we do about the powerful influence of media on our children's lives?" Visit their Web site for current lists of the most violent and dangerous as well as the best video and computer games for our kids.
Teachers Resisting Unhealthy Children's Entertainment (TRUCE)
PO Box 441261
Somerville, MA 02144
Teachers Resisting Unhealthy Children's Entertainment is a national group of educators deeply concerned about how children's entertainment and toys are affecting the play and behavior of children in the classroom. TRUCE publishes a valuable newsletter and works to raise public awareness about the negative effects of violent and stereotyped toys and media on children, families, schools, and society.
Turn Off the TV
800-949-8688
http://www.turnoffthetv.com
The mission of Turn Off the TV is to bring people together by encouraging families and friends to turn off the television and spend time playing, learning, and communicating. A catalog of resources is available by calling the above toll-free number. By visiting their Web site, parents will find loads of fun ideas for children in all stages of development who say, "I'm bored; there's nothing to do."
A DEFINITION OF MEDIA VIOLENCE
The following is a definition of media violence. Not the only one, mind you, but one that we find gives fairly clear guidelines on a complicated issue. Let it act as a useful lens for viewing any type of entertainment or playing the hundreds of video games that exist on the market.
Violence is the intentional use of force to harm a human being or animal. Its outcome is injury -- physical or psychological, fatal or nonfatal. It is true that violence is a part of the real world. However, we do not take our children to see autopsies performed as entertainment, nor do we invite someone into our living room to kill, brutally beat, or rape another person for our children to witness for their amusement.
Therefore, portrayals of violence in the media that glamorize and/or sensationalize violent acts toward other human beings or animals and show them as acceptable behavior provide a socially aberrant environment in which it is difficult to raise emotionally healthy children. Also, the prevalence of violence on television in itself imparts an implicit acceptability to the vicarious experience of violence and pushes the boundaries of cultural norms into the realm of social deviancy. From a synthesis of the research we find that harmful media violence includes:
• Plots that are driven by quick-cut scenes of gratuitous violent acts delivered in a rapid-fire frequency with graphic, salient technical effects.
• Graphic, sadistic revenge, torture techniques, inhumane treatment of others in a context of humor, trivialization, glibness and/or raucous "fun."
• Explicitly depicted violent acts shown through special effects, camera angles, background music, or lighting to be glamorous, heroic, "cool," and worthy of imitation.
• Depictions of people holding personal and social power primarily because they are using weapons, or using their bodies as weapons, and dominating other people through the threat of violence or through actual violence.
• Extraneous, graphic, gory, detailed violent acts whose intent is to shock.
• Violent acts shown as an acceptable way to solve problems or presented as the primary problem-solving approach.
• News programs that explicitly detail murder and rape, with information and graphic images not necessary for understanding the central message.
It should be noted, however, that any form of aggression on the screen has the potential to make children more aggressive. The more graphic and horrific the violence, the more likely the negative effects. Research clearly demonstrates that sensational media violence causes children and teens to become more aggressive and mean, creating fear, a lack of sensitivity to all forms of violence, and an increased appetite for violence -- in real life and on the screen. An early preference for violent programming is a strong indicator of aggressive and antisocial behavior as an adult. Sensational portrayals, then, offer children a justification for violent acts in real life and perpetuate socially dangerous attitudes, behaviors, and values.
VOICES OF CONCERN ABOUT ON-SCREEN VIOLENCE
Throughout this book we have cited the work of many organizations that have contributed to the scholarship on the subject of violent entertainment and its negative effects on children. While we do not have the room to name every group that has commented on the issue, we present here a list of the major organizations -- as well as how to contact them, and the specifics on the stands they take -- that have set the tone and lent strong backing to our argument.
The American Medical Association (AMA)
515 North State St.
Chicago, IL 60610
312-464-5563
http://www.ama-assn.org
In 1952, an editorial in the Journal of the American Medical Association raised the topic of TV violence as a health issue. The editorial ran during the first Congressional hearings on the impact of television on delinquency.
At its 1976 meeting, the American Medical Association adopted a policy supporting research on the impact of TV violence. Also adopted at that meeting was a resolution that declared the AMA's "recognition of the fact that TV violence is a risk factor threatening the health and welfare of young Americans, indeed our future society."
In 1982, the AMA reaffirmed " ... its vigorous opposition to television violence and its support for efforts designed to increase the awareness of physicians and patients that television violence is a risk factor threatening the health of young people."
In 1996, the AMA developed a guidebook for physicians with the goal of helping their patients understand the harmful effects of media violence. A portion of the summary in that guidebook reads:
"Television and other forms of visual media play an enormous role in everyday life, particularly in the lives of children and adolescents. While television serves in the education and socialization of children, there are also a number of health problems associated with the excessive watching of television, independent of content. In addition, an extensive body of research amply documents a strong correlation between children's exposure to media violence and a number of behavioral and psychological problems, primarily increased aggressive behavior. The evidence further shows that these problems are caused by the exposure itself. Physicians have important roles to play in diminishing children's involvement with violent media by serving as educators, advisors, and advocates .... There is an established body of evidence documenting the troubling behavioral effects of repeated exposure to media violence .... This guide offers physicians an overview of the health consequences of such exposure and how to understand the findings in relation to general societal violence, child development, and learning."
The American Psychological Association (APA)
750 First St. NE
Washington, DC 20002-4242
202-336-5500
http://www.apa.org
The American Psychological Association is the nation's largest scientific and professional organization representing psychology and the world's largest association of psychologists. The APA's membership includes more than 102,000 researchers, educators, clinicians, consultants, and students.
In 1993, the APA's Commission on Violence and Youth stated: "There is absolutely no doubt that higher levels of viewing violence on television are correlated with increased acceptance of aggressive attitudes and increased aggressive behavior. Three major national studies ... reviewed hundreds of studies to arrive at the irrefutable conclusion that viewing violence increases violence. In addition, prolonged viewing of media violence can lead to emotional desensitization toward violence .... We call upon the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to review, as a condition for license renewal, the programming and outreach efforts and accomplishments of television stations in helping to solve the problem of youth violence. This recommendation is consistent with the research evidence indicating television's potential to broadcast stations to 'serve the educational and informational needs of children,' both in programming and in outreach activities designed to enhance the educational value of programming. We also call on the FCC to institute rules that would require broadcasters, cable operators and other telecasters to avoid programs containing an excessive amount of dramatized violence during 'child viewing hours' between 6 A.M. and 10 P.M."
The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP)
141 Northwest Point Blvd.
Elk Grove Village, IL 60009-0927
847-981-7873
http://www.apa.org
In 1997 the American Academy of Pediatrics presented the following statement to the U.S. Senate:
"The American Academy of Pediatrics, an organization of 53,000 pediatricians, offers this statement on behalf of the children and adolescents of this country. The level of violence to which they are exposed through the media has reached such horrific proportions, health professionals, parents, legislators and educators agree that something has to be done. The problem of violence on television may not appear as compelling or as urgent as immunizations, the risk of AIDS for adolescents or the need for health insurance for all children. However, in terms of overall childhood morbidity and mortality, it breeds so many problems in our society that child health experts are very concerned. Although no one holds television responsible as the sole instigator of violence, the influence of television is a factor.
"The American Academy of Pediatrics states without hesitation that televised violence has a clear and reproducible effect on the behavior of children. Televised violence contributes to the unwholesome social environment in which we live, the frequency with which violence is used to resolve conflict, and the passivity with which violence is perceived. Both epidemiological and experimental studies have demonstrated a clear relationship in children between the viewing of televised violence and violent or aggressive behavior."
The National Association for the Education of Young Children
(NAEYC)
1509 16th St. NW
Washington, DC 20036-1426
202-232-8777 or 800-424-2460
http://www.naeyc.org
In 1996, the National Association for the Education of Young Children, an organization of over one hundred thousand early childhood educators, issued a position statement, "Violence in the Lives of Children," which, in part, states:
"The culture of violence is mirrored in and influenced by the media. As a result of the deregulation of the broadcasting industry, children's television and related toys have become more violent. Research is clear that the media, particularly television and films, contribute to the problem of violence in America. Research demonstrates that children who are frequent viewers of violence on television are less likely to show empathy toward the pain and suffering of others and more likely to behave aggressively."
The statement went on to call for early childhood educators " ... to generate a sense of public outrage that motivates actions that will eliminate violence in the lives of children, families, and communities, along with restricting the marketing of violence through linkup of media, toys, and licensed products."
American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
(AACAP)
3615 Wisconsin Ave. NW
Washington, DC 20016
202-966-7300
http://www.aacap.org
This national organization, representing 6,900 psychiatrists who specialize in working with children and adolescents, produces policies and research reports on media violence. Their Media Committee periodically publishes reviews of children's films. Below is an excerpt from one of the "Facts for Families" taken from their Web site.
"American children watch an average of three to four hours of television daily. Television can be a powerful influence in developing valuing systems and shaping behavior. Ultimately, much of today's television programming is violent. Hundreds of studies of the effects of TV violence on children and teenagers have found that children may: (1) become 'immune' to the horror of violence; (2) gradually accept violence as a way to solve problems; (3) imitate the violence they observe on television; and (4) identify with certain characters, victims and/or victimizers.
"Extensive viewing of television violence by children causes greater aggressiveness. Sometimes, watching a single violent program can increase aggressiveness. Children who view shows in which violence is very realistic, frequently repeated or unpunished, are more likely to imitate what they see. Children with emotional, behavioral, learning or impulse control problems may be more easily influenced by TV violence. The impact of TV violence may be immediately evident in the child's behavior or may surface years later, and young people can even be affected when the family atmosphere shows no tendency toward violence. "
The National Parent/Teacher Association (National PTA)
330 North Wabash Ave., Suite 2100
Chicago, IL 60611
800-307-4782
FAX: 312-670-6783
http://www.pta.org
The National Parent/Teacher Association, representing 6.5 million members, plays a pivotal role in informing and educating us about media violence. Visiting their Web site, parents can find a wealth of helpful information, including information on the rating systems, practical ideas for critical viewing, and activity sheets for dealing with media violence. The National PTA has consistently issued strong statements against TV violence, video game violence, and video game sites.
In 1993, the Convention Resolutions Committee reviewed their resolution "Violence in TV Programming," adopted in 1975. It stands in effect today.
STATEMENT ON VIOLENCE IN TV PROGRAMMING
"Whereas, children spend countless unsupervised hours watching TV; and whereas, the choice of program offerings often is less desirable, with much emphasis on violence; and whereas, children are known to imitate observed behavior and actions; and whereas, statistics reveal an alarming increase in crime committed by younger and younger children; and whereas, the Surgeon General's report states that there can be a cause-and-effect relationship between watching violence on TV and aggressive behaviors in children and young people; and whereas, at this time TV programming is self-regulated by the broadcasting industry through the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) TV Code, a voluntary code not subscribed to by all stations and the provisions of which are repeatedly violated; be it therefore resolved, that the National PTA urge its state congresses, districts, councils and local units to observe and monitor TV programming and commercials in their areas; and where an excessive amount of violence in programming is seen to make known their views with documented reporting to sponsors of the program, with copies to the local TV stations, to the TV networks, to the NAB, to the Federal Communications Commission, and to their elected representatives; and be it further resolved, that the National PTA demand from the networks and local stations reduction in the amount of violence shown on television programs and commercials during the entire day, with particular attention to viewing hours between 2:00 P.M. and 10:00 P.M. and weekend morning hours, when impressionable children and young people are most likely to be watching; and be it further resolved, that the National PTA through its state congresses, districts, councils, and local units demand, if the self-regulation of programming and commercials by the broadcasting industry does not result in better TV programming with less emphasis on violence, that the Federal Communications Commission establish and enforce regulations limiting the number and percentage of programs of violence to be presented each day."
STATEMENT ON VIOLENCE IN VIDEO GAMES AND OTHER INTERACTIVE MEDIA (ADOPTED BY THE 1994 CONVENTION DELEGATES)
"Whereas, the term 'video games' is defined broadly to include any interactive computer game including all software and hardware and future developments in video game technology and interactive media; and whereas, research studies have found that, at least in the short term, children who play violent video games are significantly more aggressive afterwards than those who play less violent video games; and whereas, studies show that violent TV programs and video games have similar effects in raising children's subsequent levels of aggression; and whereas, research shows violent video games can suppress children's inclination towards engaging in pro-social behaviors; therefore be it resolved, that the National PTA, through its constituent bodies, work to educate and to increase awareness of the impact of violent video games and other interactive media; and be it further resolved, that the National PTA, through its constituent bodies, support federal legislation to provide for the development of ratings or other appropriate information systems by a commission independent of the industry to inform parents and consumers about the content of video games and other interactive media; and be it further resolved, that the National PTA and its constituent bodies actively support efforts to end the violence in video games and other interactive media that desensitize consumers to the value of life, human or animal."
STATEMENT ON VIDEO GAME SITES (ADOPTED BY THE 1982 BOARD OF DIRECTORS; LAST REVIEW, 1998 BY THE CONVENTION RESOLUTIONS COMMITTEE)
"National PTA is concerned about video game sites which may have an adverse effect on many of the young people who frequent such establishments. Initial studies have shown that game sites are often in close proximity to schools.
"In many cases there is not adequate control of access by school-age children during school hours, which compounds the problems of school absenteeism and truancy.
"Where little or no supervision exists, drug selling, drug use, drinking, gambling, increased gang activities, and other such behavior may be seen. Where there is diligent supervision and adequate lighting, however, the interest of the customers centers on the games and the quality of play seems to be the major concern of the youthful participants.
"State PTAs should encourage their units, councils and districts to become aware of and to educate their membership and the community regarding activities of young people at business establishment having video game machines and the impact these activities have on school attendance, alcohol and drug activity.
"PTAs should study the impact of video game arcades and other establishments where games are located. They should also work for the best possible solution that allows for reasonable use by children and youth, and at the same time does not encroach on the right of merchants to conduct their businesses."
A CHRONOLOGY OF MAJOR FINDINGS, STATEMENTS, AND ACTIONS ON MEDIA VIOLENCE, 1952-1999
Television and entertainment violence and its effects on children has been an issue since the middle of the century, although you'd barely know it. It seems that every time it captures the national consciousness, usually due to some horrendous act of schoolyard violence or a skyrocketing youth aggravated assault rate, it is presented as if it's never been discussed before. Herewith, a chronology of major findings, statements, and actions regarding media violence from 1952 to the present day. Much, if not all, of this regards television, as opposed to film and video games. Collectively, this places our fight in context, for without understanding the history of this issue, we will forever be starting over when confronting it.
1952: The U.S. House of Representatives conducts the first House committee hearings on TV violence and its impact on children. These are the first of many hearings to occur over the following decades.
1954: The U.S. Senate conducts the first Senate committee hearings on the role of television in juvenile crime.
1961: Federal Communications Commission chairman Newton N. Minow tells the National Association of Broadcasters that American TV is a "vast wasteland."
1969: The National Commission on the Causes and Prevention of Violence cites TV violence as a contributor to violence in our society.
1972: The surgeon general's office issues a report citing a link between TV/movie violence and aggressive behavior.
1975: The National Parent/Teacher Association adopts a resolution demanding that networks and local TV stations reduce the amount of violence in programs and commercials.
1976: The House of Delegates of the American Medical Association adopts a resolution "to actively oppose TV programs containing violence, as well as products and/or services sponsoring such programs," in "recognition of the fact that TV violence is a risk factor threatening the health and welfare of young Americans, indeed our future society."
1979: Parents of a fifteen-year-old convicted of murdering a neighbor initiate the first known lawsuit against TV networks (Zamora v. CBS, et al.), for inciting their son to violence. The suit is unsuccessful.
1982: The National Institute of Mental Health issues an extensive report stating that there is a clear consensus on the strong link between TV violence and aggressive behavior.
1984: The attorney general's Task Force on Family Violence states that evidence is overwhelming that TV violence contributes to real violence.
Leonard Eron and L. Rowell Huesmann, in a twenty-two-year study that tracked 875 boys and girls from ages eight to thirty, find that those who watched more violent television as children are more likely as adults to commit serious crimes and to use violence to punish their own children.
The American Academy of Pediatrics' Task Force on Children and Television cautions physicians and parents that TV violence promotes aggression.
1985: The American Psychological Association's Commission on Youth and Violence cites research showing a link between TV violence and real violence.
1987: Canadian broadcasters institute a voluntary code on TV violence that discourages broadcasting violent programming early in the evening.
1989: The National PTA again calls for the TV industry to reduce the amount of violence in programs.
1990: The Television Violence Act (TVA) gives three major networks (ABC, CBS, and NBC) an antitrust exemption so they can formulate a joint policy on violence.
1991: Former FCC chairman Newton Minow declares: "In 1961 I worried that my children would not benefit much from television, but in 1991 I worry that my children will actually be harmed by it."
1992: The Journal of the American Medical Association publishes Dr. Brandon Centerwall's study concluding that "the introduction of television into the United States in the 1950s caused a subsequent doubling of the homicide rate," and "if, hypothetically, television technology had never been developed, there would today be 10,000 fewer murders each year in the United States, 70,000 fewer rapes, and 700,000 fewer injurious assaults."
The American Psychological Association report "Big World, Small Screen" concludes that the forty years of research on the link between TV violence and real-life violence has been ignored. It goes on to state that the "scientific debate is over," and calls for federal policy to protect society.
Days before the House of Representatives hearings on TV violence, and having been forced to do so by the 1990 Television Violence Act, the broadcast industry releases a set of "voluntary" industry guidelines (called "principles") on violence.
1993: In June, major TV networks announce their agreement to air parental advisories when shows deemed violent are aired.
The National Council for Families and Television holds the industrywide Leadership Conference on Violence in Television Programming.
The Departments of Justice, Education, and Health and Human Services sponsor a major conference, calling for TV networks to consider the social effects of media violence when designing programming.
1994: The Center for Media and Public Affairs conducts a study of television violence and finds that from 1992 to 1994, depictions of serious violence on television increased 67 percent.
1998: The National Television Violence Study concludes that 60 percent of all TV programs are violent and that "there are substantial risks of harmful effects from viewing violence throughout the television environment."
The publication of "Children and Media Violence: A Yearbook from the UNESCO International Clearinghouse on Children and Violence on the Screen." It reviews worldwide studies of media violence from twenty-five countries and outlines the world's concern about the "global aggressive culture" being formed by violent television, particularly violent U.S. television and film.
1999: President Clinton initiates a study by the FTA and the Attorney General of the strategies of marketing violent media to children.
WHERE TO VOICE YOUR CONCERNS
As its subtitle says, this book is a call to action. Here's where to call, write, fax, E-mail, and visit for action on this issue. We suggest contacting the following television broadcast and cable networks, major movie studios, theaters, pertinent organizations, government offices, and toy companies to voice your concerns about violent entertainment. But we also encourage you to let those people and organizations know when they're helping to make a positive difference.
