Impact of Television Violence on Children

Introduction

The phenomenon of television violence has received much attention and debate. Its definition, implications, and rationale have been questioned and studied by policymakers, media scholars, and practitioners. Television violence has remained at the centre of debates over television policy, particularly in reference to children and children's programming. (Andreasen, 14-23) The difficulty in defining television violence lies in the breadth of the definition. Some consider violence to include only physically violent actions. Such a definition is easily quantifiable but overlooks other actions and behaviour with potentially powerful consequences. Verbal threats and the implication of physical violence are important, particularly in terms of violence portrayed on television, where the violent act may not be actually depicted. It is also important to consider the possibility of psychological violence, such as verbal abuse and degradation.

Television violence is, therefore, defined as the transmission of violence, broadly defined, through the medium of television. In 1998, the National Television Violence Study (NTVS), a multiyear attempt to quantify the presence of violence on cable television, defined television violence as falling into any of three categories: credible threats, behavioural acts, and harmful consequences. This definition encompasses physical acts as well as the possibility of verbal and implied violence. Visual cues such as scars, bandages, blood, or hospitals can denote violence without actually showing it.

Current Debate

Public concern over television violence stems from the portrayal of both fiction and nonfiction. Nonfiction televised material and journalism tend to depict actual violent events such as wars, insurgency, and civil disputes. Television journalists covering war now have the capacity to report from the war zone, enabling the presentation of gun-fighting, people being killed or maimed, and the aftermath of such violence. Televised nonfictional violence can also be seen in Cops-style reality dramas, in which real people are dramatically portrayed in their interactions with law enforcement. Critics of nonfiction violence suggest that presentations are exaggerated and sensationalistic. Reality-based entertainment programmes are open to such criticism; however, journalists argue that their work merely represents events in the real world.

Televised portrayals of fictional violence cannot as easily claim to represent reality. Instead, fictional accounts tell stories and dramatize events. Fictionalized violence is often less realistic than real violence (Wilson et al., 5-35). Cartoons and prime-time dramas alike employ unrealistic and inconsistent violence in their programmes. For instance, some characters are blown back 10 feet by gunshots whereas others get up and continue fighting after having been shot multiple times. In addition to this, fictional characters using violence are sometimes portrayed in unrealistic or antisocial ways. For instance, heroic protagonists are often rewarded for using violence against their enemies.

The NTVS states that violence on television has been linked repeatedly with antisocial and aggressive behaviour (NTVS, p. 5). Their conclusion is substantiated with findings such as:

Nearly 40% of the violent incidents on television are initiated by characters who possess qualities that make them attractive role models.

Fully 71% of violent scenes contain no remorse, criticism, or penalty for violence at the time that it ...