In the past few years violence has raged our culture. It has taken the lives of adults and children alike. Our culture has been based on violence for some time, and has sky rocketed in the past few years. Ever since violence has become more popular on TV real life has become more violent itself.
Our culture has been terrorized by violence too long, and it has to be restrained from our children. Violence in Television has recently become the main focus for many parents of young children. Due to so much of the violence, television stations are now forced to put certian ratings on TV programs.
At first many stations were hesitant to put this system on their stations, but now it is located on every station.Many parents state that acts of violence are committed by many teens today due to them watching too much violence on television. Take for example Beavis and Butthead. Several years ago a child set fire to his home after watching this particular episode. Anotherchild that was watching this show saw Beavis and Butthead stab aperson in the eye wiht a pencil, needless to say the child committed the same act of violence.The V Chip is a new invention that enables parents to edit what their children watch.
It is used so that parents can block out a whole TV program in itself. Hopefully this will discourage youngsters from being so violent.Bullies in the moviesAlthough physical violence is portrayed often on screen, few movies have yet conveyed the nastiness of a serial bully and what it’s like to live with or deal with such a person.In Fatal Attraction, Demi Moore sexually harasses Michael Douglas who then has a hard time proving his innocence.
Nice idea to make the harasser a female …
bullying is not a gender issues, as over 50% of 3200+ cases reported to the UK National Workplace Bullying Advice Line involve a female serial bully.In September 1999, ITV screened Walking on the Moon, a chilling drama about a boy being bullied at school which showed the nastiness of bullying with it’s tragic and inevitable conclusion Alfred Hitchcock was a master of chilling suspense, with the Bates Motel in Psycho a classic in horror. In Silence of the Lambs, Hannibal Lecter is the archetypal psychopath, a chilling (and for Anthony Hopkins, Oscar-winning) portrayal.The Crucible portrays the Salem with trials of You could be nearer to a psycho than you think .
.. who does this remind you of in your life? Jekyll & Hyde nature, always controlling, abusive, compulsive liar, provocative, immature, aggressive, constantly criticizing, manipulative, deceptive, refuses to communicate and cooperate, charming when s/he needs to be – click serial bully for the full description. DSM-IV, the psychiatrists’ bible, estimates the prevalence of antisocial personality disorder (one of the main personality disorders for a psychopath) in the general population at 1 in 30 for males and 1 in 100 for females. I estimate the prevalence of sociopathic behaviour (psychologically violent people) at 1 in 30 for both males and females.
I believe half the population are bullied or harassed or abused … click here to see how you’ve been bullied during your life.
If you have, this site provides insight and practical information to understand an deal with it. If you haven’t been bullied yet, the information on this web site will enable you to spot it and deal with it early on before the damage is done. So…TV ViolenceViolence on TV affects how children view themselves,their world, and other people. In fact, experts warn that viewing violence can have lifelong harmful effects on childrens health.
Parents have the power to limit the influence TV violence has on a child. Watch with your child and talk about the violence they see to put it in perspective. Help children become smart about TV violence! Did you know…
By the time children complete elementary school, the average child will witness more than 100,000 acts of violence on TV, including 8,000 murders. Children may be exposed to about 5 violent acts per hour during prime time and an average of 26 violent acts per hour during Saturday morning childrens programs. The more violence children watch on TV, the more likely they may act in aggressive ways, become less sensitive to others pain and suffering, and be more fearful of the world around them.Teach your child TV smarts.
.. Explain how violence is faked for TV shows by using special effects, stunts, editing and other production techniques that make the violence look more realistic. Point out that TV often makes hurting or killing someone seem funny or thrilling.
Discuss the consequences of the violent actthe punishment of the aggressor and the pain of the victim and the family. Help your child think of nonviolent solutions to TV stories and talk about how violence is not an acceptable, quick solution to problems. Take control… Limit the amount of violence children watch on TV.
Monitor your own TV use and video tape your favorite shows that contain violence to watch when children are not around. When you purchase toys, be aware that superheroes might reinforce aggressive play behavior in your children. Write letters with your children to TV stations, advertisers, the FCC, and Congress to tell them how you feel about violence on TV.