TELEVISION STATIONS
(Note: The Telecommunications Act of 1996 requires television stations to make available a staff person to act as a liaison with viewers who want to comment on children's programs.)
ABC
Audience Information Dept.
77th West 66th St., 9th Floor
New York, NY 10023
212-456-7477
ABC Entertainment
2040 Avenue of the Stars
Los Angeles, CA 90067
310-557-5413 or 800-213-6222
A&F/Arts and Entertainment
235 East 45th St.
New York, NY 10017
212-210-1340
AMC/American Movie Classics
1111 Stewart Ave.
Bethpage, NY 11714
516-364-2222
CBS
Audience Services
530 West 57th St.
New York, NY 10019
212-975-3247
CNN
One CNN Center
Atlanta, GA 30348-5366
404-827-1500
COM/Comedy Central
Attention: Dennay Riley
1775 Broadway
New York, NY 10019
212-767-8600
Discovery Channel
7700 Wisconsin Ave., Suite 700
Bethesda, MD 20814
301-986-0444
Disney Channel
3800 West Alameda Ave.
Burbank, CA 91505
800-822-8648
FAX: 818-842-1024
ESPN
935 Middle St.
Bristol, CT 06010
860-585-2236
FOX Broadcast Studios
PO Box 900
Beverly Hills, CA 90213
310-369-1000
HBO/Home Box Office
1100 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10036
212-512-1000
Lifetime
Viewer Services
309 West 49th St.
New York, NY 10019
212-424-7000
MTV (owns VH-1 and Nickelodeon)
Viewer Comments
1515 Broadway, 24th Floor
New York, NY 10036
212-258-8000
NBC
30 Rockefeller Plaza
New York, NY 10112
212-664-2333
NICK/Nickelodeon
1515 Broadway, 42nd Floor
New York, NY 10036
212-258-7500
PBS
Attention: Program Information
1320 Braddock PI.
Alexandria, VA 22314
703-739-5000
SHO/Showtime
1633 Broadway
New York, NY 10019
212-708-1600
TNN (The Nashville Network)
2806 Opryland Drive
Nashville, TN 37214
615-883-7000
TNT/Turner Network TV
1050 Techwood Drive NW
Atlanta, GA 30318
404-885-4538
USA Network
Viewer Response
1230 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10020
212-408-9100
VH-1/Contemporary Music Videos
1515 Broadway
New York, NY 10036
212-258-7800
MAJOR STUDIOS: MOTION PICTURES, HOME VIDEOS, TV MOVIES
Columbia Pictures Entertainment Company, or
Sony Pictures Entertainment, Inc., or
Tri-Star Pictures
10202 West Washington Blvd.
Culver City, CA 90232
310-244-4000
MGM Communications Co.
Attention: William Mitchell
2500 Broadway St.
Santa Monica, CA 90404-3061
310-449-3000
Paramount Communications, Inc.
Publicity Department
1515 Broadway
New York, NY 10036
212-846-4320
Paramount Pictures and Home Videos
Bluhdorn Building
5555 Melrose Ave.
Hollywood, CA 90038-3917
323-956-5000
The Samuel Goldwyn Company
10203 Santa Monica Blvd.
Los Angeles, CA 90067-6403
310-552-2255
The Samuel Goldwyn Company
Attention: Publicity Department
1133 Broadway
New York, NY 10010
212-367 -9435
Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corporation
10201 West Pico Blvd.
Los Angeles, CA 90035
310-369-1000
Universal Pictures
100 Universal City Plaza
Universal City, CA 91608
818-777-1000
The Walt Disney Company
500 South Buena Vista St.
Burbank, CA 91521
818-560-1581
Warner Brothers, Inc. (a division of Time Warner, Inc.)
4000 Warner Blvd.
Burbank, CA 91522
818-954-6000
THEATERS
Cineplex Odeon Corporation
1303 Yonge St.
Toronto, Ontario
Canada M4T 2Y9
416-323-6600
General Cinema Corporation
Director of Operations
1280 Boylston St.
Chestnut Hill, MA 02467
800-992-0084
For comments on the film rating system:
Motion Picture Association of America, Inc.
Jack Valenti, President
1600 Eye St. NW
Washington, DC 20006
202-293-1966
For comments on the video and computer game rating system:
Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB)
845 3rd Ave.
New York, NY 10022
800-771-3772
http://www.ersb.org
VIDEO RENTAL COMPANIES
Blockbuster Videos
Corporate Office
1201 Elm St.
Dallas, TX 75270
214-854-3000
Tower Records/Video
Customer Comments/Video Rental
MTS, Inc.
2500 Del Monte St., Building C
West Sacramento, CA 95691-9001
916-373-2500 or 800-541-0070
VIDEO AND COMPUTER GAMES
Nintendo of America, Inc.
Corporate Communication Manager
4820 150th Ave. NE
Redmond, WA 98052
425-882-2040
FAX: 425-882-3585
Sega of America
650 Townsend St., Suite 650
San Francisco, CA 94065
415-701-6000
To voice your opinion about a coin-operated video game parental advisory system, contact:
American Amusement Machine Association (AAMA)
450 East Higgins Rd., Suite 201
Elk Grove Village, IL 60007
847-290-9088
http://www.com-op.org
The AAMA is a nonprofit trade association that represents approximately 120 manufacturers, distributors, and parts suppliers of coin-operated amusement equipment.
International Association of Family Entertainment Centers
(IAFEC)
36 Symonds Rd.
Hillsborough, NH 03244
603-464-6498
E-mail: [email protected]
GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS
Federal Communications Commission
Mass Media Bureau
Complaints/Enforcement Division
Political Programming Branch, Room 3443
445 12th St. SW
Washington, DC 20554
202-418-1430
The President of the United States
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
Washington, DC
202-456-1414
TOY MANUFACTURERS AND RETAILERS
Lewis Galoob Toys
500 Forbes Blvd.
San Francisco, CA 94080
650-952-1678
Hasbro Toy Group
1027 Newport Ave.
Pawtucket, RI 02862
401-431-8697
Mattel Toys
333 Continental Blvd.
El Segundo, CA 90245
310-252-2000
Saban Entertainment
400 West Alameda Ave.
Burbank, CA 91505
818-972-4800
Toys R Us Corporate Office
CEO Robert Nakasone
461 From Rd.
Paramus, NJ 07652
210-262-7800
MEDIA LITERACY AND VIOLENCE PREVENTION ORGANIZATIONS
We're not alone out there. There are several worthwhile watchdog groups that have been fighting the good fight for years. The following is a list of media literacy and violence prevention organizations, along with their statements of purpose.
Americans for Responsible Television
(The Dove Foundation)
4521 Broadmoor SE
Grand Rapids, MI 49512
616-514-5000 or 800-968-8437
http://www.dove.org
Established to encourage and promote the creation, production, and distribution of wholesome family entertainment, the Dove Foundation, free from commercial pressures, awards a blue-and-white Dove Seal to any movie or video that is rated "family friendly" by its film review board.
Atrium Society Publications
PO Box 816
Middlebury, VT 05753
800-848-6021
http://www.atriumsoc.org
The Atrium Society offers understanding about the conditioned mind, "which has brought us to a state of unparalleled conflict and devastation that we experience in the world today." Its intent is to bring the issue of conditioning, and the tremendous conflict conditioning creates, to the forefront of awareness and consideration. Resources include a series of books for youth on understanding and handling violence; books for parents, such as Growing Up Sane: Understanding the Conditioned Mind; audio/videotapes; teacher training workshops; and seminars to address the primary causes of conflict.
Canadians Concerned About Violence in Entertainment
(C-CAVE)
416-961-0853
FAX: 416-929-2720
E-mail: [email protected]
Founded in 1983 in collaboration with the U.S.-based National Coalition on Television Violence, Canadians Concerned About Violence in Entertainment provides public education on the results of media violence research and believes the public has a right to know that the overwhelming weight of research points toward harmful effects. The organization functions primarily as a working group through media interviews and the provision of information to journalists and other members of the media. CCAVE maintains links with a broad coalition of groups, both nationally and internationally.
Center for Media Literacy
4727 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 403
Los Angeles, CA 90010
800- 226- 9494
FAX: 323-931-4474
http://www.medialit.org
The Center for Media Literacy distributes a broad range of media literacy education books, kits, and videos for parents and teachers, including the highly acclaimed Beyond Blame: Challenging Violence in the Media. This kit applies the principles of media literacy education to violence reduction and prevention. It contains lesson plans, ready-to-use handouts, and audio/video resources for all age groups. A comprehensive catalog of all resources offered is available.
Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence
Institute for Behavorial Sciences
University of Colorado, Boulder
Campus Box 442
Boulder, CO 80309-0442
303-492-8147
The Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence provides guidance on research, effective programs, and policy actions that improve the effectiveness of antiviolence interventions. Among the reports available is What Works in Reducing Adolescent Violence: An Empirical Review of the Field by Patrick Tolan and Nancy Guerra.
Center for Successful Parenting
1917 East 116th Street
Carmel, IN 46032
317-581-5355
Fax: 317-581-5399
E-mail: [email protected].
Founded in 1997, the Center for Successful Parenting is presently focused on media violence because the founders believe that protecting children from the negative impact of media violence is key for adults of the next generation to be mentally and socially healthy. The group is organizing the ever-growing body of research demonstrating the negative effects of media violence, along with a national parent awareness campaign.
Committee for Children
2203 Airport Way S., Suite 500
Seattle, WA 98134
800-634-4449
The Committee for Children is an international nonprofit organization whose mission is to promote the safety, well-being, and social development of children by creating quality educational programs for educators, families, and communities. The prekindergarten-to-grade 9 violence prevention curriculum, Second Step, teaches children prosocial skills and includes a companion program for parent education at the elementary level. Second Step implementation has taken place in approximately ten thousand schools across North America. A study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (May 27, 1997) demonstrates Second Step's effectiveness in changing children's behavior.
Cultural Environment Movement (CEM)
PO Box 40285
Philadelphia, PA 19106
E-mail: [email protected]
The Cultural Environment Movement is a nonprofit coalition of independent organizations and individual supporters in every state of the United States and in fifty-seven other countries on six continents, united in working for freedom, fairness, gender equity, general diversity, and democratic decision-making in media ownership, employment, and representation. The organization supports, and if necessary organizes, local and national media councils, study groups, citizen groups, minority and professional groups, and other forums of public discussion, policy development, representation, and action. Not waiting for a blueprint, it creates and experiments with methods of community and citizen participation in local, national, and international media policy-making.
The Fathers' Network
PO Box 800-SH
San Anselmo, CA 94979
415-453-2839
http://www.menstuff.org
The goal of this organization is to increase fathers' involvement in parenting and to promote fulfilling relationships between fathers and children. Much useful information can be found on their Web site for men who want to make a difference in a child's life.
GrowSmartBrains
PO Box 311
Redmond, WA 98073-0311
206-654-2994
http://www.GrowSmartBrains.com
Author Gloria DeGaetano and her staff of highly trained educators and consultants offer research-based, application-rich workshops across the United States and Canada for corporations, school districts, social service, and parent organizations. Emphasis is on the impact of screen technologies on brain development and the problematic effects of violent entertainment on children's learning and behavior. GrowSmartBrains provides manuals (in English and Spanish) and educational audio- and videotapes, including Maximizing Your Child's Potential: Healthy Brain Development in a Media Age, a forty-minute video for parents of young children.
Heavy Freight Films
811 First Avenue, Suite 425
Seattle, WA 98104
Contacts:
Richard Hazzard, M.Ed.
206-755-3118
FAX: 206-621-1193
Sandy Cioffi
206-322-1332
FAX: 206-322-1341
Two of Washington State's leading media literacy specialists founded Heavy Freight Films with the intention of creating unique opportunities for individual and social change through media education, addressing issues such as violence prevention, youth leadership, and community involvement. Their projects include consulting with school districts for adopting media literacy standards, extensive teacher training programs, conducting innovative film schools for youth, and community film projects with professional filmmakers mentoring youth in film production. One video production, Terminal 187, produced by and for youth, is an excellent, compelling examination of the consequences of violence for anyone who cares about kids.
Institute on Violence and Destructive Behavior
1265 University of Oregon
Eugene, OR 97403-1265
541-346-3591
http://interact.uoregon.edulivdb/ivdb.html
The Institute on Violence and Destructive Behavior is doing some of the most seminal research in the area of violence prevention today. Its mission is to empower schools and social service agencies to address violence and destructive behavior, at the point of school entry and beyond, in order to ensure safety and to facilitate the academic achievement and healthy social development of children and youth. Key target areas addressed are antisocial behavior, school failure, delinquency, violence, gang membership, and at-risk conditions. Call for a list of publications and research studies currently available.
Lion and the Lamb Project
4300 Montgomery Ave., Suite 104
Bethesda, MD 20814
301-654-3091
FAX: 301-718-8192
http://www.lionlamb.org
The Lion and the Lamb Project provides information about the effects of violent entertainment, toys, and games on children's behavior for parents, teachers, day-care providers, social workers, psychologists, grandparents, and others -- anyone interested in teaching values of nonviolence to children. They offer four different types of workshops, along with a Parent Action Kit, which provides suggestions for selecting age-appropriate, nonviolent toys and games, and tips for resolving family conflicts peacefully at home and on the playground.
Media Awareness Network
1500 Merivale Rd., 3rd Floor
Nepean, ON
Canada K2E 6Z5
613-224-7721
FAX: 613-224-1958
E-mail: [email protected]
http://www.media-awareness.ca
The Media Awareness Network (MNet) is a nonprofit organization promoting media education among children and young people. MNet's award-winning Web site is one of the largest educational Web sites in Canada. It provides parents, educators, and community leaders with free, copyright-cleared on-line resources and information on a variety of issues related to children and the media, including media violence, advertising to children, and children and the Internet.
Media Education Foundation
26 Center St.
Northampton, MA 01060
413-584-8500
E-mail: [email protected]
http://www.igc.org/mef
video orders: 800-897-0080
Directed by well-known media scholar and author Sut Jhally, this foundation produces and distributes award-wining resources for students of media literacy, educators, parents, and community leaders. The Killing Screens: Media and the Culture of Violence is an educational video that examines the psychology, sociology, and politics of media violence. In the video, paced for high school and college students, Dr. George Gerbner addresses the issue of living and growing within a cultural environment of pervasive violent representation. Social critic Neil Postman says of this video: "If every American could see The Killing Screens there would ensue a revolution in the content of popular media."
Mediascope, Inc.
12711 Ventura Blvd., Suite 440
Studio City, CA 91604
818-508-2080
http://www.mediascope.org
Mediascope is a national, nonprofit research and public policy organization working to raise awareness about the influence of media on society. Founded in 1992, the organization works with the entertainment industry to encourage responsible depictions of health and social issues, particularly as they relate to children and adolescents. They address such topics as media violence, ratings, teen sexuality, effects of video games, artists' rights and responsibilities, and substance abuse. Mediascope's resources and services are used by screenwriters, journalists, researchers, producers, media critics, educators, lawyers, media executives, legislators, government officials, advocacy groups, and students.
MediaWise
PO Box 6145
Kansas City, KS 66106
913-831-3221
FAX: 913-831-0262
Media Wise operates through a broad-based coalition of community groups to reduce the impact and incidence of violence in the media through public awareness, education, and community action without invading First Amendment rights. They provide programs and services to help children, youth, and adults become discriminating media consumers by learning how to analyze, evaluate, and interpret the messages and images delivered by the various forms of media in our society. They offer MediaSmarts, an innovative video-based media literacy and antiviolence curriculum for use in middle schools or by youth-serving agencies.
Mothers Against Violence in America (MAVIA)
105-14th Ave., Suite 2A
Seattle, WA 98122
206-323-2303
800-897-7697
FAX: 206-323-2132
http://www.mavia.org
Mothers Against Violence in America is a national, nonprofit, nonpartisan educational organization dedicated to reducing violence by and against children. Founded in 1994, with over thirty-five thousand members, MAVIA encourages prevention investment in young people before they are affected by violence, and advocates for changes that support a safer environment. MAVIA's innovative programs, such as Students Against Violence Everywhere (SAVE) and violent video game legislative initiatives, have been praised by President and Mrs. Clinton as exemplary models of grassroots activism.
National Alliance for Non-Violent Programming (NANP)
122 North Elm St., Suite 300
Greensboro, NC 27401
336-370-0392
FAX: 336-370-0407
E-mail: [email protected]
A network of national not-for-profit organizations including the American Medical Women's Association, Jack and Jill of America, Jewish Women International, the National Association of Women Business Owners, National Council of LaRaza, and Soroptimist of the Americas, the National Alliance for Non-Violent Programming's reach into communities extends to over two million citizens at the grassroots level. NANP researches and recommends noncensorial resources, workshops, and educational materials appropriate for children and youth, parents, teachers, caregivers, service organizations, violence prevention efforts, and the faith community. Once a community initiative is launched, NANP provides technical assistance and support to ensure sustainability.
National Coalition on Television Violence (NCTV)
51332 Newport Ave.
Bethesda, MD 20816
E-mail: [email protected]
http://www.nctvv.org
Since 1980 the National Coalition on Television Violence has been providing useful information regarding the amount of TV violence, the accuracy of rating systems, and practical tips for citizen advocacy. Directed by MaryAnn Banta, the organization responds to E-mail and acts as a clearinghouse to direct inquires to the most helpful resources available nationwide.
National Institute on Media and the Family
606 24th Ave. S., Suite 606
Minneapolis, MN 55454
888-672-5437
FAX: 612-672-4113
http://www.mediafamily.org
The National Institute son Media and the Family is a nonprofit organization whose mission is to maximize the benefits and minimize the harm of media on children and families through research, education, and advocacy. The organization provides a range of educational resources for parents, teachers, and community leaders, including a comprehensive alternative rating system for violent media and Media Wise, a multimedia resource kit that provides innovative, action-oriented solutions to the question "What can we do about the powerful influence of media on our children's lives?" Visit their Web site for current lists of the most violent and dangerous as well as the best video and computer games for our kids.
Teachers Resisting Unhealthy Children's Entertainment (TRUCE)
PO Box 441261
Somerville, MA 02144
Teachers Resisting Unhealthy Children's Entertainment is a national group of educators deeply concerned about how children's entertainment and toys are affecting the play and behavior of children in the classroom. TRUCE publishes a valuable newsletter and works to raise public awareness about the negative effects of violent and stereotyped toys and media on children, families, schools, and society.
Turn Off the TV
800-949-8688
http://www.turnoffthetv.com
The mission of Turn Off the TV is to bring people together by encouraging families and friends to turn off the television and spend time playing, learning, and communicating. A catalog of resources is available by calling the above toll-free number. By visiting their Web site, parents will find loads of fun ideas for children in all stages of development who say, "I'm bored; there's nothing to do."
