Violence & Television

Psychologists and other researchers studying human behavior almost always qualify their results when reporting them:

“It seems to be...”
“It probably is true that...”
“It is likely the case that...”

No such hedging of bets is necessary here. Many dozens of studies have shown that this heavy diet of violence viewing has three serious and often long-lasting effects.

The first may be called the “copycat effect.” A substantial minority of the viewers will actually do what they have seen. Males copy more than females, younger children more than older kids. The more violence the youngster has seen, the more copying he or she is likely to do.

The violence depicted is often justified by the show’s script--for example, when the “good guy” wins, when it “works,” when it is shown in how-to detail and when it has that odd quality of painlessness so often depicted.

• No suffering
• No injury
• No bodily consequences

The following is a list of shows, ranked in order, that lead to the most copying:

1st: violently erotic shows
2nd: cartoons, sports and soap operas
3rd: adventure, detective and crime stories
4th: news and public affairs shows

The second, well-demonstrated consequence has been called the “victim effect.” Increased fearfulness, mistrust and self-protectiveness are its main features. We come to see the world differently, as more threatening, less safe. Millions of (especially elderly) American citizens sentence themselves to solitary confinement every night, fearful of becoming crime victims to an extent that it is out of proportion to its actuarial likelihood. This fearfulness is, in part, an effect of television.

The final consequence, and perhaps the most serious, is the desensitization effect. As the violence level depicted increases in intensity and graphic detail, we adapt, we adjust, we get used to it. Current fare includes sputtering arteries, chainsaw dismemberment and violent rape scenes. We adapt, we adjust and we get used to it. Such desensitization and increased callousness present a major problem for the revenue-driven television industry because as we adapt to a level of violence, it becomes less stimulating, less interesting, and thus, less desirable to watch. If we don’t watch the program, we don’t watch the commercial. Therefore, to command our attention, producers must program ever-higher levels of violence. It is difficult to imagine what may be shown next: a type of “hemovision” in which blood spurts from the set onto your living room rug? Or the “snuff film,” where the actors are actually killed?

Thus far, corrective steps either contemplated or enacted at the industry or even at congressional levels have been ineffective, concentrating primarily on one or another type of rating scale. Very little energy has been directed toward encouraging or creating significant amounts of interesting nonviolent programming.