PTC vs TV Watch

According to the Parents Television Council, incidents of violence against women on US television has increased by 120 percent in the last five years. While we’re not sure exactly how the PTC came to this number, the Reuters report states that the PTC compared prime time programming on the major commercial networks in February and May of 2004 and those months in 2009. This was investigated via content analysis and categorisation, though no actual definition of violence against women is given, so whether they had one for the study is unknown. Another figure given was in relation to victimisation of teen girls, which has apparently risen by 400 percent.

While aggression of any type towards women, or anyone for that matter, is (in this bloggers opinion) unacceptable; to raise a furore about it with dodgy figures and questionable methods is also. Another TV watchdog group, TV Watch, is also of this opinion. Jim Dyke, executive director of TV Watch, had this to say about the PTC study:

“This so-called ‘study’ is…an attempt to force all television contents to conform to their own beliefs. Parents have the tools to enforce the decisions about their children’s viewing,”

While this debate is contentious and ongoing, it sometimes helps to remember there are at least two sides to any story and usually many more in the analysis of it.

The PTC study can be accessed here:

http://www.parentstv.org/PTC/publications/reports/womeninperil/study.pdf

The Media Violence Fast

 

During the week beginning the 19th of October, the National Interfaith Coalition for Media Justice encouraged a week-long fast from media violence. This was in an effort to boycott media violence in the US and make it known to the powers that be, that some forms (they state that very clearly) are not acceptable. This years ban was regarding ‘hate speech’ and was in support of the National Hispanic Media Coalition. On a personal note, any form of racism vocal or not is most definitely unacceptable. However, from a more objective viewpoint, there is no opinion here in this particular campaign a whole, I just wanted to share.

http://www.ucc.org/media-justice/mvf2009/

 

Media violence is killing America (according to the pediatricians)

Media violence is apprently turning our children into serial killing adults. According to the latest report by the American Pediatrics Association, the evidence on media violence being harmful to the mental health of our future adult popluation is ‘clear and convincing’. It would be wonderful to believe that someone somewhere has come up with anything that is clear and convincing regarding this issue but, unless theories and methods have been drastically altered, it’s highly unlikely.  There have been no studies yet that have proven long term harm as a consequence of interaction with media violence, despite the APA claiming that there have been 3,500 seperate studies achieving just that – according to some prominent sociologists and criminologists who have made it their life work to catalougue these things, there are just over 200 and none have proven anything.

According to Todd Neale, chief medical writer for abc America, when children go for medical exams they should be asked about how much media they engage with and what types. As far as what this will acheive or what their GP can do with this information, I’m not quite sure. How about beginning with educating the parents ? Fairly – no to fear mongering but yes to education.

The full article can be read here:

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/MindMoodNews/media-violence-sex-threaten-kids-pediatricians/Story?id=8866443

Californian kids escape gaming restrictions

The US Supreme Court has effectively ended a push by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger  to ban violent video game sales to minors. Responsible parenting is important and limiting children’s exposure to age appropriate media is a wise move but there is obviously a certain level of irony attached to this bill. The person who starred in one of the most violent character franchises of the last century and who revolutionized the action hero, is now pushing for limitations on media violence. Perhaps there’s a touch of the cynic about me but if this wasn’t a prime example of political rhetoric and a play for the the emotive vote, then all the main characters in Terminator 2 went on to live wholesome and fulfilling lives post-production.

For the record, District Judge Ronald Whyte stated that “the evidence does not establish that video games, because of their interactive nature or otherwise, are any more harmful than violent television, movies, internet sites or other speech-related exposures.”. Whether or not this is fact has not actually been established either way. Besides, I just wanted to focus on the Arnie bit…

Somebody’s thinking of the children

Though so far this blog has been an exercise in cynicism regarding all things policy related, today’s entry is a positive one (but still relates in its own way to media policy… sorry). While browsing the web for contentious and interesting things to relate, I came across an article on the Center on Media and Child Health. Expecting this to be yet another site with a  ‘scare the parents, spare the child’ philosophy, I was ready to read about the AMA citing 3,500 studies that found a correlation between engagement with television and spontaneous combustion in minors. What I found however, was quite a well balanced and informative site on children and media. The primary contributors to this (and founders of the center) are the Boston Children’s Hospital and the Harvard Medical School. The latter is quite surprising as the Harvard Medical School has contributed to moral panics regarding this topic in the past.

The focus of the CMCH is to teach ‘active, critical media use’ and it appears that this philosophy also applies to their research. After having encountered many sites in which panic is primary and healthy engagement with media is a secondary concern, the logic espoused here is quite refreshing:

“For any given child, which effects occur depends largely on the media’s content, the child’s age, the context in which the child uses media, the amount of media the child uses, and whether that use is active and critical.” (CMCH)

More can be read about the CMCH here:

http://www.cmch.tv/mentors_parents/messaging.asp

Left 4 Dead (again)

Once again Australian authorities are at loggerheads regarding classification of a new video game. Put simply, like many games before it, first person shooter ‘Left 4 Dead 2’ is being refused classification by the Australian Office of Film and Literature Classification Board due to its violent content. For those not aware, Australia does not have an R18+ rating for video games, so any game which does not fall within the parameters of an MA15+ within the eyes of the OFLC is subsequently not given a rating. This then ensures that the game is completely banned in Australia, as anything without a rating cannot be sold or distributed within the country. As a result, any game with high levels of sexuality, violence or drug use has to be doctored for resale (as in the case of GTA III) or, as in the case of the zombie fest being discussed here,  just does not reach the market at all. As with all pertinent issues, there are two sides to the argument and as with anything concerning the media violence debate, it’s contentious.