- admin
- Site Admin
- Posts: 37493
- Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am
Re: Stop Teaching Our Kids to Kill: A Call to Action Against
by admin » Fri Sep 13, 2013 1:55 am
NOTES
INTRODUCTION
Adolescents who copy crimes ... correct flaws that may have caused the television crime to fail: Wendy Josephson, "Television Violence: A Review of the Effects on Children of Different Ages." Ottawa: National Clearinghouse on Family Violence, 1995, 40.
Scientific evidence has established that screen portrayals of violence need not lead to reinforcement of aggressive attitudes and behaviors ... Joel Federman, Television Violence Study, vol. 3. Santa Barbara: University of California, 1998, 7-11.
CHAPTER 1: IT'S A VIOLENT WORLD AFTER ALL
According to InterPol, between 1977 and 1993 the per capita "serious assault" rate increased ... InterPol International Crime Statistics, InterPol, Lyons, France, vols. 1977 to 1994.
The Japanese crime data (30 percent increase in juvenile violent crime in 1997): BBC News Online, "Japanese tackle teenage knife attacks," Friday, February 6, 1998.
According to FBI reports, crime is down 7 percent: Fox Butterfield, "Crime Fell 7 Percent in '98, Continuing a 7-Year Trend," The New York Times, May 17, 1999, 14.
From 1960 through 1991 the U.S. population increased by 40 percent, yet violent crime increased by 500 percent; murders increased by 170 percent, rapes 520 percent, and aggravated assaults 600 percent: Ronald Kotulak, Inside the Brain: Revolutionary Discoveries of How the Mind Works. Kansas City: Andrews McMeel Publishing, 1996, 69.
In 1996 there were 19,654 murders, 95,769 reported rapes, over 1 million cases of aggravated assault, and 537,050 robberies, amounting to a loss of about $500 million in stolen property: Federal Bureau of Investigation, Crime in the United States 1996, Uniform Crime Reporting Statistics. Washington, D.C.; U.S. Department of Justice, 1996.
Murder is the least committed violent crime, although the most often reported crime on the nightly news: Howard Kurtz of The Washington Post, "Murder Rates Fall-But Not on Network News," The Seattle Times, August 13, 1997, A9.
Figure 1- Violent Crime in America: "Statistical Abstract of the United States." Washington, D.C.: The U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, editions 1957 to 1997.
Professor James Q. Wilson quote: Lt. Col. Dave Grossman, On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society. New York: Little, Brown & Co., 1996, 301.
According to the U.S. Army Medical Service Corps, a hypothetical wound that ... Dave Grossman, "Evolution of Weaponry," in Encyclopedia of Violence: Peace and Conflict. New York: Academic Press, 1999.
The per capita incarceration rate in America more than quadrupled between 1970, when it was at 97 people per 100,000, and 1997, when it reached 440 per 100,000: Statistical Abstract of the United States. Washington, D.C.: The U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, editions 1957 to 1997.
John J. DiIulio quote: Lt. Col. Dave Grossman, On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society. New York: Little, Brown & Co., 1996, 301.
In Richmond ... "zero tolerance" ... has been credited with cutting murders by 65 percent: Virginia Governor James Gilmore, quoted in Virginia Governor James Gilmore, quoted in U.S. News & World Report, November 16, 1998.
In Boston ... led to an 80 percent drop in youth homicides from 1990 to 1995, and in 1996 not a single youth died in a firearm homicide: President Clinton, State of the Union Address, "The President's Anti-Gang and Youth Violence Strategy-An Overview," February 4, 1997.
Among young people fifteen to twenty-four years old, murder is the second-leading cause of death. For African-American youths, murder is number one; Every 5 minutes a child is arrested in America for committing a violent crime, and gun-related violence takes the life of an American child every three hours; A child growing up in Washington, D.C., or Chicago is fifteen times more likely to be murdered than a child in Northern Ireland: Ellen Wartella, Adriana Olivarez, Nancy Jennings, "Children and Television Violence in the United States," in Children and Media Violence: Yearbook from the UNESCO International Clearinghouse on Children and Violence on the Screen, eds. U. Carlsson and C. Von Felitzen. Nordicom: Goteborg University, 1998, 55.
. . . 4,881 gangs in the United States: Daniel Flannery, C. Ronald Huff, Michael Manos, "Youth Gangs: A Developmental Perspective," in Delinquent Violent Youth: Theory and Interventions, eds. T. Gullotta, G. Adams, R. Montemayor. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 1998, 176.
Since 1960 teen suicide has tripled: John Crudele and Richard Erickson, Making Sense of Adolescence: How to Parent from the Heart. Minneapolis: John Crudele Productions, 1995, 139.
Every day an estimated 270,000 students bring guns to school; One of every fifty children has a parent in prison: Ronald Kotulak, Inside the Brain: Revolutionary Discoveries of How the Mind Works. Kansas City: Andrews McMeel Publishing, 1997, 93.
At least 160,000 children miss school every day because they fear an attack or intimidation by other students: National Education Association statistics, in Suellen Fried and Paula Fried, Bullies and Victims: Helping Your Child Through the Schoolyard Battlefield. New York: M. Evans and Company, 1996, xii.
One out of three girls and one out of seven boys are sexually abused by the time they reach the age of eighteen: Ellen Bass and Laura Davis, The Courage to Heal-A Guide for Women Survivors of Child Sexual Abuse. New York: Harper & Row, Publishers, 1988, 20.
Figures 2and 3- Violent Crime Arrest Rate for Juvenile Males and Juvenile Females: Graphs compiled by authors using data from Federal Bureau of Investigation, Crime in the United States 1996, Uniform Crime Reporting Statistics. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, 1996.
Stephen M. Case, of America Online, says that 80 percent of teenagers on A 0 L say that what happened at Columbine could happen in their school. Ken Auletta. "What I Did at Summer Camp," The New Yorker, July 26, 1999, 48.
Diane Levin quote: Ann Cornell, "TV, Video Game Violence Cause Aggressive Behavior, Leads to Crime, Experts Warn," Lion and Lamb Newsletter, Video Game Violence (Internet Information).
CHAPTER 2: NOT JUST A "TOASTER WITH PICTURES"
Brandon Tartikoff quote: John Caputo, "Tune Out the Tube: television viewing poor substitute for summer recreation," The Spokesman-Review, June 30, 1991, A-17.
Since 1950 there has been a total of more than 3,500 research studies ... Ellen Wartella, Adriana Olivarez, Nancy Jennings, "Children and Television Violence in the United States," in Children and Media Violence: Yearbook from the UNESCO International Clearinghouse on Children and Violence on the Screen, eds. U. Carlsson and C. Von Felitzen. Nordicom: Goteborg University, 1998, 57.
One random analysis of almost 1,000 of these studies found that all save 18 (12 of those were funded by the television industry) demonstrate ... Dr. Scott Snyder, in a 1998 presentation at the annual meeting of the American College of Forensic Psychiatry. "Clinical Psychiatry News," International Medical News Group, 1998,26(7), 36.
In the myriad studies done over the last four decades, experts have found three basic negative effects ... "Safeguarding Our Youth: Violence Prevention for Our Nation's Children, Report from the Working Group on Media." Washington, D.C., Center for Media Literacy, July 20-21, 1993, 4.
Since 1982, television violence has increased 780 percent ... Phil Phillips, Saturday Morning Mind Control. Nashville: Oliver- Nelson Books, 1991, 54.
The first U.S. Congressional hearings on the question took place in 1952 ... John P. Murray, "Studying Television Violence: A Research Agenda for the 21st Century," in Research Paradigms, Television, and Social Behavior, eds. Joy Asamen and Gordon Berry. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 1998, 370.
. . . when only around a quarter of American households had television sets ... Dr. Brandon Centerwall, "Journal of the American Medical Association," June 10, 1992-vol. 267, no. 22, "Television and violence: The scale of the problem and where to go from here," page 3,061, fig. 2.
. . . the "university of the air" brought quality programming ... Mary Megee, On Television: Teach the Children, a video. San Francisco: California Newsreel, 1991.
Concerns about television violence in the mid-50s ... totally unacceptable risk: John P. Murray, "Impact of Televised Violence," Kansas State University, http://www.ksu.edulhumec/impact.htm. 1-2.
In 1969, Senator John Pastore ... invited the Surgeon General ... John P. Murray, "Children and Television Violence," Kansas Journal of Law and Public Policy, vol. no. 3 (1995), 10.
1972 Surgeon General's Report: Surgeon General's Scientific Advisory Committee on Television and Social Behavior, Television and Growing Up: The Impact of Television Violence. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1972.
Quote from the National Institute of Mental Health Report: Pearl D. Bouthilet, L. Lazar, J. Eds. National Institute of Mental Health, Television and Behavior: Ten Years of Scientific Progress and Implications for the Eighties, vol. 1, Summary Report. Washington D.C.: United States Government Printing Office, 1982.
Eron and Huesmann's study: L. D. Eron and L. R. Huesmann, "The Control of Aggressive Behavior by Changes in Attitudes, Values, and the Conditions of Learning," in Advances in the Study of Aggression, eds. R. J. Blanchard and D. C. Blanchard. Orlando: Academic Press, Inc., 1984, 139-171.
McBeth Williams's study: Tannis McBeth Williams, The Impact of Television: A Natural Experiment in Three Communities. New York: Academic Press, 1986.
Centerwall's study: Brandon Centerwall, "Television and Violence: The Scale of the Problem and Where to Go from Here," The Journal of the American Medical Association, vol. 267 (June 10, 1992), 3059-3063.
"There never was a moment of 'Aha!' It simply happened": Gloria DeGaetano, personal interview with Dr. Brandon Centerwall, June 15, 1998.
In a classic 1974 study ... Ronald Drabman and Margaret Thomas, "Does media violence increase children's toleration of real-life aggression?" Developmental Psychology, vol. 10, 1974, 418-421.
... one of the more benign movies of the 1990s ... Vincent Canby's observations in Michael Medved, Hollywood vs. America: Popular Culture and the War on Traditional Values. New York: HarperCollins, 1992, 187.
Miller quote: Michael Medved, Hollywood vs. America: Popular Culture and the War on Traditional Values. New York: HarperCollins, 1992, 190-191.
Power Rangers contains about two hundred acts of violence per hour: Chris J. Boyatzis, "Of Power Rangers and V-Chips," Young Children, vol. 52, no. 7 (November 1997), 75.
... cartoons averaging twenty-five acts of violence per hour: A. Huston, E. Donnerstein, et aI., Big World, Small Screen: The Role of Television in American Society. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1992, 136.
British children under the age of twelve were not allowed to see Batman: "Batman Off Limits to Kids in Britain," Reuter Press, Seattle Post-Intelligencer, July 31, 1989, C-5.
Swedish children under the age of fifteen ... Turtles movies. Description of audiences for films by Swedish Bureau of Censors, http://www.statensbiografbyra.se.
Fright reactions: "Problems Frequently Caused by Scary Television and Movies," in Joanne Cantor, Mommy, I'm Scared: How TV and Movies Frighten Children and What We Can Do to Protect Them. Orlando: Harcourt Brace & Company, 1998, 215.
Cantor quote: Joanne Cantor, Ph.D., Mommy, I'm Scared: How TV and Movies Frighten Children and What We Can Do to Protect Them. Orlando: Harcourt Brace & Company, 1998, 12-13.
23 million Americans suffer from some sort of anxiety-based disorder: Stephen Hall, "Fear Itself: What we know about how it works, how it can be treated and what it tells us about our unconscious," The New York Times Magazine, February 28, 1999, 44.
Hall quote: Stephen Hall, "Fear Itself: What we know about how it works, how it can be treated and what it tells us about our unconscious," The New York Times Magazine, February 28, 1999, 45.
George Gerbner study: George Gerbner and Nancy Signorielli, Violence Profile, 1967 Through 1988-89: Enduring Patterns, manuscript. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, Annenberg School of Communication, 1990; George Gerbner, et al., "Growing Up with Television: The Cultivation Perspective," in J. Bryant and D. Zillmann (eds.), Media Effects: Advances in Theory and Research. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum, 17-41.
Center for Media and Public Affairs study: R. Lichter and D. Amundson, "A Day of Television Violence." Washington, D.C.: Center for Media and Public Affairs, 1992; R. Lichter and D. Amundson, "A Day of TV Violence: 1992 vs. 1994." Washington, D.C.: Center for Media and Public Affairs, 1994; Elizabeth Kolbert, "Study Finds TV Violence on the Rise," The New York Times, August 5, 1994, A9.
Newton Minow quote: Newton Minow quoted in E. Barnouw, Tube of Plenty: The Evolution of American Television (New York: Oxford University Press, 1975), 300.
Mark Fowler quote: C. Mayer, "FCC Chief's Fears: Fowler Sees Threat in Regulation," Washington Post, February 6, 1983, K-6.
. . . in the 1980-81 season, when the FCC was discussing deregulation of children's programming, violence on children's television shows reached its highest level in twenty years: thirty-three acts of violence per hour: John P. Murray, "Impact of Televised Violence," Kansas State University, http://www.ksu.edu/humec/impact.htm. 5.
By 1987, the sales of violent toys had soared more than 600 percent: Levin, Diane, Remote Control Childhood? Combating the Hazards of Media Culture. Washington, D.C.: National Association for the Education of Young Children, 1998, 10.
Television Violence Act: Newsletter from Senator Paul Simon, December 12, 1990.
Children's Television Act: Brian Sullivan, "Children's TV Bill Becomes Law," National Coalition on Television Violence Press Release, December 28, 1990.
. . . such programs as G.I. Joe, Leave It to Beaver, The Jetsons, and James Bond, Jr.... Newton Minow and Craig Lamay, "Making Television Safe for Kids," book excerpt in Time, June 26, 1995, 70; Cox News Service, "TV Stations Say 'Toons, Reruns Teach Kids," Bellevue Journal American, August 30, 1992, B-6.
The 1990 Report, Watching America quote: Michael Medved, Hollywood vs. America: Popular Culture and the War on Traditional Values. New York: HarperCollins, 1992, 196-197.
Barry Diller quote: Terry Pristin, "Soul-Searching on Violence by the Industry," The Los Angeles Times, May 18, 1992, Home Section, 1.
National Association of Broadcasters "Statement of Principles": Advisory Committee on Public Interest Obligations of Digital Television Broadcasters, "Statement of Principles of Radio and Television Broadcasting," Issued by the Board of Directors of the National Association of Broadcasters, adopted, 1990; reaffirmed 1992.
National Television Violence Study: George Comstock, "Television Research: Past Problems and Present Issues," in Research Paradigms, Television, and Social Behavior, eds. Joy Asamen and Gordon Berry. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 1998, 32.
The broadcast industry ... financed its own three-year study: George Comstock, "Television Research: Past Problems and Present Issues," in Research Paradigms, Television, and Social Behavior, eds. Joy Asamen and Gordon Berry. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 1998, 32.
Facts from National Television Study: Federman, Joel (ed.), National Television Violence Study, Vol. 3, Executive Summary. Santa Barbara: University of California, 1998, 29-42.
Marty Franks quote: Jeannine Aversa (The Associated Press), "Prime-Time Television on the Rise," The Seattle Times, April, 16, 1998, A-3.
George Comstock quote: George Comstock, "Television Research: Past Problems and Present Issues," in Research Paradigms, Television, and Social Behavior, eds. Joy Asamen and Gordon Berry. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 1998, 32.
. . . the largest study ever conducted which surveyed five thousand twelve-year-olds in twenty-three countries ... Jo Grobel, "The UNESCO Global Study on Media Violence: Report Presented to the Director General of UNESCO," in Children and Media Violence: Yearbook from the UNESCO International Clearinghouse on Children and Violence on the Screen, eds. U. Carlsson and C. Von Felitzen. Nordicom: Goteborg University, 1998, 181-199.
A recent study examining 2,380 major movie releases from 1988 to 1997 indicates ... Armstrong Williams, "Extra! Extra! Family-friendly films make money for Hollywood," Eastside Journal, June 6, 1999, B-4.
CHAPTER 3: PRETENDING TO BE FREDDY KRUEGER
Many believe that the desire for murderous violence is largely unnatural: Lt. Col. Dave Grossman, "Psychological effects of Combat," in The Oxford Companion to American Military History. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999.
Brigadier General S. L. A. Marshall first observed ... by nature, are not close-range, interpersonal killers: S. L. A. Marshall, Men Against Fire. Gloucester: Peter Smith, 1978,51, 78-79.
A preschooler is exposed to nearly 10,000 violent episodes each year Federman, Joel (ed.), National Television Violence Study, Vol. 3, Executive Summary. Santa Barbara: University of California, 1998, 34.
Nearly 40 percent of all violent incidents on television are initiated by characters who possess qualities that make them attractive role models to kids ... More than half of violent incidents feature physical aggression that would be lethal or incapacitating if it were to occur in real life: Federman, Joel (ed.), National Television Violence Study, Vol. 3, Executive Summary. Santa Barbara: University of California, 1998, 29.
By age eighteen, a typical American child will have seen at least two hundred thousand dramatized acts of violence and forty thousand screen murders: President Clinton, in his national address on media violence following the Littleton Massacre.
Poussaint quote: Poussaint, Alvin M.D., "Taking Movie Ratings Seriously: The Risks Faced by Children Allowed to Watch Films Meant for Adults Are as Real as Those from Alcohol, Tobacco, or Abuse," in Good Housekeeping, April 1997, 74.
Bruner quote: Gloria DeGaetano, "Learning from Creative Play," in Television and the Lives of Our Children (Redmond: Train of Thought Publishing, 1998), 35.
The most popular children's television shows in 1995 were ... G. Fabrikant, "The Young and Restless Audience," The New York Times, April 18, 1996, D1.
That infants can, and do, imitate an array of adult facial features ... Brandon Centerwall, "Television and Violence: The Scale of the Problem and Where to Go from Here," The Journal of the American Medical Association, vol. 267 (June 10, 1992), 3059.
Emotionally laden images are even more efficient at catching and holding the attention of youngsters ... Wendy Josephson, Television Violence: A Review of the Effects on Children of Different Ages. Ottawa: National Clearinghouse on Family Violence, 1995, 17-19.
... case of a preschooler who expressed fear and hostility ... Wendy Josephson, Television Violence: A Review of the Effects on Children of Different Ages. Ottawa: National Clearinghouse on Family Violence, 1995, 19.
... but they do not possess an instinct for gauging whether a behavior ought to be imitated: Brandon Centerwall, "Television and Violence: The Scale of the Problem and Where to Go from Here," The Journal of the American Medical Association, Vol. 267 (June 10, 1992), 3059.
... "they have a refrigerator, and there are such things as refrigerators": H. Kelly, "Reasoning About Realities: Children's Evaluations of Televisions and Books," in H. Kelly and H. Gardner (eds.), New Directions for Child Development: Viewing Children Through Television, no. 13. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1981, 63.
. . . an Indiana school board had to issue an advisory ... Neal Lawrence, "What's happening to our children?" Midwest Today, December 1993.