Generously funded by Pacific Life Foundation.1997, Center for Media EducationOverview Released in February 1996, the Mediascope National Television Violence Study (NTVS) is the initial report of an ongoing three-year research project into violent content in U.S. television programming. The project’s purpose is to assess ratings and advisories, and to review educational TV initiatives. The impetus for the study came in August 1993, when Illinois Democratic Senator Paul Simon called for an independent study of violence on American TV. Sen.
Simon warned the broadcast networks and cable companies that Congress would introduce legislation if they did not address the issue themselves. To conduct an independent study of violence on cable television, the National Cable Television Association chose four universities and Mediascope, a non-profit media education organization. The broadcast TV networks chose the UCLA Center for Communication Policy for the broadcast television study. Its findings were released in the Television Violence Monitoring Report of September 1995.
The Mediascope study examined 2,693 cable television programs to learn more about the context in which television violence was most likely to pose harmful psychological risks to viewers. Researchers at the four universities looked at: A content analysis of violence in television series, daytime television, TV movies, specials, children’s shows and music videos Research on violence in reality programs, including tabloid news, talk shows, police shows and documentaries Studies on how TV ratings and advisories influence children’s viewing decisions The effectiveness of anti-violence public service announcements, and of educational initiatives by the TV industry Framework of the Study This study is the most elaborate and comprehensive assessment ever conducted of the context in which violence appears on TV. Precise quantitative content analysis techniques were used. This allowed researchers to evaluate differences in the contexts of Violence. The analysis identified three primary types of harmful effects associated with viewing violence: Learning aggressive attitudes and behaviors Becoming desensitized to real world violence Developing a fear of being victimized by violence The risk of these effects is influenced by how the violence is depicted. The study analyzed context at three levels: How characters interact with one another when violence occurs (a “violent interaction”) How violent interactions are grouped together (“a violent scene”) How violence is presented in the context of the overall program Additional analyses were conducted on reality-based programs to examine how violence in non-fiction may be discussed (as opposed to visual depictions).
For the study, violence was defined as any overt depiction of physical force or the credible threat of such force intended to harm an animate being or group of beings. The definition of violence also include depictions of physical harm that resulted from unseen violence. Facts and Figures about How Programs were Studied Researchers working on the National Television Violence Study randomly selected programs on 23 cable TV channels over a 20 week period to create a composite week of content for each source. The study monitored programs between 6 a.
m.and 11 p.m. A total of 17 hours was watched each day, seven days a week.
A total of 119 hours of television programming per channel was viewed. In total, some 2,500 hours of TV programming were examined. This includes 2,693 programs, of which 384 were reality-based shows. Key Findings The context in which most violence is presented on TV poses risks for viewers. The majority of programs analyzed in the study contain violence, but the context for these acts of violence is more important. By watching such depictions, viewers risk: Learning to behave violently Becoming more desensitized to violence Becoming more fearful of being attacked The contextual patterns recur across most channels, program types and times of day. That means there are substantial risks of harmful effects from viewing violence throughout the TV environment.
Perpetrators go unpunished in 73% of all violent scenes. When violence is presented without punishment, viewers are more likely to learn the lesson that violence is successful. In all 47% of violent interactions show no harm to victims, and 58% show no pain. Only some 16% portray the long-term negative effects of violence, such as psychological, financial or emotional harm. A total of 25% of violent interactions on TV involve handguns. Only 4% of violent programs emphasize an anti-violence theme. TV violence is not usually explicit or graphic.
Less than 3% of violent scenes feature close-ups on the violence, and only 15% depict blood. The “industry norm” for violence on TV is 57% of programming, but there are notable differences in how violence is presented across TV channels. Public broadcasting: 18% of programming is violent, with the least risk of harmful effect. Premium cable channels: 85% of programming is violent, with the highest risk of harmful effect. Broadcast networks: 44% of programming is violent, and the context is as problematic as on other channels.