According to a number of news sources, South Australian Attorney-General Michael Atkinson is the only authority figure holding out on the introduction of an R18+ rating, which would require unanimous approval of all of Australia’s attorney-generals.  He does, however have much support from various lobby groups such as Young Media Australia and a variety of religious and parent’s groups. In his opinion, interactivity results in believability and a greater chance of the individual displaying second hand aggression. However, Victorian Attorney-General Rob Hulls disagrees vehemently with Michael Atkinson’s stance and believes that Australia is behind the rest of the world due to this contentious regulation.

the way in which the OFLC decides levels of violent and sexual content is also an issue and consists of board members merely playing the game or employing members of the public to do the same and then asking them questions about how they feel. These methods are quite out-dated and perhaps need to be reviewed, particularly in the case of interactive media. While a number of studies have been conducted into Australia’s video game ratings and our ratings system, it seems the decision on classification rests with a lone Attorney-General. Perhaps he just doesn’t like zombies…

Crime down, gaming up, sexy charts

The FBI have recently released their annual Uniform Crime Report for 2008 and it’s causing quite a lot of contentious debate; evidenced by the fact that it was released only days ago and Google already boasts over 517 articles on the findings.  The good news is that, in America, violent crime has apparently decreased by 1.9% in comparison to the 2007 estimate. Of course definitions of violent crime, how much of it is reported etc. needs to be taken into account. They have released a very handsome chart on the topic, which can be seen below.

FBI Uniform Crime rates 2008

There are many articles which have sprung up about these findings since,  results being met with everything from naked elation to guarded suspicion – and in the more bizarre reports, both. However, one of the more interesting to the author of this blog comes from games review site Kokatu”, in which they also chart US game sales from the last four years and draw a direct comparison. Their more practical but equally attractive chart can be seen here, with the purple line representing game sales and the green line violent crime arrests:

While the numbers are too large to reflect exact figures, there is a definite rise in game sales while the crime rate lowers. The authors of Kokatu” and a few other sites that have taken their lead are well aware that this is not conclusive evidence for the lack of correlation between gaming and crime but feel it’s a start. Perhaps it is.

Fun and games. Well, games…

‘Gamer’, the latest project of Mark Neveldine and Brian Taylor,  is apparently intended to address the topic of desensitisation to violence. The plot of the film involves prisoners being controlled via brain implants by ‘gamers’ in a hedonistic frenzy of blood lust, with one innocent man defying the odds. Think ‘The Running Man’ but more graphic and this time without the free will bit.

Despite the obvious discrepency between intention and execution, the reason for this post is not a review (I have yet to see the film) but a prediction that this film will be fodder for pro-censorship lobbyists and people concerned about the children everywhere. This not to say I condemn their views but am simply anticipating that this film may be the lighter fluid that this particular inferno does not necessarily need. Here’s hoping everyone plays nicely.

‘Gamer’ was released in the US on September 4th, I have yet to find a release date for Australia. Whether or not it actually gets released here has yet to be seen but that’s a whole other post…

Panic and politics

When appointed to office in March 2009, Victoria’s new Chief Commissioner of Police revealed immediately what he saw to be the major issues to be dealt with. The second concern listed by Simon Overland was public desensitisation to violence, in his view being caused by over exposure to violent media. In his first press conference, the man elected to fill this contested position made an appeal to the public using an issue which has been at the center of political rhetoric for decades.

 

” … broader representations of violence in the media can be problematic. I think that’s why we see some of the behaviour on the streets. It’s an unreal representation of force – how much you can use and the consequences. Sometimes people punch other people, not really understanding the impact it has or the damage it can do. They see it happen in the movies and in video games, and the person always gets up. Well, sadly, we know that’s not always the case. ”

(Chief Commissioner Simon Overland 2009, Herald Sun, March 3rd, p.9)

 This is by no means the first time a public figure has utilised this issue in order to win the hearts and minds of a concerned public. They may well be concerned for good reason but feeding moral panic by suggesting that grown human beings cannot separate reality from fantasy or a physical confrontation from a video game is feeding the beast rather than providing room for a solution. Here’s hoping that Commissioner Overland’s investigation into the issue of Melbournians and their relationship with their media is founded in concern rather than simply riding the crest of a contentious issue and that it provides a balanced account. Between the date of the speech quoted here and writing this entry, there has been no action taken on this issue. Let’s hope that when it is, objectivity features and there are real solutions reached. More on this when it happens!

The ‘Why’ of media violence…

Since Aristotle first coined the theory of Katharsis (c.335 BC), in which he claimed that viewing a tragic play induced an emotional release in its audience members, the audience relationship with media violence has been steeped in curiosity and contention. Public engagement with the spectacle of violence has found it’s way from the Roman Colosseums and Greek amphitheatres to homes and cinemas worldwide, we consume it with veracity and have a love hate relationship with this long standing form of media. As a species, we have formally studied our relationship with it for about a century yet we still have no real idea of the effects of media violence or indeed if there are any at all.

The objective of this blog is not to ascertain this one way or the other but rather to open up the possibility of looking at this topic in a different way and perhaps from a less emotional standpoint. This will be conducted via a semi-formalised review of both the public and academic relationship with the topic of observational violence, particularly as it pertains to current and important happenings.