A seven-year-old boy described a deliberate attempt to reduce his own fear ... Since identifying with an aggressive hero ... is chilling indeed: Wendy Josephson, Television Violence: A Review of the Effects on Children of Different Ages. Ottawa: National Clearinghouse on Family Violence, 1995, 32.
It has been found that the more unrealistic the character, the more preschoolers both want to be like that character and think they are like that character: D. G. Perry and K. Bussey, "Self-Reinforcement in High and Low Aggressive Boys Following Acts of Aggression," Child Development, vol. 48, 1977, 653-657.
. . . young children are more likely to choose fantasy heroes over real-life heroes ... rather than from friends, siblings, or parents: J. French and S. Pena, "Children's Hero Play of the 20th Century: Changes Resulting From Television's Influence," Child Study Journal, vol. 21, 1991, 79-94.
Children with a propensity for violence usually have both learning and behavior problems ... Gloria DeGaetano, "Cycle Effects from Long-Term Viewing of Television Violence," in G. DeGaetano and K. Bander, Screen Smarts: A Family Guide to Media Literacy. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1996, 57.
Like 56 percent of kids between ages twelve and seventeen ... "Television in the Home, The 1997 Survey of Parents and Children," The Annenberg Public Policy Center, 1997, in "TV in the Bedroom," Better Viewing Magazine, September/October 1997, 3.
An estimated four million American children are victimized each year by physical abuse ... and other traumatic events: Ronald Kotulak, Inside the Brain: Revolutionary Discoveries of How the Mind Works. Kansas City: Andrews McMeel Publishing, 1996, 89.
Research has found that abused children ... most likely to commit violent crimes later in life: Wendy Josephson, Television Violence: A Review of the Effects on Children of Different Ages. Ottawa: National Clearinghouse on Family Violence, 1995, 47.
Violent or aggressive people have decreased activity ... leading to a short fuse: Two of four characteristics listed by Daniel G. Amen, M.D., in Change Your Brain, Change Your Life: The Breakthrough Program for Conquering Anxiety, Depression, Obsessiveness, Anger, and Impulsiveness. New York: Times Books, 1998, 212.
The brain of the child is not a miniature version of the adult brain: Florida Starting Points Initiative with support from the Carnegie Corporation, Maximizing Washington's Brain Power: We Need to Use It or Lose It, October 1997, 7.
In Florida, for instance, a six-year-old boy and his friend ... Brandon Centerwall, "The TV Message is Mayhem," Encyclopaedia Britannica: 1995 Medical and Health Annual. Chicago: Encyclopaedia Brittanica, 1995, 94-95.
When children start off in an alarm state with high noradrenaline and impulsive behavior ... revert to low noradrenaline levels and calculating behaviors: Perry, Bruce, M.D., Ph.D., "Incubated in Terror: Neurodevelopmental Factors in the 'Cycle of Violence,''' in Children in a Violent Society, Joy D. Osofsky, ed. New York: The Guilford Press, 1997, 124-149.
Research indicates that children may be deliberately trying to conquer their fears ... through repeated exposures to horror movies: D. Zillmann and J. Bryant, "Affect, Mood, and Emotion as Determinants of Selective Exposure," in D. Zillmann and J. Bryant, eds., Selective Exposure to Communication. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1985, 157-190.
Belson study: William Belson, Television Violence and the Adolescent Boy. Farnborough, UK: Saxon House, Teakfield Limited, 1978. John P. Murray, "Studying Television Violence: A Research Agenda for the 21st Century," in Research Paradigms, Television, and Social Behavior, eds. Joy Asamen and Gordon Berry. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 1998, 387-388.
Constant exposure ... incapable of producing socially acceptable emotional responses: Paul Gathercoal, "Brain Research and Mediated Experience: An Interpretation of the Implications for Education," Clearing House, Vol. 63, February 1990, 271.
The Japanese army very effectively used classical conditioning with their soldiers: Lt. Col. Dave Grossman, "We are training our kids to kill," Saturday Evening Post, August 1999, 70.
The conditioning of our children by violent visual entertainment creates an "acquired deficiency" in this immune system. AVIDS ... Lt. Col. Dave Grossman, On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society. New York: Little, Brown & Co., 1996, xviii.
CHAPTER 4: "IT'S IMPORTANT TO FEEL SOMETHING WHEN YOU KILL"
We must assume that what we know of the more benign, outdated games of the 1970s ... cannot be considered valid for the games that have been put on the market in the last five years: Eugene Provenzo in The Social Effects of Electronic Games: An Annotated Bibliography, eds. Joel Federman, S. Carbone, Helen Chen, and William Munn. Studio City: Mediascope, 1996, ii.
"Globally, annual video game revenues now exceed $18 billion. In the United States alone, video game revenues exceed $10 billion annually, nearly double the amount Americans spend going to the movies. On average, American children who have home game systems play with them about ninety minutes a day": eds. Joel Federman, S. Carbone, Helen Chen, and William Munn, The Social Effects of Electronic Games: An Annotated Bibliography (Studio City: Mediascope, 1996), i.
. . . 49 percent of young teens indicate a preference for violent games, while only 2 percent prefer educational ones: Jeanne B. Funk, "Reevaluating the Impact of Video Garnes," Clinical Pediatrics, vol. 32, no. 2, 1993, 86-90.
Patricia Greenfield quote: Eugene Provenza, Video Kids (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1991), 47-48.
More than 60 percent of children report that they play video games longer than they intend to play: Mark D. Griffiths and N. Hunt, "Computer game playing in adolescence: Prevalence and demographic indicators," Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, vol. 5, 1995, 189-193.
Four basic elements of video games (we have expanded these to make points about violent video games): Jane M. Healy, Endangered Minds: Why Kids Don't Think and What to Do About It (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1990), 207.
. . . studies show that generally boys' preferences ... Jeanne B. Funk, "Reevaluating the Impact of Video Games," Clinical Pediatrics, vol. 32, no. 2, 1993, 86-90.
For girls ... associated with lower self-esteem: Jeanne B. Funk, Debra D. Buchman, "Playing Violent Video and Computer Games and Adolescent Self-Concept," Journal of Communication, vol. 46, Spring 1996, 19-32.
Study on arcade use among adolescents: Sue Fisher, "Identifying Video Game Addiction in Children and Adolescents," Addictive Behaviors, vol. 19, 545-553.
Dr. Donald Shifrin quote: Gloria DeGaetano, personal interview, June 22, 1999.
. . . college students who had played a violent virtual reality game ... Sandra L. Calvert and Siu-Lan Tan, "Impact of virtual reality on young adults' physiological arousal and aggressive thoughts: Interaction versus observation," Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, vol. no. 5, 1, 125-139.
Mortal Kombat study: Mary E. Ballard and J. Rose Wiest, "Mortal Kombat: The Effects of Violent Video Technology on Males' Hostility and Cardiovascular Responding," March 1995, 8; paper presented at the Biennial Meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development (61st, Indianapolis, Ind., March 30-April 2, 1995).
Soldiers in that war spent a lot of time firing their guns the firing rate was a mere 15 percent among riflemen S. L. A. Marshall, Men Against Fire. Gloucester: Peter Smith, 1978, 51.
Their introduction is undeniably responsible for increasing the firing rate from 15 to 20 percent in World War II to 95 percent in Vietnam ... 75 percent to 80 percent of the killing on the modern battlefield is a direct result of the simulators. Ken Murray, Lt. Col. Dave Grossman, and R. W. Kentridge, "Behavioral Psychology," in Encyclopedia of Violence, Peace and Conflict. San Diego: Academic Press, 1999.
Time Crisis brochure quote: Personal correspondence, Jack Thompson and Lt. Col. Dave Grossman, June 1999.
WingMan Force: Advertising copy in PC Gamer, cited by President Clinton in his national speech on media violence after the Littleton, Colorado, massacre, June 1, 1999.
Wesley Schafer quote: Lt. Col. Dave Grossman, personal interviews conducted with Wesley Schafer, Union, SC, January 1998.
These two avid video game players fired twenty-seven shots from a range of over one hundred yards, and hit fifteen people: Lt. Col. Dave Grossman, personal interviews conducted with law enforcement officers after the Jonesboro massacre, March 1998.
Description of Duke Nukem game: Media Watch Online: "Duke's the King Baby," http://www.mediawatch.com.
Gary Eng Walk quote: Gary Eng Walk. "All Gore," Entertainment Weekly, Summer Double Issue '99, 143.
Doug Lowenstein quote: Mark Boal. "One Step Ahead of the Law." salon.com, July 19, 1999.
Duke Nukem, rated M for mature audiences, seventeen and older, is shelved next to Eggs of Steel, a kiddie game about an animated egg. Susan Nielsen, "A beginner's guide to becoming a video game prude," The Seattle Times, February 21, 1999, B 7-8.
"Fatalities can be the best part of Mortal Kombat," Mortal Kombat action toys are labeled, "For children four and up"; "As easy as killing babies with axes"; "More fun than shooting your neighbor's cat": Susan Nielsen, "A beginner's guide to becoming a video game prude, The Seattle Times, February 21, 1999, B 7-8.
Capcom's latest Street Fighter proclaims, "The killer in me is just beginning"; Robert Lindsey quote: "Game Makers Downplay Violent Role," USA Today, Internet site (ctc8229.htm at http://www.usatoday.com). 2.
"The Creators of Redneck Rampage are about to bring you a new, urban drama ... ": "Kingpin: Life of Crime," http//www.interplay.com/kingpin.
CHAPTER 5: DON'T .JUST STAND THERE ... DO SOMETHING!
1998 ~'State of Children's Television" report: "V-Chip Debuts, Ratings Confuse," Better Viewing Magazine, September/ October 1998, 3.
Bruce Perry Quote: Perry, Bruce, M.D., Ph.D., "Incubated in Terror: Neurodevelopmental Factors in the 'Cycle of Violence,' " in Maximizing Washington State's Brain Power. Olympia: Department of Health and Human Services, Fall 1998, 8.
A recent Canadian study demonstrated that 40 percent of parents ... A study by Tony Charlton cited by Paul Majendide, "TV Dominates Family Life," The Seattle Times, April 1, 1998, E-6.
And an American study has shown that 82 percent of parents ... do not encourage reading at home: Eric Jensen, Teaching With the Brain in Mind. Alexandria, Va: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 1998, 23.
Russell Harter quote: Jane M. Healy in Endangered Minds: Why Kids Don't Think and What to Do About It. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1990, 208.
"Gratuitous Violence Is 200 Times Faster with a D-Link Network"; "No cure. No hope. Only death"; "Destroying Your Enemies Isn't Enough ... You Must Devour Their Souls": PC Gamer, vol. 6, no. 8, August 1999. Advertising on pages 142, 104, 22-23.
40 percent of ten- to seventeen-year-olds said they would be less likely to watch such a program. "The Power of Three Hours," Better Viewing Magazine, September/October 1997, 3.
Story of Tim: Beverly Robertson Jackson, "Creating a Climate for Healing in a Violent Society," Young Children, vol. 52, no. 7 (November 1997), 70.
"21st Century Media Responsibility Act": Mark Boal, "One Step Ahead of the Law," salon.com, July 19, 1999.
Mason City, Iowa, has embraced a plan by their mayor to rid the town of violent video game, vowing "zero tolerance" for these murder simulators: "A Ban on Trouble," Newsweek, June 14, 1999, 4.
President Clinton quotes: National address by President Clinton, June 1, 1999.
Colorado Attorney General Ken Salazar quote: Ken Salazar, OpEd Column: "Initiatives may arise from dialogue," Denver Post, 13 June 1999.
Jack Thompson quote: Personal correspondence, Jack Thompson and Lt. Col. Dave Grossman, June 1999.
In New York, a father taught his eight-year-old how to use and fire a gun ... Fox News, "Hannity & Colmes," May 12, 1999.
Jennifer James quote: Jennifer James, "Death rattle: last gasp of a failed mind-set," The Seattle Times, July 4, 1999, L6.
This is exactly the technique used by some very notable citizens to call for an entertainment industry "Code of Conduct": "An Appeal to Hollywood," http://www.media-appeal.org.
RESOURCES
A DEFINITION OF MEDIA VIOLENCE
Definition written by authors using the following sources:
Belson, W. Television Violence and the Adolescent Boy. Franborough: Teakfield, 1978.
DeGaetano, Gloria, and Kathleen Bander. Screen Smarts: A Family Guide to Media Literacy. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1996.
Comstock, G., and H. Paik. Television and the American Child. San Diego: Academic Press, 1991.
Federman, Joel, ed. National Television Violence Study, Vol. 3, Executive Summary. Santa Barbara: University of California, 1998.
Murray, John. "Children and Television Violence," in Kansas Journal of Law & Public Policy, 1995, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 7-14.
VOICES OF CONCERN ABOUT ON-SCREEN VIOLENCE
Information from the American Medical Association: Physician Guide to Media Violence, The American Medical Association, 1996, 4-6.
Information from the American Psychological Association: Violence and Youth: Psychology's Response; vol. 1: Summary Report of the American Psychological Association Commission on Violence and Youth, The American Psychological Association, 1993,33-35, 77-78.
Information from the American Academy of Pediatrics: "Statement for the Senate Commerce Science and Transportation Committee on the Television Rating System," American Academy of Pediatrics, February 27, 1997.
Information from the National Association for the Education of Young Children: "NAEYC Position Statement on Violence in the Lives of Children," National Association for the Education of Young Children, 1996.
Information from the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry: http://www.aacap.org excerpt used with permission from the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry.
Information from the National Parentrreacher Association: Resolutions used with permission of the National PTA.
A CHRONOLOGY OF MAJOR FINDINGS, STATEMENTS, AND ACTIONS ON MEDIA VIOLENCE, 1952-1999
Adapted from http://www.videofreedom.com/chrono.html (Original source: Charles S. Clark, Communication Quarterly, September 4, 1993).
INTRODUCTION
Adolescents who copy crimes ... correct flaws that may have caused the television crime to fail: Wendy Josephson, "Television Violence: A Review of the Effects on Children of Different Ages." Ottawa: National Clearinghouse on Family Violence, 1995, 40.
Scientific evidence has established that screen portrayals of violence need not lead to reinforcement of aggressive attitudes and behaviors ... Joel Federman, Television Violence Study, vol. 3. Santa Barbara: University of California, 1998, 7-11.
CHAPTER 1: IT'S A VIOLENT WORLD AFTER ALL
According to InterPol, between 1977 and 1993 the per capita "serious assault" rate increased ... InterPol International Crime Statistics, InterPol, Lyons, France, vols. 1977 to 1994.
The Japanese crime data (30 percent increase in juvenile violent crime in 1997): BBC News Online, "Japanese tackle teenage knife attacks," Friday, February 6, 1998.
According to FBI reports, crime is down 7 percent: Fox Butterfield, "Crime Fell 7 Percent in '98, Continuing a 7-Year Trend," The New York Times, May 17, 1999, 14.
From 1960 through 1991 the U.S. population increased by 40 percent, yet violent crime increased by 500 percent; murders increased by 170 percent, rapes 520 percent, and aggravated assaults 600 percent: Ronald Kotulak, Inside the Brain: Revolutionary Discoveries of How the Mind Works. Kansas City: Andrews McMeel Publishing, 1996, 69.
In 1996 there were 19,654 murders, 95,769 reported rapes, over 1 million cases of aggravated assault, and 537,050 robberies, amounting to a loss of about $500 million in stolen property: Federal Bureau of Investigation, Crime in the United States 1996, Uniform Crime Reporting Statistics. Washington, D.C.; U.S. Department of Justice, 1996.
Murder is the least committed violent crime, although the most often reported crime on the nightly news: Howard Kurtz of The Washington Post, "Murder Rates Fall-But Not on Network News," The Seattle Times, August 13, 1997, A9.
Figure 1- Violent Crime in America: "Statistical Abstract of the United States." Washington, D.C.: The U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, editions 1957 to 1997.
Professor James Q. Wilson quote: Lt. Col. Dave Grossman, On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society. New York: Little, Brown & Co., 1996, 301.
According to the U.S. Army Medical Service Corps, a hypothetical wound that ... Dave Grossman, "Evolution of Weaponry," in Encyclopedia of Violence: Peace and Conflict. New York: Academic Press, 1999.
The per capita incarceration rate in America more than quadrupled between 1970, when it was at 97 people per 100,000, and 1997, when it reached 440 per 100,000: Statistical Abstract of the United States. Washington, D.C.: The U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, editions 1957 to 1997.
John J. DiIulio quote: Lt. Col. Dave Grossman, On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society. New York: Little, Brown & Co., 1996, 301.
In Richmond ... "zero tolerance" ... has been credited with cutting murders by 65 percent: Virginia Governor James Gilmore, quoted in Virginia Governor James Gilmore, quoted in U.S. News & World Report, November 16, 1998.
In Boston ... led to an 80 percent drop in youth homicides from 1990 to 1995, and in 1996 not a single youth died in a firearm homicide: President Clinton, State of the Union Address, "The President's Anti-Gang and Youth Violence Strategy-An Overview," February 4, 1997.
Among young people fifteen to twenty-four years old, murder is the second-leading cause of death. For African-American youths, murder is number one; Every 5 minutes a child is arrested in America for committing a violent crime, and gun-related violence takes the life of an American child every three hours; A child growing up in Washington, D.C., or Chicago is fifteen times more likely to be murdered than a child in Northern Ireland: Ellen Wartella, Adriana Olivarez, Nancy Jennings, "Children and Television Violence in the United States," in Children and Media Violence: Yearbook from the UNESCO International Clearinghouse on Children and Violence on the Screen, eds. U. Carlsson and C. Von Felitzen. Nordicom: Goteborg University, 1998, 55.
. . . 4,881 gangs in the United States: Daniel Flannery, C. Ronald Huff, Michael Manos, "Youth Gangs: A Developmental Perspective," in Delinquent Violent Youth: Theory and Interventions, eds. T. Gullotta, G. Adams, R. Montemayor. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 1998, 176.
Since 1960 teen suicide has tripled: John Crudele and Richard Erickson, Making Sense of Adolescence: How to Parent from the Heart. Minneapolis: John Crudele Productions, 1995, 139.
Every day an estimated 270,000 students bring guns to school; One of every fifty children has a parent in prison: Ronald Kotulak, Inside the Brain: Revolutionary Discoveries of How the Mind Works. Kansas City: Andrews McMeel Publishing, 1997, 93.
At least 160,000 children miss school every day because they fear an attack or intimidation by other students: National Education Association statistics, in Suellen Fried and Paula Fried, Bullies and Victims: Helping Your Child Through the Schoolyard Battlefield. New York: M. Evans and Company, 1996, xii.
One out of three girls and one out of seven boys are sexually abused by the time they reach the age of eighteen: Ellen Bass and Laura Davis, The Courage to Heal-A Guide for Women Survivors of Child Sexual Abuse. New York: Harper & Row, Publishers, 1988, 20.