There are also some important differences in the presentation of violence across types of TV programs. Movies are most likely to present violence in realistic settings (85% of the time), and to include gory violent scenes (28% of the time). Children’s programs are the least likely of all genres to show the long-term negative consequences of violence (5% of the time), and they frequently portray violence in a humorous context (67% of the time). Ratings and Advisories The first year of study explored how ratings and advisories are currently used, and the role they play in the viewing decisions of children, parents and university undergraduates. More than 300 children (aged 5 to 14), and an additional 70 parent-child pairs, participated in the study.
Results of content analysis: Fewer than 4% of shows use advisories like “viewer discretion is advised.” The content that prompted the concern is rarely indicated. 56% of movies on the three premium cable channels use content codes to indicate the presence of violence. Only 15% of programs that contain violence have an advisory or content code. 81% of movies on premium cable channels have Motion Picture Association of America ratings.
The research suggests that ratings and advisories can influence how children choose programs: For boys (especially those aged 10-14), “parental discretion” advisories made programs and movies more attractive. For girls (especially those aged 5-9), “viewer discretion” advisories made programs less attractive. There were other characteristics besides age and gender that affected how children responded to ratings: Children whose parents took more control over their TV viewing were less likely to choose programs with advisories or ratings like “PG-13” or “R.” Children who had been frightened by a show in the past were less interested in viewing programs with advisories or ratings like “PG-13” or “R.” Assessment of TV’s Anti-Violence Messages Overall TV Programming Only 4% of violent programs have a strong anti-violence theme.
Only 13% of reality programs that depict violence present any alternatives to violence or show how it can be avoided. Special TV Messages Seven studies tested responses to a sample of 15 anti-violence public service announcements (PSAs) created by the TV industry, and an award-winning program on conflict resolution. The respondents included more than 200 adolescents drawn from a middle school, a training school for boys and a university.
Preliminary findings appear below. Preliminary Findings 9 of 15 anti-violence PSAs were rated as “interesting.” No evidence was found that the PSAs or anti-violence program significantly altered the adolescents’ attitudes toward the appropriateness of using violence to resolve conflict.Most slogans like “stop the violence” seemed to promote positions already held by viewers, even those with a history of violent behavior.
Narrative PSAs were more interesting to audiences than “talking heads,” but also were more frequently misinterpreted. Although some celebrity endorsers stimulated interest, their lack of credibility sometimes undermined the anti-violence message especially if they were perceived as promoting violence in real life or in their jobs (e.g. sports, acting). Messages promoting pacifist themes like “just walk away” were not realistic to adolescents who had experience with violence. But these scored better with younger students with less exposure to violence.
Young people may be more affected by depictions of family suffering as a potential consequence of violence, than they are by death. Network promotions and sponsor tags attached to PSAs appear to compete for valuable time and audience attention. Recommendations for the TV Community Produce more programs that avoid violence. When violence does occur, keep the number of incidents low. Show more negative consequences of violence. Provide non-violent alternatives to solving problems.
Consider emphasizing anti-violence themes. Schedule programs with high levels of violence, including reality programs, in late-evening time periods. Increase the number of program advisories and content codes, but be careful not to make them too attractive to children.
Provide information about advisories and the nature of violent content in programming guides. Limit the time devoted to identifying the sponsor, station or network during public service announcements (PSAs), so the name doesn’t compete with the message. Recommendations for Policy and Public Interest LeadersRecognize that context is an essential aspect of TV violence. The basis of any policy proposal should consider the types of violent depictions that pose the greatest concern. Consider the feasibility of technology that allows parents to restrict access to inappropriate material. Test anti-violence PSAs with target audiences before production, including the credibility of spokespersons.
Provide target audiences with specific and realistic actions for resolving conflict. When possible, link anti-violence PSAs to school-based or community efforts. Target 8- to13-year-olds, who may be more responsive to the message. Recommendations for Parents Watch TV with your children. In this study, children whose parents took more control over their TV viewing were more likely to avoid inappropriate material. Encourage critical evaluation of TV content.
Consider a child’s developmental level when making decisions about what to watch. Be aware of the potential risks associated with viewing TV violence. These include learning aggressive attitudes and behaviors, fear, and desensitization or loss of sympathy towards victims of violence. Recognize that different kinds of programs pose different risks.