Figures 2and 3- Violent Crime Arrest Rate for Juvenile Males and Juvenile Females: Graphs compiled by authors using data from Federal Bureau of Investigation, Crime in the United States 1996, Uniform Crime Reporting Statistics. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, 1996.
Stephen M. Case, of America Online, says that 80 percent of teenagers on A 0 L say that what happened at Columbine could happen in their school. Ken Auletta. "What I Did at Summer Camp," The New Yorker, July 26, 1999, 48.
Diane Levin quote: Ann Cornell, "TV, Video Game Violence Cause Aggressive Behavior, Leads to Crime, Experts Warn," Lion and Lamb Newsletter, Video Game Violence (Internet Information).
CHAPTER 2: NOT JUST A "TOASTER WITH PICTURES"
Brandon Tartikoff quote: John Caputo, "Tune Out the Tube: television viewing poor substitute for summer recreation," The Spokesman-Review, June 30, 1991, A-17.
Since 1950 there has been a total of more than 3,500 research studies ... Ellen Wartella, Adriana Olivarez, Nancy Jennings, "Children and Television Violence in the United States," in Children and Media Violence: Yearbook from the UNESCO International Clearinghouse on Children and Violence on the Screen, eds. U. Carlsson and C. Von Felitzen. Nordicom: Goteborg University, 1998, 57.
One random analysis of almost 1,000 of these studies found that all save 18 (12 of those were funded by the television industry) demonstrate ... Dr. Scott Snyder, in a 1998 presentation at the annual meeting of the American College of Forensic Psychiatry. "Clinical Psychiatry News," International Medical News Group, 1998,26(7), 36.
In the myriad studies done over the last four decades, experts have found three basic negative effects ... "Safeguarding Our Youth: Violence Prevention for Our Nation's Children, Report from the Working Group on Media." Washington, D.C., Center for Media Literacy, July 20-21, 1993, 4.
Since 1982, television violence has increased 780 percent ... Phil Phillips, Saturday Morning Mind Control. Nashville: Oliver- Nelson Books, 1991, 54.
The first U.S. Congressional hearings on the question took place in 1952 ... John P. Murray, "Studying Television Violence: A Research Agenda for the 21st Century," in Research Paradigms, Television, and Social Behavior, eds. Joy Asamen and Gordon Berry. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 1998, 370.
. . . when only around a quarter of American households had television sets ... Dr. Brandon Centerwall, "Journal of the American Medical Association," June 10, 1992-vol. 267, no. 22, "Television and violence: The scale of the problem and where to go from here," page 3,061, fig. 2.
. . . the "university of the air" brought quality programming ... Mary Megee, On Television: Teach the Children, a video. San Francisco: California Newsreel, 1991.
Concerns about television violence in the mid-50s ... totally unacceptable risk: John P. Murray, "Impact of Televised Violence," Kansas State University, http://www.ksu.edulhumec/impact.htm. 1-2.
In 1969, Senator John Pastore ... invited the Surgeon General ... John P. Murray, "Children and Television Violence," Kansas Journal of Law and Public Policy, vol. no. 3 (1995), 10.
1972 Surgeon General's Report: Surgeon General's Scientific Advisory Committee on Television and Social Behavior, Television and Growing Up: The Impact of Television Violence. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1972.
Quote from the National Institute of Mental Health Report: Pearl D. Bouthilet, L. Lazar, J. Eds. National Institute of Mental Health, Television and Behavior: Ten Years of Scientific Progress and Implications for the Eighties, vol. 1, Summary Report. Washington D.C.: United States Government Printing Office, 1982.
Eron and Huesmann's study: L. D. Eron and L. R. Huesmann, "The Control of Aggressive Behavior by Changes in Attitudes, Values, and the Conditions of Learning," in Advances in the Study of Aggression, eds. R. J. Blanchard and D. C. Blanchard. Orlando: Academic Press, Inc., 1984, 139-171.
McBeth Williams's study: Tannis McBeth Williams, The Impact of Television: A Natural Experiment in Three Communities. New York: Academic Press, 1986.
Centerwall's study: Brandon Centerwall, "Television and Violence: The Scale of the Problem and Where to Go from Here," The Journal of the American Medical Association, vol. 267 (June 10, 1992), 3059-3063.
"There never was a moment of 'Aha!' It simply happened": Gloria DeGaetano, personal interview with Dr. Brandon Centerwall, June 15, 1998.
In a classic 1974 study ... Ronald Drabman and Margaret Thomas, "Does media violence increase children's toleration of real-life aggression?" Developmental Psychology, vol. 10, 1974, 418-421.
... one of the more benign movies of the 1990s ... Vincent Canby's observations in Michael Medved, Hollywood vs. America: Popular Culture and the War on Traditional Values. New York: HarperCollins, 1992, 187.
Miller quote: Michael Medved, Hollywood vs. America: Popular Culture and the War on Traditional Values. New York: HarperCollins, 1992, 190-191.
Power Rangers contains about two hundred acts of violence per hour: Chris J. Boyatzis, "Of Power Rangers and V-Chips," Young Children, vol. 52, no. 7 (November 1997), 75.
... cartoons averaging twenty-five acts of violence per hour: A. Huston, E. Donnerstein, et aI., Big World, Small Screen: The Role of Television in American Society. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1992, 136.
British children under the age of twelve were not allowed to see Batman: "Batman Off Limits to Kids in Britain," Reuter Press, Seattle Post-Intelligencer, July 31, 1989, C-5.
Swedish children under the age of fifteen ... Turtles movies. Description of audiences for films by Swedish Bureau of Censors, http://www.statensbiografbyra.se.
Fright reactions: "Problems Frequently Caused by Scary Television and Movies," in Joanne Cantor, Mommy, I'm Scared: How TV and Movies Frighten Children and What We Can Do to Protect Them. Orlando: Harcourt Brace & Company, 1998, 215.
Cantor quote: Joanne Cantor, Ph.D., Mommy, I'm Scared: How TV and Movies Frighten Children and What We Can Do to Protect Them. Orlando: Harcourt Brace & Company, 1998, 12-13.
23 million Americans suffer from some sort of anxiety-based disorder: Stephen Hall, "Fear Itself: What we know about how it works, how it can be treated and what it tells us about our unconscious," The New York Times Magazine, February 28, 1999, 44.
Hall quote: Stephen Hall, "Fear Itself: What we know about how it works, how it can be treated and what it tells us about our unconscious," The New York Times Magazine, February 28, 1999, 45.
George Gerbner study: George Gerbner and Nancy Signorielli, Violence Profile, 1967 Through 1988-89: Enduring Patterns, manuscript. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, Annenberg School of Communication, 1990; George Gerbner, et al., "Growing Up with Television: The Cultivation Perspective," in J. Bryant and D. Zillmann (eds.), Media Effects: Advances in Theory and Research. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum, 17-41.
Center for Media and Public Affairs study: R. Lichter and D. Amundson, "A Day of Television Violence." Washington, D.C.: Center for Media and Public Affairs, 1992; R. Lichter and D. Amundson, "A Day of TV Violence: 1992 vs. 1994." Washington, D.C.: Center for Media and Public Affairs, 1994; Elizabeth Kolbert, "Study Finds TV Violence on the Rise," The New York Times, August 5, 1994, A9.
Newton Minow quote: Newton Minow quoted in E. Barnouw, Tube of Plenty: The Evolution of American Television (New York: Oxford University Press, 1975), 300.
Mark Fowler quote: C. Mayer, "FCC Chief's Fears: Fowler Sees Threat in Regulation," Washington Post, February 6, 1983, K-6.
. . . in the 1980-81 season, when the FCC was discussing deregulation of children's programming, violence on children's television shows reached its highest level in twenty years: thirty-three acts of violence per hour: John P. Murray, "Impact of Televised Violence," Kansas State University, http://www.ksu.edu/humec/impact.htm. 5.
By 1987, the sales of violent toys had soared more than 600 percent: Levin, Diane, Remote Control Childhood? Combating the Hazards of Media Culture. Washington, D.C.: National Association for the Education of Young Children, 1998, 10.
Television Violence Act: Newsletter from Senator Paul Simon, December 12, 1990.
Children's Television Act: Brian Sullivan, "Children's TV Bill Becomes Law," National Coalition on Television Violence Press Release, December 28, 1990.
. . . such programs as G.I. Joe, Leave It to Beaver, The Jetsons, and James Bond, Jr.... Newton Minow and Craig Lamay, "Making Television Safe for Kids," book excerpt in Time, June 26, 1995, 70; Cox News Service, "TV Stations Say 'Toons, Reruns Teach Kids," Bellevue Journal American, August 30, 1992, B-6.
The 1990 Report, Watching America quote: Michael Medved, Hollywood vs. America: Popular Culture and the War on Traditional Values. New York: HarperCollins, 1992, 196-197.
Barry Diller quote: Terry Pristin, "Soul-Searching on Violence by the Industry," The Los Angeles Times, May 18, 1992, Home Section, 1.
National Association of Broadcasters "Statement of Principles": Advisory Committee on Public Interest Obligations of Digital Television Broadcasters, "Statement of Principles of Radio and Television Broadcasting," Issued by the Board of Directors of the National Association of Broadcasters, adopted, 1990; reaffirmed 1992.
National Television Violence Study: George Comstock, "Television Research: Past Problems and Present Issues," in Research Paradigms, Television, and Social Behavior, eds. Joy Asamen and Gordon Berry. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 1998, 32.
The broadcast industry ... financed its own three-year study: George Comstock, "Television Research: Past Problems and Present Issues," in Research Paradigms, Television, and Social Behavior, eds. Joy Asamen and Gordon Berry. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 1998, 32.
Facts from National Television Study: Federman, Joel (ed.), National Television Violence Study, Vol. 3, Executive Summary. Santa Barbara: University of California, 1998, 29-42.
Marty Franks quote: Jeannine Aversa (The Associated Press), "Prime-Time Television on the Rise," The Seattle Times, April, 16, 1998, A-3.
George Comstock quote: George Comstock, "Television Research: Past Problems and Present Issues," in Research Paradigms, Television, and Social Behavior, eds. Joy Asamen and Gordon Berry. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 1998, 32.
. . . the largest study ever conducted which surveyed five thousand twelve-year-olds in twenty-three countries ... Jo Grobel, "The UNESCO Global Study on Media Violence: Report Presented to the Director General of UNESCO," in Children and Media Violence: Yearbook from the UNESCO International Clearinghouse on Children and Violence on the Screen, eds. U. Carlsson and C. Von Felitzen. Nordicom: Goteborg University, 1998, 181-199.
A recent study examining 2,380 major movie releases from 1988 to 1997 indicates ... Armstrong Williams, "Extra! Extra! Family-friendly films make money for Hollywood," Eastside Journal, June 6, 1999, B-4.
CHAPTER 3: PRETENDING TO BE FREDDY KRUEGER
Many believe that the desire for murderous violence is largely unnatural: Lt. Col. Dave Grossman, "Psychological effects of Combat," in The Oxford Companion to American Military History. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999.
Brigadier General S. L. A. Marshall first observed ... by nature, are not close-range, interpersonal killers: S. L. A. Marshall, Men Against Fire. Gloucester: Peter Smith, 1978,51, 78-79.
A preschooler is exposed to nearly 10,000 violent episodes each year Federman, Joel (ed.), National Television Violence Study, Vol. 3, Executive Summary. Santa Barbara: University of California, 1998, 34.
Nearly 40 percent of all violent incidents on television are initiated by characters who possess qualities that make them attractive role models to kids ... More than half of violent incidents feature physical aggression that would be lethal or incapacitating if it were to occur in real life: Federman, Joel (ed.), National Television Violence Study, Vol. 3, Executive Summary. Santa Barbara: University of California, 1998, 29.
By age eighteen, a typical American child will have seen at least two hundred thousand dramatized acts of violence and forty thousand screen murders: President Clinton, in his national address on media violence following the Littleton Massacre.
Poussaint quote: Poussaint, Alvin M.D., "Taking Movie Ratings Seriously: The Risks Faced by Children Allowed to Watch Films Meant for Adults Are as Real as Those from Alcohol, Tobacco, or Abuse," in Good Housekeeping, April 1997, 74.
Bruner quote: Gloria DeGaetano, "Learning from Creative Play," in Television and the Lives of Our Children (Redmond: Train of Thought Publishing, 1998), 35.
The most popular children's television shows in 1995 were ... G. Fabrikant, "The Young and Restless Audience," The New York Times, April 18, 1996, D1.
That infants can, and do, imitate an array of adult facial features ... Brandon Centerwall, "Television and Violence: The Scale of the Problem and Where to Go from Here," The Journal of the American Medical Association, vol. 267 (June 10, 1992), 3059.
Emotionally laden images are even more efficient at catching and holding the attention of youngsters ... Wendy Josephson, Television Violence: A Review of the Effects on Children of Different Ages. Ottawa: National Clearinghouse on Family Violence, 1995, 17-19.
... case of a preschooler who expressed fear and hostility ... Wendy Josephson, Television Violence: A Review of the Effects on Children of Different Ages. Ottawa: National Clearinghouse on Family Violence, 1995, 19.
... but they do not possess an instinct for gauging whether a behavior ought to be imitated: Brandon Centerwall, "Television and Violence: The Scale of the Problem and Where to Go from Here," The Journal of the American Medical Association, Vol. 267 (June 10, 1992), 3059.
... "they have a refrigerator, and there are such things as refrigerators": H. Kelly, "Reasoning About Realities: Children's Evaluations of Televisions and Books," in H. Kelly and H. Gardner (eds.), New Directions for Child Development: Viewing Children Through Television, no. 13. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1981, 63.
. . . an Indiana school board had to issue an advisory ... Neal Lawrence, "What's happening to our children?" Midwest Today, December 1993.
A seven-year-old boy described a deliberate attempt to reduce his own fear ... Since identifying with an aggressive hero ... is chilling indeed: Wendy Josephson, Television Violence: A Review of the Effects on Children of Different Ages. Ottawa: National Clearinghouse on Family Violence, 1995, 32.
It has been found that the more unrealistic the character, the more preschoolers both want to be like that character and think they are like that character: D. G. Perry and K. Bussey, "Self-Reinforcement in High and Low Aggressive Boys Following Acts of Aggression," Child Development, vol. 48, 1977, 653-657.
. . . young children are more likely to choose fantasy heroes over real-life heroes ... rather than from friends, siblings, or parents: J. French and S. Pena, "Children's Hero Play of the 20th Century: Changes Resulting From Television's Influence," Child Study Journal, vol. 21, 1991, 79-94.
Children with a propensity for violence usually have both learning and behavior problems ... Gloria DeGaetano, "Cycle Effects from Long-Term Viewing of Television Violence," in G. DeGaetano and K. Bander, Screen Smarts: A Family Guide to Media Literacy. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1996, 57.
Like 56 percent of kids between ages twelve and seventeen ... "Television in the Home, The 1997 Survey of Parents and Children," The Annenberg Public Policy Center, 1997, in "TV in the Bedroom," Better Viewing Magazine, September/October 1997, 3.
An estimated four million American children are victimized each year by physical abuse ... and other traumatic events: Ronald Kotulak, Inside the Brain: Revolutionary Discoveries of How the Mind Works. Kansas City: Andrews McMeel Publishing, 1996, 89.
Research has found that abused children ... most likely to commit violent crimes later in life: Wendy Josephson, Television Violence: A Review of the Effects on Children of Different Ages. Ottawa: National Clearinghouse on Family Violence, 1995, 47.
Violent or aggressive people have decreased activity ... leading to a short fuse: Two of four characteristics listed by Daniel G. Amen, M.D., in Change Your Brain, Change Your Life: The Breakthrough Program for Conquering Anxiety, Depression, Obsessiveness, Anger, and Impulsiveness. New York: Times Books, 1998, 212.
The brain of the child is not a miniature version of the adult brain: Florida Starting Points Initiative with support from the Carnegie Corporation, Maximizing Washington's Brain Power: We Need to Use It or Lose It, October 1997, 7.
In Florida, for instance, a six-year-old boy and his friend ... Brandon Centerwall, "The TV Message is Mayhem," Encyclopaedia Britannica: 1995 Medical and Health Annual. Chicago: Encyclopaedia Brittanica, 1995, 94-95.
When children start off in an alarm state with high noradrenaline and impulsive behavior ... revert to low noradrenaline levels and calculating behaviors: Perry, Bruce, M.D., Ph.D., "Incubated in Terror: Neurodevelopmental Factors in the 'Cycle of Violence,''' in Children in a Violent Society, Joy D. Osofsky, ed. New York: The Guilford Press, 1997, 124-149.
Research indicates that children may be deliberately trying to conquer their fears ... through repeated exposures to horror movies: D. Zillmann and J. Bryant, "Affect, Mood, and Emotion as Determinants of Selective Exposure," in D. Zillmann and J. Bryant, eds., Selective Exposure to Communication. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1985, 157-190.
Belson study: William Belson, Television Violence and the Adolescent Boy. Farnborough, UK: Saxon House, Teakfield Limited, 1978. John P. Murray, "Studying Television Violence: A Research Agenda for the 21st Century," in Research Paradigms, Television, and Social Behavior, eds. Joy Asamen and Gordon Berry. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 1998, 387-388.
Constant exposure ... incapable of producing socially acceptable emotional responses: Paul Gathercoal, "Brain Research and Mediated Experience: An Interpretation of the Implications for Education," Clearing House, Vol. 63, February 1990, 271.
The Japanese army very effectively used classical conditioning with their soldiers: Lt. Col. Dave Grossman, "We are training our kids to kill," Saturday Evening Post, August 1999, 70.
The conditioning of our children by violent visual entertainment creates an "acquired deficiency" in this immune system. AVIDS ... Lt. Col. Dave Grossman, On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society. New York: Little, Brown & Co., 1996, xviii.
CHAPTER 4: "IT'S IMPORTANT TO FEEL SOMETHING WHEN YOU KILL"
We must assume that what we know of the more benign, outdated games of the 1970s ... cannot be considered valid for the games that have been put on the market in the last five years: Eugene Provenzo in The Social Effects of Electronic Games: An Annotated Bibliography, eds. Joel Federman, S. Carbone, Helen Chen, and William Munn. Studio City: Mediascope, 1996, ii.
"Globally, annual video game revenues now exceed $18 billion. In the United States alone, video game revenues exceed $10 billion annually, nearly double the amount Americans spend going to the movies. On average, American children who have home game systems play with them about ninety minutes a day": eds. Joel Federman, S. Carbone, Helen Chen, and William Munn, The Social Effects of Electronic Games: An Annotated Bibliography (Studio City: Mediascope, 1996), i.
. . . 49 percent of young teens indicate a preference for violent games, while only 2 percent prefer educational ones: Jeanne B. Funk, "Reevaluating the Impact of Video Garnes," Clinical Pediatrics, vol. 32, no. 2, 1993, 86-90.
Patricia Greenfield quote: Eugene Provenza, Video Kids (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1991), 47-48.
More than 60 percent of children report that they play video games longer than they intend to play: Mark D. Griffiths and N. Hunt, "Computer game playing in adolescence: Prevalence and demographic indicators," Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, vol. 5, 1995, 189-193.
Four basic elements of video games (we have expanded these to make points about violent video games): Jane M. Healy, Endangered Minds: Why Kids Don't Think and What to Do About It (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1990), 207.
. . . studies show that generally boys' preferences ... Jeanne B. Funk, "Reevaluating the Impact of Video Games," Clinical Pediatrics, vol. 32, no. 2, 1993, 86-90.
For girls ... associated with lower self-esteem: Jeanne B. Funk, Debra D. Buchman, "Playing Violent Video and Computer Games and Adolescent Self-Concept," Journal of Communication, vol. 46, Spring 1996, 19-32.
Study on arcade use among adolescents: Sue Fisher, "Identifying Video Game Addiction in Children and Adolescents," Addictive Behaviors, vol. 19, 545-553.
Dr. Donald Shifrin quote: Gloria DeGaetano, personal interview, June 22, 1999.
. . . college students who had played a violent virtual reality game ... Sandra L. Calvert and Siu-Lan Tan, "Impact of virtual reality on young adults' physiological arousal and aggressive thoughts: Interaction versus observation," Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, vol. no. 5, 1, 125-139.
Mortal Kombat study: Mary E. Ballard and J. Rose Wiest, "Mortal Kombat: The Effects of Violent Video Technology on Males' Hostility and Cardiovascular Responding," March 1995, 8; paper presented at the Biennial Meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development (61st, Indianapolis, Ind., March 30-April 2, 1995).
Soldiers in that war spent a lot of time firing their guns the firing rate was a mere 15 percent among riflemen S. L. A. Marshall, Men Against Fire. Gloucester: Peter Smith, 1978, 51.
Their introduction is undeniably responsible for increasing the firing rate from 15 to 20 percent in World War II to 95 percent in Vietnam ... 75 percent to 80 percent of the killing on the modern battlefield is a direct result of the simulators. Ken Murray, Lt. Col. Dave Grossman, and R. W. Kentridge, "Behavioral Psychology," in Encyclopedia of Violence, Peace and Conflict. San Diego: Academic Press, 1999.
Time Crisis brochure quote: Personal correspondence, Jack Thompson and Lt. Col. Dave Grossman, June 1999.
WingMan Force: Advertising copy in PC Gamer, cited by President Clinton in his national speech on media violence after the Littleton, Colorado, massacre, June 1, 1999.
Wesley Schafer quote: Lt. Col. Dave Grossman, personal interviews conducted with Wesley Schafer, Union, SC, January 1998.
These two avid video game players fired twenty-seven shots from a range of over one hundred yards, and hit fifteen people: Lt. Col. Dave Grossman, personal interviews conducted with law enforcement officers after the Jonesboro massacre, March 1998.
Description of Duke Nukem game: Media Watch Online: "Duke's the King Baby," http://www.mediawatch.com.
Gary Eng Walk quote: Gary Eng Walk. "All Gore," Entertainment Weekly, Summer Double Issue '99, 143.
Doug Lowenstein quote: Mark Boal. "One Step Ahead of the Law." salon.com, July 19, 1999.
Duke Nukem, rated M for mature audiences, seventeen and older, is shelved next to Eggs of Steel, a kiddie game about an animated egg. Susan Nielsen, "A beginner's guide to becoming a video game prude," The Seattle Times, February 21, 1999, B 7-8.
"Fatalities can be the best part of Mortal Kombat," Mortal Kombat action toys are labeled, "For children four and up"; "As easy as killing babies with axes"; "More fun than shooting your neighbor's cat": Susan Nielsen, "A beginner's guide to becoming a video game prude, The Seattle Times, February 21, 1999, B 7-8.
Capcom's latest Street Fighter proclaims, "The killer in me is just beginning"; Robert Lindsey quote: "Game Makers Downplay Violent Role," USA Today, Internet site (ctc8229.htm at http://www.usatoday.com). 2.
"The Creators of Redneck Rampage are about to bring you a new, urban drama ... ": "Kingpin: Life of Crime," http//www.interplay.com/kingpin.
CHAPTER 5: DON'T .JUST STAND THERE ... DO SOMETHING!
1998 ~'State of Children's Television" report: "V-Chip Debuts, Ratings Confuse," Better Viewing Magazine, September/ October 1998, 3.
Bruce Perry Quote: Perry, Bruce, M.D., Ph.D., "Incubated in Terror: Neurodevelopmental Factors in the 'Cycle of Violence,' " in Maximizing Washington State's Brain Power. Olympia: Department of Health and Human Services, Fall 1998, 8.
A recent Canadian study demonstrated that 40 percent of parents ... A study by Tony Charlton cited by Paul Majendide, "TV Dominates Family Life," The Seattle Times, April 1, 1998, E-6.
And an American study has shown that 82 percent of parents ... do not encourage reading at home: Eric Jensen, Teaching With the Brain in Mind. Alexandria, Va: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 1998, 23.
Russell Harter quote: Jane M. Healy in Endangered Minds: Why Kids Don't Think and What to Do About It. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1990, 208.
"Gratuitous Violence Is 200 Times Faster with a D-Link Network"; "No cure. No hope. Only death"; "Destroying Your Enemies Isn't Enough ... You Must Devour Their Souls": PC Gamer, vol. 6, no. 8, August 1999. Advertising on pages 142, 104, 22-23.
40 percent of ten- to seventeen-year-olds said they would be less likely to watch such a program. "The Power of Three Hours," Better Viewing Magazine, September/October 1997, 3.
Story of Tim: Beverly Robertson Jackson, "Creating a Climate for Healing in a Violent Society," Young Children, vol. 52, no. 7 (November 1997), 70.
"21st Century Media Responsibility Act": Mark Boal, "One Step Ahead of the Law," salon.com, July 19, 1999.
Mason City, Iowa, has embraced a plan by their mayor to rid the town of violent video game, vowing "zero tolerance" for these murder simulators: "A Ban on Trouble," Newsweek, June 14, 1999, 4.
President Clinton quotes: National address by President Clinton, June 1, 1999.
Colorado Attorney General Ken Salazar quote: Ken Salazar, OpEd Column: "Initiatives may arise from dialogue," Denver Post, 13 June 1999.
Jack Thompson quote: Personal correspondence, Jack Thompson and Lt. Col. Dave Grossman, June 1999.
In New York, a father taught his eight-year-old how to use and fire a gun ... Fox News, "Hannity & Colmes," May 12, 1999.
Jennifer James quote: Jennifer James, "Death rattle: last gasp of a failed mind-set," The Seattle Times, July 4, 1999, L6.
This is exactly the technique used by some very notable citizens to call for an entertainment industry "Code of Conduct": "An Appeal to Hollywood," http://www.media-appeal.org.
RESOURCES
A DEFINITION OF MEDIA VIOLENCE
Definition written by authors using the following sources:
Belson, W. Television Violence and the Adolescent Boy. Franborough: Teakfield, 1978.
DeGaetano, Gloria, and Kathleen Bander. Screen Smarts: A Family Guide to Media Literacy. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1996.
Comstock, G., and H. Paik. Television and the American Child. San Diego: Academic Press, 1991.
Federman, Joel, ed. National Television Violence Study, Vol. 3, Executive Summary. Santa Barbara: University of California, 1998.
Murray, John. "Children and Television Violence," in Kansas Journal of Law & Public Policy, 1995, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 7-14.
VOICES OF CONCERN ABOUT ON-SCREEN VIOLENCE
Information from the American Medical Association: Physician Guide to Media Violence, The American Medical Association, 1996, 4-6.
Information from the American Psychological Association: Violence and Youth: Psychology's Response; vol. 1: Summary Report of the American Psychological Association Commission on Violence and Youth, The American Psychological Association, 1993,33-35, 77-78.
Information from the American Academy of Pediatrics: "Statement for the Senate Commerce Science and Transportation Committee on the Television Rating System," American Academy of Pediatrics, February 27, 1997.
Information from the National Association for the Education of Young Children: "NAEYC Position Statement on Violence in the Lives of Children," National Association for the Education of Young Children, 1996.
Information from the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry: http://www.aacap.org excerpt used with permission from the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry.
Information from the National Parentrreacher Association: Resolutions used with permission of the National PTA.
A CHRONOLOGY OF MAJOR FINDINGS, STATEMENTS, AND ACTIONS ON MEDIA VIOLENCE, 1952-1999
Adapted from http://www.videofreedom.com/chrono.html (Original source: Charles S. Clark, Communication Quarterly, September 4, 1993).
- admin
- Site Admin
- Posts: 37493
- Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am
Re: Stop Teaching Our Kids to Kill: A Call to Action Against
by admin » Fri Sep 13, 2013 1:59 am
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Asamen, Joy, and Gordon Berry, eds. Research Paradigms, Television, and Social Behavior. Sage Publications, 1998.
Cantor, Joanne. Mommy, I'm Scared: How TV and Movies Frighten Children and What We Can Do to Protect Them. Harcourt Brace, 1998.
Carlsson, C., and C. Von Felitzen, eds. Children and Media Violence: Yearbook from the UNESCO International Clearinghouse on Children and Violence on the Screen. Nordicom: Goteborg University, 1998.
Condry, John. The Psychology of Television. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, 1989.
Cress, Joseph, and Burt Berlowe. Peaceful Parenting in a Violent World. Perspective Publications, 1995.
Crudele, John, and Richard Erickson. Making Sense of Adolescence: How to Parent from the Heart. John Crudele Productions, 1995.
DeGaetano, Gloria. Media Smarts for Young Folks. Train of Thought Publishing, 1999.
DeGaetano, Gloria. Television and the Lives of Our Children. Train of Thought Publishing, 1998.
DeGaetano, Gloria and K. Bander. Screen Smarts: A Family Guide to Media Literacy. Houghton Mifflin, 1996.
Duhon-Sells, Rose, ed. Dealing with Youth Violence: What Schools and Communities Need to Know. National Education Services, 1995.
Eron, Leonard, et al. Reason to Hope: A Psychosocial Perspective on Violence and Youth. American Psychological Association, 1994.
Federman, Joel. Television Violence Study, vol. 3. University of California, 1998.
Fried, Suellen, and Paula Fried. Bullies and Victims: Helping Your Child Through the Schoolyard Battlefield. M. Evans and Company, 1996.
Garbarino, James. Raising Children in a Socially Toxic Environment. Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1995.
Garbarino, James, et al. Children in Danger: Coping with the Consequences of Community Violence. Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1992.
Grossman, Dave. On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society. Little, Brown & Co, 1996.
Gullotta, T., et al., eds. Delinquent Violent Youth: Theory and Interventions. Sage Publications, 1998.
Healy, Jane M. Endangered Minds: Why Our Kids Don't Think and What to Do About It. Simon and Schuster, 1991.
Healy, Jane M. Failure to Connect: How Computers Affect Our Children's Minds-for Better and Worse. Simon and Schuster, 1998.
Josephson, Wendy. Television Violence: A Review of the Effects on Children of Different Ages. Ottawa: National Clearinghouse on Family Violence, 1995.
Kotulak, Ronald. Inside the Brain: Revolutionary Discoveries of How the Mind Works. Andrews McMeel Publishing, 1996.
Levin, Diane. Remote Control Childhood? Combating the Hazards of a Media Culture. National Association for the Education of Young Children, 1998.
Levin, Diane. Teaching Young Children in Violent Times: Building a Peaceable Classroom. Educators for Social Responsibility, 1994.
Levine, James. Getting Men Involved: Strategies for Early Childhood Programs. Scholastic, 1994.
Levine, Madeline. Viewing Violence: How Media Violence Affects Your Child's and Adolescent's Development. Doubleday, 1996.
Medved, Michael. Hollywood vs. America: Popular Culture and the War on Traditional Values. HarperCollins, 1992.
Provenzo, Eugene. Video Kids. Harvard University Press, 1991.
Slaby, R. Early Violence Prevention: Tools for Teaching Young Children. National Association for the Education of Young Children, 1995.
Walsh, David. Selling Out America's Children: How America Puts Profits Before Values -- and What Parents Can Do. Fairview Press, 1994.
Asamen, Joy, and Gordon Berry, eds. Research Paradigms, Television, and Social Behavior. Sage Publications, 1998.
Cantor, Joanne. Mommy, I'm Scared: How TV and Movies Frighten Children and What We Can Do to Protect Them. Harcourt Brace, 1998.
Carlsson, C., and C. Von Felitzen, eds. Children and Media Violence: Yearbook from the UNESCO International Clearinghouse on Children and Violence on the Screen. Nordicom: Goteborg University, 1998.
Condry, John. The Psychology of Television. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, 1989.
Cress, Joseph, and Burt Berlowe. Peaceful Parenting in a Violent World. Perspective Publications, 1995.
Crudele, John, and Richard Erickson. Making Sense of Adolescence: How to Parent from the Heart. John Crudele Productions, 1995.
DeGaetano, Gloria. Media Smarts for Young Folks. Train of Thought Publishing, 1999.
DeGaetano, Gloria. Television and the Lives of Our Children. Train of Thought Publishing, 1998.
DeGaetano, Gloria and K. Bander. Screen Smarts: A Family Guide to Media Literacy. Houghton Mifflin, 1996.
Duhon-Sells, Rose, ed. Dealing with Youth Violence: What Schools and Communities Need to Know. National Education Services, 1995.
Eron, Leonard, et al. Reason to Hope: A Psychosocial Perspective on Violence and Youth. American Psychological Association, 1994.
Federman, Joel. Television Violence Study, vol. 3. University of California, 1998.
Fried, Suellen, and Paula Fried. Bullies and Victims: Helping Your Child Through the Schoolyard Battlefield. M. Evans and Company, 1996.
Garbarino, James. Raising Children in a Socially Toxic Environment. Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1995.
Garbarino, James, et al. Children in Danger: Coping with the Consequences of Community Violence. Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1992.
Grossman, Dave. On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society. Little, Brown & Co, 1996.
Gullotta, T., et al., eds. Delinquent Violent Youth: Theory and Interventions. Sage Publications, 1998.
Healy, Jane M. Endangered Minds: Why Our Kids Don't Think and What to Do About It. Simon and Schuster, 1991.
Healy, Jane M. Failure to Connect: How Computers Affect Our Children's Minds-for Better and Worse. Simon and Schuster, 1998.
Josephson, Wendy. Television Violence: A Review of the Effects on Children of Different Ages. Ottawa: National Clearinghouse on Family Violence, 1995.
Kotulak, Ronald. Inside the Brain: Revolutionary Discoveries of How the Mind Works. Andrews McMeel Publishing, 1996.
Levin, Diane. Remote Control Childhood? Combating the Hazards of a Media Culture. National Association for the Education of Young Children, 1998.
Levin, Diane. Teaching Young Children in Violent Times: Building a Peaceable Classroom. Educators for Social Responsibility, 1994.
Levine, James. Getting Men Involved: Strategies for Early Childhood Programs. Scholastic, 1994.
Levine, Madeline. Viewing Violence: How Media Violence Affects Your Child's and Adolescent's Development. Doubleday, 1996.
Medved, Michael. Hollywood vs. America: Popular Culture and the War on Traditional Values. HarperCollins, 1992.
Provenzo, Eugene. Video Kids. Harvard University Press, 1991.
Slaby, R. Early Violence Prevention: Tools for Teaching Young Children. National Association for the Education of Young Children, 1995.
Walsh, David. Selling Out America's Children: How America Puts Profits Before Values -- and What Parents Can Do. Fairview Press, 1994.
- admin
- Site Admin
- Posts: 37493
- Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am
Re: Stop Teaching Our Kids to Kill: A Call to Action Against
by admin » Fri Sep 13, 2013 2:02 am
INDEX
Page numbers in italics indicate figures.
abuse. See child abuse; domestic violence
Acquired Violence Immune System
Deficiency Syndrome (AVIDS),
64
action figures, 39, 51, 53, 80-81
addiction, video game, 68-70
adolescents. See teenagers
African-American youth murder victims,
17
age
American cultural insensitivity to
appropriate viewing fare, 34-37
appropriate television news viewing,
96-97
movie rating system, 109
prime years for violent criminal
acts, 16
See also preschoolers; teenagers
aggravated assault. See assault
aggression, 7, 133, 134
brain activity and, 58-64, 89
and decreased prefrontal cortex
activity, 58
heroic fantasies of, 55
studies of increased levels of,
26-32
video game arousal effects, 70-71
See also assault rates; violent
crime
Allen, Steve, 116
American Academy of Child and
Adolescent Psychiatry
(AACAP), 127-28
American Academy of Pediatrics,
The (AAP), 87, 125-26, 134
American Medical Association, The
(AMA), 123-24, 133
American Psychological Association
(APA), 124-25, 134-35
Americans for Responsible Television,
147
America Online, 18
animal behavior, 47-48
animal mutilation, 7, 18
anxiety, 35, 36
arcade games. See video and computer
games
Arkansas. See Jonesboro (Ark.) middle
school shootings
Army, U.S.
combat simulator usage, 4-5, 74
Medical Service Corps, 14
arrest rates
violent crime, 18, 19
assault rates, 11, 12, 15
comparison of murder, assault, and
imprisonment (1957-97), 13
international per-<:apita rate
increase (1977-93), 10-11
Atrium Society Publications, 147-48
Australia, 10
AVIDS. See Acquired Violence
Immune System Deficiency Syndrome
Batman movies, 35
behavior problems, 10, 56, 59, 61, 88
Belgium, 10-11
Belson, William, 62
Ben Hur (movie), 85
Bennett, William J., 116
Boston (Mass.) crime deterrents, 16
boys. See males
brain activity, 58-64
language skills as violence
inhibitor, 89-90
violence-provoked cognitive confusion,
55
violent imagery as overstimulant,
59
brain stem reactivity, 59
Bruner, Jerome, 52
Bullitt (movie), 34
bullying, 18, 56
Burke, Edmund, 33
Bush, George, 39-40
cable television violence, 42, 44
Canada, 11, 134
Canadians Concerned About Violence
in Entertainment
(C-CAVE), 148
Cantor, Joanne, 36
Capcom, 80, 81
Carneal, Michael, 4, 61, 75-76,
111, 112
CarnEvil (video game), 79
Carter, jimmy, 116
cartoon violence, 34-35, 37, 49
toy counterparts, 39
Case, Stephen M., 18
CBS television, 133
Center for Media Literacy, 148-49
Center for Media and Public Affairs,
37-38, 135
Center for Successful Parenting,
149-50
Center for the Study and Prevention
of Violence, 149
Centerwall, Brandon, 31-32, 134
Chicago (111.) child murder-victim
potential, 17
child abuse, 15, 57, 59
exposure to screen violence as,
49-50, 57
sexual, 18
child development
and brain activity stimulation,
58-64
impact of violent imagery on,
53-58
literacy skills-building and, 89-92
reduced viewing rules and, 87-88
"Children and Media Violence: A
Yearbook from the UNESCO
International Clearinghouse on
Children and Violence on the
Screen, " 45, 135-36
Children's Television Act of 1990,
39-40
chronology of media violence finding,
statements, and actions
(1952-99), 132-36
civil litigation. See lawsuits
classical conditioning, 63, 64
Clinton, Bill, 1, 7, 104-5, 109, 136
CNN Newsroom and World View
(television program), 97
"Code of Conduct, " 116
cognition. See brain activity
Colorado. See Littleton (Colo.) high
school shootings
Columbine High School. See Littleton
(Colo.) high school shootmgs
commercials, television, 45
Committee for Children, 150
compassion, 61
computers
placement in home, 88
reduced use-time rules, 87
See also video and computer
games; World Wide Web
Comstock, George, 44
conditioning, 48, 63, 64, 73. See
also desensitization
Congress, U.S., 39-41
hearings on television violence,
26-28, 39, 132
violence-restrictive legislative initiatives,
107-8
conversational skills, 90-92
crime. See assault rates; law enforcement;
violent crime
Cultural Environment Movement
(CEM), 150-51
Cuomo, Mario, 116
Cypress Hill (rap group), 79
Death Wish (movie), 34
Denmark, 11
desensitization, 2-3, 26
cultural, 32-37
of young children, 7, 60-64
development, child. See child development
Dewey, John, 49
Dick Tracy (movie), 34
Die-Hard 2 (movie), 85
DiIulio, John J., 15
Diller, Barry, 41
Disney Company, 105, 113
domestic violence, 12, 56-57, 59
Doom (video game), 67, 83
Littleton perpetrators' practice in,
101, 77
as mechanical training simulator,
71-72, 77
drug abuse, 15
Duck Hunt (video game), 74
Duke Nukem (video game), 67, 78,
80
educational television, 98
Education Department, U.S., 135
Eggs of Steel (video game), 80
ego development, 56
Ellerbee, Linda, 97
E-mail campaigns, anti-media violence,
115-16
empathy, 61
Endangered Minds (Healey), 68-69
England. See Great Britain
environmental influences, 49-53
Eron, Leonard, 29, 133
Exorcist, The (movie), 36
Falklands War, 48, 74
fantasy, 54-55
Fathers' Network, 151
FATS (Fire Arms Training Simulator),
74
FBI (Federal Bureau of Investigation),
11, 12, 48
FCC (Federal Communications
Commission), 39, 115
address and telephone number,
145
rating system investigation, 111
fears, children's, 26, 35-37
feelings, articulation of, 90
females
arrest rate for violent crimes, 20
video game use, 68
fight or flight response, 59
films. See movies; television
firearms. See guns
Fire Arms Training Simulator
(FATS), 74
First Amendment, 1, 40, 105, 111,
112
"First Person Shooter" video games,
71, 78, 79, 81
Ford, Gerald R., 116
Fowler, Mark, 39
France, 11
Franks, Marty, 43-44
free speech. See First Amendment
French Connection, The (movie), 34
Fresh (movie), 95
FTC (Federal Trade Commission),
104-5
gaming industry. See video games
gangs, 12, 16, 17
Gerbner, George, 37
G.I. Joe (cartoon), 34-35, 40
girls. See females
Golden, Andrew, 61
government officials, list of, 145
G-rated movies, 45
Great Britain, 11, 35
Greece, 10
Greenfield, Patricia, 67
Griffith, Paddy, 48
GrowSmartBrains, 151-52
Guncon, 74
guns, 16, 17, 21
marksmanship simulators, 4-5,
71-80, 112
Gunsmoke (television program), 27
Hall, Stephen, 36
Harris, Eric, 9, 21, 77, 101
Harter, Russell, 91
Healey, Jane, 68-69
Health and Human Services Department,
U.S., 135
Heavy Freight Films, 152
heroes, screen, 51, 52, 56, 57
Hitman (book), 111
Holmes, Richard, 48
home video games. See video and
computer games
homicide. See murders
horror movies, 36, 93
House of Representatives, U.S.,
hearings on television violence,
132
House of the Dead (video game), 79
Huesmann, L. Rowell, 29, 133
Hungary, 11
Hustler (magazine), 108
Hyde, Henry, 107
hyperactivity, 59, 88
hypervigilancy, 59-60
identification, 53-58
id Software, 112
imagination, 61
imitation, 51-52
identification and, 53-58
imprisonment. See incarceration
impulsive behavior, 59, 61, 89
incarceration, 17
rate comparisons, 13, 15
indicator species, 17
insensitivity. See desensitization
Institute on Violence and Destructive
Behavior, 152-53
interactive video games. See video
and computer games
Internet. See World Wide Web
InterPol, 10
Invasion of the Body Snatchers
(movie), 36
Jackson, Beverly Robertson,
100-101
James, Jennifer, 114
James Bond, Jr. (television program),
40
Japan, 11
Jetsons, The (cartoon), 40
Jonesboro (Ark.) middle school
shootings, 2, 3, 22, 61, 76-77
Journal of the American Medical
Association, 32, 134
joystick, similarity to pistol grip,
79
Judd, Naomi, 116
Justice Department, U.S., 104-5,
111, 135
Kennard, Bill, 115
Kentucky. See Paducah (Ky.) school
shootings
Kingpin: Life of Crime (video game),
79, 81
Klebold, Dylan, 9, 21, 77, 101
Krueger, Freddy (movie character),
55
language skills, 89-92
Laugh-In (television program), 44
law enforcement, 4, 48
anticrime measures, 16
training simulators, 73, 74, 75
See also incarceration
laws. See legislation
lawsuits
first-known against television network,
133
against media and video game
manufacturers, 75, 110, 111
product liability, 113
learning problems, 56, 88
Leave It to Beaver (television program),
40
legislation
Children's Television Act, 39-40
media violence-restriction initiatives,
107-10
Levin, Diane, 18
Lieberman, Joseph, 107-8
Lindsey, Robert, 81
Lion and the Lamb Project, 153
listening skills, 92
literacy skills, 89-92
litigation. See lawsuits
Littleton (Colo.) high school shootings,
2, 6-7, 22, 104
characteristics of perpetrators, 9,
21, 77, 101
youth reactions to, 18, 63
Lowenstein, Doug, 80
MACS (Multipurpose Arcade Combat
Simulator), 74
males
juvenile violent crime arrest rate,
19
study of teenage exposure to television
violence, 62
study of video game reactions, 68,
71
Marine Corps, U.S., 77
Marine Doom simulator, 77
marksmanship practice, video games
as, 4-5, 72-74
Marshall, S. L. A., 48
Masked Rider (television program),
52
Mason City, Iowa, 109
Matrix, The (movie), 34
McCain, John, 107-8
Media Awareness Network,
153-54
Media Education Foundation,
154-55
media literacy organizations, list of,
147-58
Mediascope, Inc., 42, 66, 155
media violence, 3-4
behavioral links with, 7, 10,
24-26
damaging and potentially good
effects of, 6-8
definition of, 121-22
increased levels of graphic imagery
in, 22
list of prevention organizations,
147-58
production techniques, 92-94
regulatory approaches, 104-18
research studies findings, 24-26,
29-32, 42-45
See also movies; television; video
and computer games
MediaWise, 155-56
medical technology, 14
Mighty Morphin Power Rangers
(television program), 52-53
military psychology, 2, 48, 63
military simulators, 4-5, 72, 73, 74,
77
Miller, Mark Crispin, 34
Minow, Newton N., 134
"vast wasteland" speech, 38, 39,
132
Mommy, I'm Scared: How TV and
Movies Frighten Children and
What We Can Do to Protect
Them (Cantor), 36
Mortal Kombat (video game), 67,
71, 80
Mothers Against Violence in America
(MAVIA), 156
movies
as aggression stimulators, 7
cognitive confusion from, 55
desensitization to violence from,
33-34
fearful reactions to, 35-36, 55
listing of major studios, 141-42
listing of theater exhibitors, 143
parental guidance on, 85, 93, 95
rating system, 34, 45, 109, 143
rating system initiatives, 107-10
sensational vs. sensitive violence
portrayals in, 94-96
"slasher" genre effects, 22, 83, 110
murder, 6, 11, 12, 16, 31
comparison with assault and violent
crime rates (1957-97),
12-14, 13
military psychology studies, 48
urban youth liability to, 17
video game practice-stimulus,
76-77
See also school shootings
Murrow, Edward R., 27
National Alliance for Non-Violent
Programming (NANP), 156-57
National Association of Broadcasters
(NAB)
Mark Fowler's speech to, 39
Newton Minow's "vast wasteland"
speech to, 38, 132
National Association for the Education
of Young Children
(NAEYC), 126-27
National Cable Television Association
(NCT A), 42
National Centers for Disease Control,
violence research program,
31-32
National Coalition on Television
Violence (NCTV), 157
National Commission on the Causes
and Prevention of Violence,
133
National Council for Families and
Television, 135
National Funding Collaborative on
Violence Prevention, 9
National Institute of Mental Health,
report on link between television
violence and aggressive
behavior, 29, 133
National Institute on Media and the
Family, 157-58
National Parent/Teacher Association
(National PTA), 128-31, 133,
134
National Television Violence Study
(NTVS), 42-43, 44, 70, 135
Natural Born Killers (movie), 33,
106
NC-17-rated movies, 45
Netherlands, 11
New Zealand, 10
Nick News (television program), 197
Nightmare on Elm Street, A (movie),
55
nightmares, 35, 36
noradrenaline levels, 58, 61
Norway, 10
007 Golden Eye (video game), 71
operant conditioning, 73
organizations, media literacy and
prevention, 157-58
Pac-Man (video game), 65
Paducah (Ky.) school shootings, 4,
22, 61, 75-76
lawsuits, 75, 110, 111
parental recourses, 82-118
alternate quality entertainment
choices, 98-99
approaches to television news violence,
96-98
banned use of violent video
games, 99-100
consistent viewing-time rule
enforcement, 87-89
discussions with children, 85-86,
92-96, 100-101
guidelines of responsibilities,
83-87
language and reading skills
encouragement, 89-92
list of action resources, 137-46
list of watch-dog organizations,
147-58
litigation, 75, 110, 111, 113
movie viewing with children, 85, 95
national-level measures, 106-18
peer pressure confrontation,
101-3
as process, 84-86
Pastore, John, 28
Patton (movie), 85
PC Gamer (magazine), 93
Peckinpah, Sam, 34
peer pressure, parental confrontation
with, 101-3
Perry, Bruce, 89-90
PG-rated movies, 34, 45
PG-13-rated movies, 109
physiological arousal, video games
and, 71
play, imitation of screen violence,
51-52
PlayStation 2, 4
police. See law enforcement
Pong (video game), 65
pornography industry, 8
Postal (video game), 67, 78, 106
post-traumatic stress disorder, 36
Poussaint, Alvin, 49-50
poverty, 15
Powell, Colin, 116
power issues, 85-86
Power Rangers, 34, 52-53
prefrontal cortex activity, 58, 89
preschoolers, 7, 96-97
cartoon violence exposure, 49
credulity of, 55
cultural desensitivity and viewing
habits of, 34-35
imitative behavior, 54, 56
as television merchandising targets,
51
production techniques, 92-94
PTA. See National Parent/Teacher
Association
Pulp Fiction (movie), 34
punishments, 29-30, 133
Quake (video game), 79
racism, 14, 15
rape, 11, 12
rating systems
Clinton on enforcement of, 109
FCC investigation of, 111
industry organizations, 143
legislative initiatives, 107-8
movie, 34, 45, 109, 143
television, 44, 88-89
video games, 80, 143
reading
to children, 90
skills as violence inhibitor, 89-90
Redneck Rampage (video game),
78-79, 81
Richmond (Va.) crime deterrents, 16
robberies, 11, 12
role models, television characters as,
49
Roots (television program), 54
R-rated movies, 45, 109
Salazar, Ken, 109
Schafer, Wesley, 76
school shootings, 2-3
Jonesboro (Ark.), 2, 76-77
Littleton (Colo.), 2, 9, 18-19, 21,
63, 77, 101
Paducah (Ky.), 4, 75-76, 110, 111
student reactions to, 2-3, 18-19,
63
Schwarzkopf, Norman, 116
Scotland, 11
Searchers, The (movie), 34
See It Now (television program),
27
self-expression skills, 91
Senate, U.S., hearings on television
violence, 27, 132
sexual abuse, 18
She-Ra (cartoon), 34-35
Shifrin, Donald, 70
Signorielli, Nancy, 37
simulators, 4-5, 71-80, 112
slasher films, 22, 83, 110
societal values, decay of, 21
sociopathic behaviors, 61
Soldier of Fortune (magazine), 108
Sounder (movie), 94-95
South Carolina, convenience store
murder, 76
Spider-Man (television program),
52
"State of Children's Television"
(1998 report), 88-89
stimulus-response training, 73, 76.
See also conditioning
Street Fighter (video game), 80-81
stress, 56
suicide, teen, 17
Super Mario Brothers (video game),
65
Super Nintendo, 5
Surgeon General, U.S., 28, 133
Sweden, 10, 35
Tartikoff, Brandon, 23
Task Force on Family Violence, 133
Teachers Resisting Unhealthy Children's
Entertainment (TRUCE),
158
Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, 35,
55, 85
teenagers, 62, 65
interactive video game popularity
with, 65-71
peer pressure and, 102-3
suicide rate increase, 17
television news viewing, 97-98
Telecommunications Act of 1996,
137
television, 23-46
as aggressive and violent behavior
trigger, 7, 26-32
cartoon violence, 34-35, 37, 49
commercials, 45
congressional hearings, 26-28
distorted perception of reality
from, 37
escalation of children's exposure
to violence on, 3, 37-38
first violence-incitement lawsuit,
133
industry "Statement of Principles, "
41-42, 135
listing of networks and stations,
137-41
merchandising tie-ins, 51
national study of violence on,
42-43, 44
news program violence, 96-98
parental program selection, 98-99
parental reduced viewing-time
rules, 87-89
rating system, 44, 88-89
reading as alternative to, 90-91
research studies, 29-32, 42-45
surgeon general's report, 28-29
V-chip blocking device, 44, 88-89
"Television and Growing Up: The
Impact of Televised Violence"
(U.S. Surgeon General's report),
28-29
Television Violence Act (TVA) of
1990, 39, 40, 41, 134
Thompson, Jack, 110
Time Crisis (video game), 74
toddlers, 34, 51
toys
list of manufacturers and retailers,
145-46
as reinforcement of screen violence,
39, 51, 53, 80-81
television cartoon tie-ins, 39
Turn Off the TV (organization), 158
21st-Century Media Responsibility
Act (proposed), 107-8
UNESCO, 45, 135-36
University of California, 42
University of North Carolina, 42
University of Texas, 42
Untouchables, The (television program),
27
V-chip device, 44, 88-89
video and computer games, 4-5,
65-81, 105, 113
as addictive, 68-70
add-on packages, 77
escapist quality of, 69
"First Person Shooter, " 71, 78,
79, 81
inadequacy of rating system, 80
interactive effects of, 65-66,
67-68, 71-72
legislative rating system initiative,
107-8
linked with school shooting perpetrators,
75-77, 101
list of manufacturers, 144-45
list of rental companies, 143-44
manufacturer denials, 79-80
manufacturer liability, 112
as marksmanship practice, 4-5,
71-77
on-line availability of, 66, 81
parental countermeasures, 87-88,
93, 99-100
psychological and physiological
effects of, 68-71
technological advances, 65, 66,
77-78
Vietnam War, 74
violence. See aggression; assault
rates; media violence; movies;
murders; television; video and
computer games
violence immune system, 64
violent crime, 6-7, 17
comparison of murder, assault,
and imprisonment rates
(1957-97), 13
juvenile arrest rates, 19, 20
local deterrents, 16
rate increase, 1960-1991, 11
See also murders; school shootings
visual imagery, 91-92
Walk, Gary Eng, 79-80
warfare, 48, 63, 74, 77
Washington (D.C.) child murder-victim
potential, 17
Washington (state) media-violence
control legislative initiative,
110
watch-dog organizations, listing of,
147-58
"Watching America" (1990 report),
40
Westside Middle School. See Jonesboro
(Ark.) middle school
shootings
Williams, Tannis McBeth, 30-31
Wilson, James Q., 14
WingMan Force (video game), 75
World War II, 48, 63, 72, 74
World Wide Web, 18, 80, 101,
116
violent video games availability,
66, 81
World Wrestling Federation, action
figures sold by, 53
wrestling, professional, 53, 106
writing skills, 89-92
X-Men (television program), 52
youth gangs, 12, 16, 17
Zamora v. CBS, et at. (1979), 133
zero-tolerance policies, 16, 109
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
LT. COL DAVE GROSSMAN (U.S.A., RET.) is the author of On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society. As a West Point psychology professor and professor of military science, Grossman trains medical and health professionals on how to deal with and prevent killing. He trained mental health professionals in the aftermath of the Jonesboro shootings, and has been an expert witness and consultant in several murder cases, including that of Timothy McVeigh and Michael Carneal.
GLORIA DEGAETANO is a nationally recognized educator in the field of media violence, and the author of the critically acclaimed Screen Smarts: A Family Guide to Media Literacy.
Page numbers in italics indicate figures.
abuse. See child abuse; domestic violence
Acquired Violence Immune System
Deficiency Syndrome (AVIDS),
64
action figures, 39, 51, 53, 80-81
addiction, video game, 68-70
adolescents. See teenagers
African-American youth murder victims,
17
age
American cultural insensitivity to
appropriate viewing fare, 34-37
appropriate television news viewing,
96-97
movie rating system, 109
prime years for violent criminal
acts, 16
See also preschoolers; teenagers
aggravated assault. See assault
aggression, 7, 133, 134
brain activity and, 58-64, 89
and decreased prefrontal cortex
activity, 58
heroic fantasies of, 55
studies of increased levels of,
26-32
video game arousal effects, 70-71
See also assault rates; violent
crime
Allen, Steve, 116
American Academy of Child and
Adolescent Psychiatry
(AACAP), 127-28
American Academy of Pediatrics,
The (AAP), 87, 125-26, 134
American Medical Association, The
(AMA), 123-24, 133
American Psychological Association
(APA), 124-25, 134-35
Americans for Responsible Television,
147
America Online, 18
animal behavior, 47-48
animal mutilation, 7, 18
anxiety, 35, 36
arcade games. See video and computer
games
Arkansas. See Jonesboro (Ark.) middle
school shootings
Army, U.S.
combat simulator usage, 4-5, 74
Medical Service Corps, 14
arrest rates
violent crime, 18, 19
assault rates, 11, 12, 15
comparison of murder, assault, and
imprisonment (1957-97), 13
international per-<:apita rate
increase (1977-93), 10-11
Atrium Society Publications, 147-48
Australia, 10
AVIDS. See Acquired Violence
Immune System Deficiency Syndrome
Batman movies, 35
behavior problems, 10, 56, 59, 61, 88
Belgium, 10-11
Belson, William, 62
Ben Hur (movie), 85
Bennett, William J., 116
Boston (Mass.) crime deterrents, 16
boys. See males
brain activity, 58-64
language skills as violence
inhibitor, 89-90
violence-provoked cognitive confusion,
55
violent imagery as overstimulant,
59
brain stem reactivity, 59
Bruner, Jerome, 52
Bullitt (movie), 34
bullying, 18, 56
Burke, Edmund, 33
Bush, George, 39-40
cable television violence, 42, 44
Canada, 11, 134
Canadians Concerned About Violence
in Entertainment
(C-CAVE), 148
Cantor, Joanne, 36
Capcom, 80, 81
Carneal, Michael, 4, 61, 75-76,
111, 112
CarnEvil (video game), 79
Carter, jimmy, 116
cartoon violence, 34-35, 37, 49
toy counterparts, 39
Case, Stephen M., 18
CBS television, 133
Center for Media Literacy, 148-49
Center for Media and Public Affairs,
37-38, 135
Center for Successful Parenting,
149-50
Center for the Study and Prevention
of Violence, 149
Centerwall, Brandon, 31-32, 134
Chicago (111.) child murder-victim
potential, 17
child abuse, 15, 57, 59
exposure to screen violence as,
49-50, 57
sexual, 18
child development
and brain activity stimulation,
58-64
impact of violent imagery on,
53-58
literacy skills-building and, 89-92
reduced viewing rules and, 87-88
"Children and Media Violence: A
Yearbook from the UNESCO
International Clearinghouse on
Children and Violence on the
Screen, " 45, 135-36
Children's Television Act of 1990,
39-40
chronology of media violence finding,
statements, and actions
(1952-99), 132-36
civil litigation. See lawsuits
classical conditioning, 63, 64
Clinton, Bill, 1, 7, 104-5, 109, 136
CNN Newsroom and World View
(television program), 97
"Code of Conduct, " 116
cognition. See brain activity
Colorado. See Littleton (Colo.) high
school shootings
Columbine High School. See Littleton
(Colo.) high school shootmgs
commercials, television, 45
Committee for Children, 150
compassion, 61
computers
placement in home, 88
reduced use-time rules, 87
See also video and computer
games; World Wide Web
Comstock, George, 44
conditioning, 48, 63, 64, 73. See
also desensitization
Congress, U.S., 39-41
hearings on television violence,
26-28, 39, 132
violence-restrictive legislative initiatives,
107-8
conversational skills, 90-92
crime. See assault rates; law enforcement;
violent crime
Cultural Environment Movement
(CEM), 150-51
Cuomo, Mario, 116
Cypress Hill (rap group), 79
Death Wish (movie), 34
Denmark, 11
desensitization, 2-3, 26
cultural, 32-37
of young children, 7, 60-64
development, child. See child development
Dewey, John, 49
Dick Tracy (movie), 34
Die-Hard 2 (movie), 85
DiIulio, John J., 15
Diller, Barry, 41
Disney Company, 105, 113
domestic violence, 12, 56-57, 59
Doom (video game), 67, 83
Littleton perpetrators' practice in,
101, 77
as mechanical training simulator,
71-72, 77
drug abuse, 15
Duck Hunt (video game), 74
Duke Nukem (video game), 67, 78,
80
educational television, 98
Education Department, U.S., 135
Eggs of Steel (video game), 80
ego development, 56
Ellerbee, Linda, 97
E-mail campaigns, anti-media violence,
115-16
empathy, 61
Endangered Minds (Healey), 68-69
England. See Great Britain
environmental influences, 49-53
Eron, Leonard, 29, 133
Exorcist, The (movie), 36
Falklands War, 48, 74
fantasy, 54-55
Fathers' Network, 151
FATS (Fire Arms Training Simulator),
74
FBI (Federal Bureau of Investigation),
11, 12, 48
FCC (Federal Communications
Commission), 39, 115
address and telephone number,
145
rating system investigation, 111
fears, children's, 26, 35-37
feelings, articulation of, 90
females
arrest rate for violent crimes, 20
video game use, 68
fight or flight response, 59
films. See movies; television
firearms. See guns
Fire Arms Training Simulator
(FATS), 74
First Amendment, 1, 40, 105, 111,
112
"First Person Shooter" video games,
71, 78, 79, 81
Ford, Gerald R., 116
Fowler, Mark, 39
France, 11
Franks, Marty, 43-44
free speech. See First Amendment
French Connection, The (movie), 34
Fresh (movie), 95
FTC (Federal Trade Commission),
104-5
gaming industry. See video games
gangs, 12, 16, 17
Gerbner, George, 37
G.I. Joe (cartoon), 34-35, 40
girls. See females
Golden, Andrew, 61
government officials, list of, 145
G-rated movies, 45
Great Britain, 11, 35
Greece, 10
Greenfield, Patricia, 67
Griffith, Paddy, 48
GrowSmartBrains, 151-52
Guncon, 74
guns, 16, 17, 21
marksmanship simulators, 4-5,
71-80, 112
Gunsmoke (television program), 27
Hall, Stephen, 36
Harris, Eric, 9, 21, 77, 101
Harter, Russell, 91
Healey, Jane, 68-69
Health and Human Services Department,
U.S., 135
Heavy Freight Films, 152
heroes, screen, 51, 52, 56, 57
Hitman (book), 111
Holmes, Richard, 48
home video games. See video and
computer games
homicide. See murders
horror movies, 36, 93
House of Representatives, U.S.,
hearings on television violence,
132
House of the Dead (video game), 79
Huesmann, L. Rowell, 29, 133
Hungary, 11
Hustler (magazine), 108
Hyde, Henry, 107
hyperactivity, 59, 88
hypervigilancy, 59-60
identification, 53-58
id Software, 112
imagination, 61
imitation, 51-52
identification and, 53-58
imprisonment. See incarceration
impulsive behavior, 59, 61, 89
incarceration, 17
rate comparisons, 13, 15
indicator species, 17
insensitivity. See desensitization
Institute on Violence and Destructive
Behavior, 152-53
interactive video games. See video
and computer games
Internet. See World Wide Web
InterPol, 10
Invasion of the Body Snatchers
(movie), 36
Jackson, Beverly Robertson,
100-101
James, Jennifer, 114
James Bond, Jr. (television program),
40
Japan, 11
Jetsons, The (cartoon), 40
Jonesboro (Ark.) middle school
shootings, 2, 3, 22, 61, 76-77
Journal of the American Medical
Association, 32, 134
joystick, similarity to pistol grip,
79
Judd, Naomi, 116
Justice Department, U.S., 104-5,
111, 135
Kennard, Bill, 115
Kentucky. See Paducah (Ky.) school
shootings
Kingpin: Life of Crime (video game),
79, 81
Klebold, Dylan, 9, 21, 77, 101
Krueger, Freddy (movie character),
55
language skills, 89-92
Laugh-In (television program), 44
law enforcement, 4, 48
anticrime measures, 16
training simulators, 73, 74, 75
See also incarceration
laws. See legislation
lawsuits
first-known against television network,
133
against media and video game
manufacturers, 75, 110, 111
product liability, 113
learning problems, 56, 88
Leave It to Beaver (television program),
40
legislation
Children's Television Act, 39-40
media violence-restriction initiatives,
107-10
Levin, Diane, 18
Lieberman, Joseph, 107-8
Lindsey, Robert, 81
Lion and the Lamb Project, 153
listening skills, 92
literacy skills, 89-92
litigation. See lawsuits
Littleton (Colo.) high school shootings,
2, 6-7, 22, 104
characteristics of perpetrators, 9,
21, 77, 101
youth reactions to, 18, 63
Lowenstein, Doug, 80
MACS (Multipurpose Arcade Combat
Simulator), 74
males
juvenile violent crime arrest rate,
19
study of teenage exposure to television
violence, 62
study of video game reactions, 68,
71
Marine Corps, U.S., 77
Marine Doom simulator, 77
marksmanship practice, video games
as, 4-5, 72-74
Marshall, S. L. A., 48
Masked Rider (television program),
52
Mason City, Iowa, 109
Matrix, The (movie), 34
McCain, John, 107-8
Media Awareness Network,
153-54
Media Education Foundation,
154-55
media literacy organizations, list of,
147-58
Mediascope, Inc., 42, 66, 155
media violence, 3-4
behavioral links with, 7, 10,
24-26
damaging and potentially good
effects of, 6-8
definition of, 121-22
increased levels of graphic imagery
in, 22
list of prevention organizations,
147-58
production techniques, 92-94
regulatory approaches, 104-18
research studies findings, 24-26,
29-32, 42-45
See also movies; television; video
and computer games
MediaWise, 155-56
medical technology, 14
Mighty Morphin Power Rangers
(television program), 52-53
military psychology, 2, 48, 63
military simulators, 4-5, 72, 73, 74,
77
Miller, Mark Crispin, 34
Minow, Newton N., 134
"vast wasteland" speech, 38, 39,
132
Mommy, I'm Scared: How TV and
Movies Frighten Children and
What We Can Do to Protect
Them (Cantor), 36
Mortal Kombat (video game), 67,
71, 80
Mothers Against Violence in America
(MAVIA), 156
movies
as aggression stimulators, 7
cognitive confusion from, 55
desensitization to violence from,
33-34
fearful reactions to, 35-36, 55
listing of major studios, 141-42
listing of theater exhibitors, 143
parental guidance on, 85, 93, 95
rating system, 34, 45, 109, 143
rating system initiatives, 107-10
sensational vs. sensitive violence
portrayals in, 94-96
"slasher" genre effects, 22, 83, 110
murder, 6, 11, 12, 16, 31
comparison with assault and violent
crime rates (1957-97),
12-14, 13
military psychology studies, 48
urban youth liability to, 17
video game practice-stimulus,
76-77
See also school shootings
Murrow, Edward R., 27
National Alliance for Non-Violent
Programming (NANP), 156-57
National Association of Broadcasters
(NAB)
Mark Fowler's speech to, 39
Newton Minow's "vast wasteland"
speech to, 38, 132
National Association for the Education
of Young Children
(NAEYC), 126-27
National Cable Television Association
(NCT A), 42
National Centers for Disease Control,
violence research program,
31-32
National Coalition on Television
Violence (NCTV), 157
National Commission on the Causes
and Prevention of Violence,
133
National Council for Families and
Television, 135
National Funding Collaborative on
Violence Prevention, 9
National Institute of Mental Health,
report on link between television
violence and aggressive
behavior, 29, 133
National Institute on Media and the
Family, 157-58
National Parent/Teacher Association
(National PTA), 128-31, 133,
134
National Television Violence Study
(NTVS), 42-43, 44, 70, 135
Natural Born Killers (movie), 33,
106
NC-17-rated movies, 45
Netherlands, 11
New Zealand, 10
Nick News (television program), 197
Nightmare on Elm Street, A (movie),
55
nightmares, 35, 36
noradrenaline levels, 58, 61
Norway, 10
007 Golden Eye (video game), 71
operant conditioning, 73
organizations, media literacy and
prevention, 157-58
Pac-Man (video game), 65
Paducah (Ky.) school shootings, 4,
22, 61, 75-76
lawsuits, 75, 110, 111
parental recourses, 82-118
alternate quality entertainment
choices, 98-99
approaches to television news violence,
96-98
banned use of violent video
games, 99-100
consistent viewing-time rule
enforcement, 87-89
discussions with children, 85-86,
92-96, 100-101
guidelines of responsibilities,
83-87
language and reading skills
encouragement, 89-92
list of action resources, 137-46
list of watch-dog organizations,
147-58
litigation, 75, 110, 111, 113
movie viewing with children, 85, 95
national-level measures, 106-18
peer pressure confrontation,
101-3
as process, 84-86
Pastore, John, 28
Patton (movie), 85
PC Gamer (magazine), 93
Peckinpah, Sam, 34
peer pressure, parental confrontation
with, 101-3
Perry, Bruce, 89-90
PG-rated movies, 34, 45
PG-13-rated movies, 109
physiological arousal, video games
and, 71
play, imitation of screen violence,
51-52
PlayStation 2, 4
police. See law enforcement
Pong (video game), 65
pornography industry, 8
Postal (video game), 67, 78, 106
post-traumatic stress disorder, 36
Poussaint, Alvin, 49-50
poverty, 15
Powell, Colin, 116
power issues, 85-86
Power Rangers, 34, 52-53
prefrontal cortex activity, 58, 89
preschoolers, 7, 96-97
cartoon violence exposure, 49
credulity of, 55
cultural desensitivity and viewing
habits of, 34-35
imitative behavior, 54, 56
as television merchandising targets,
51
production techniques, 92-94
PTA. See National Parent/Teacher
Association
Pulp Fiction (movie), 34
punishments, 29-30, 133
Quake (video game), 79
racism, 14, 15
rape, 11, 12
rating systems
Clinton on enforcement of, 109
FCC investigation of, 111
industry organizations, 143
legislative initiatives, 107-8
movie, 34, 45, 109, 143
television, 44, 88-89
video games, 80, 143
reading
to children, 90
skills as violence inhibitor, 89-90
Redneck Rampage (video game),
78-79, 81
Richmond (Va.) crime deterrents, 16
robberies, 11, 12
role models, television characters as,
49
Roots (television program), 54
R-rated movies, 45, 109
Salazar, Ken, 109
Schafer, Wesley, 76
school shootings, 2-3
Jonesboro (Ark.), 2, 76-77
Littleton (Colo.), 2, 9, 18-19, 21,
63, 77, 101
Paducah (Ky.), 4, 75-76, 110, 111
student reactions to, 2-3, 18-19,
63
Schwarzkopf, Norman, 116
Scotland, 11
Searchers, The (movie), 34
See It Now (television program),
27
self-expression skills, 91
Senate, U.S., hearings on television
violence, 27, 132
sexual abuse, 18
She-Ra (cartoon), 34-35
Shifrin, Donald, 70
Signorielli, Nancy, 37
simulators, 4-5, 71-80, 112
slasher films, 22, 83, 110
societal values, decay of, 21
sociopathic behaviors, 61
Soldier of Fortune (magazine), 108
Sounder (movie), 94-95
South Carolina, convenience store
murder, 76
Spider-Man (television program),
52
"State of Children's Television"
(1998 report), 88-89
stimulus-response training, 73, 76.
See also conditioning
Street Fighter (video game), 80-81
stress, 56
suicide, teen, 17
Super Mario Brothers (video game),
65
Super Nintendo, 5
Surgeon General, U.S., 28, 133
Sweden, 10, 35
Tartikoff, Brandon, 23
Task Force on Family Violence, 133
Teachers Resisting Unhealthy Children's
Entertainment (TRUCE),
158
Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, 35,
55, 85
teenagers, 62, 65
interactive video game popularity
with, 65-71
peer pressure and, 102-3
suicide rate increase, 17
television news viewing, 97-98
Telecommunications Act of 1996,
137
television, 23-46
as aggressive and violent behavior
trigger, 7, 26-32
cartoon violence, 34-35, 37, 49
commercials, 45
congressional hearings, 26-28
distorted perception of reality
from, 37
escalation of children's exposure
to violence on, 3, 37-38
first violence-incitement lawsuit,
133
industry "Statement of Principles, "
41-42, 135
listing of networks and stations,
137-41
merchandising tie-ins, 51
national study of violence on,
42-43, 44
news program violence, 96-98
parental program selection, 98-99
parental reduced viewing-time
rules, 87-89
rating system, 44, 88-89
reading as alternative to, 90-91
research studies, 29-32, 42-45
surgeon general's report, 28-29
V-chip blocking device, 44, 88-89
"Television and Growing Up: The
Impact of Televised Violence"
(U.S. Surgeon General's report),
28-29
Television Violence Act (TVA) of
1990, 39, 40, 41, 134
Thompson, Jack, 110
Time Crisis (video game), 74
toddlers, 34, 51
toys
list of manufacturers and retailers,
145-46
as reinforcement of screen violence,
39, 51, 53, 80-81
television cartoon tie-ins, 39
Turn Off the TV (organization), 158
21st-Century Media Responsibility
Act (proposed), 107-8
UNESCO, 45, 135-36
University of California, 42
University of North Carolina, 42
University of Texas, 42
Untouchables, The (television program),
27
V-chip device, 44, 88-89
video and computer games, 4-5,
65-81, 105, 113
as addictive, 68-70
add-on packages, 77
escapist quality of, 69
"First Person Shooter, " 71, 78,
79, 81
inadequacy of rating system, 80
interactive effects of, 65-66,
67-68, 71-72
legislative rating system initiative,
107-8
linked with school shooting perpetrators,
75-77, 101
list of manufacturers, 144-45
list of rental companies, 143-44
manufacturer denials, 79-80
manufacturer liability, 112
as marksmanship practice, 4-5,
71-77
on-line availability of, 66, 81
parental countermeasures, 87-88,
93, 99-100
psychological and physiological
effects of, 68-71
technological advances, 65, 66,
77-78
Vietnam War, 74
violence. See aggression; assault
rates; media violence; movies;
murders; television; video and
computer games
violence immune system, 64
violent crime, 6-7, 17
comparison of murder, assault,
and imprisonment rates
(1957-97), 13
juvenile arrest rates, 19, 20
local deterrents, 16
rate increase, 1960-1991, 11
See also murders; school shootings
visual imagery, 91-92
Walk, Gary Eng, 79-80
warfare, 48, 63, 74, 77
Washington (D.C.) child murder-victim
potential, 17
Washington (state) media-violence
control legislative initiative,
110
watch-dog organizations, listing of,
147-58
"Watching America" (1990 report),
40
Westside Middle School. See Jonesboro
(Ark.) middle school
shootings
Williams, Tannis McBeth, 30-31
Wilson, James Q., 14
WingMan Force (video game), 75
World War II, 48, 63, 72, 74
World Wide Web, 18, 80, 101,
116
violent video games availability,
66, 81
World Wrestling Federation, action
figures sold by, 53
wrestling, professional, 53, 106
writing skills, 89-92
X-Men (television program), 52
youth gangs, 12, 16, 17
Zamora v. CBS, et at. (1979), 133
zero-tolerance policies, 16, 109
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
LT. COL DAVE GROSSMAN (U.S.A., RET.) is the author of On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society. As a West Point psychology professor and professor of military science, Grossman trains medical and health professionals on how to deal with and prevent killing. He trained mental health professionals in the aftermath of the Jonesboro shootings, and has been an expert witness and consultant in several murder cases, including that of Timothy McVeigh and Michael Carneal.
GLORIA DEGAETANO is a nationally recognized educator in the field of media violence, and the author of the critically acclaimed Screen Smarts: A Family Guide to Media Literacy.
- admin
- Site Admin
- Posts: 37493
- Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am
14 posts
• Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2
Return to Media Violence Studies
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests