Basic HTML Version
18
v1ston programming. And, what has
been reported over and over again leaves
little ground for optimism.
Government agencies, educators,
broadcasting associations, and joucnal–
ists are consistently appalled by the ex–
ploitive misuse of this most powerful
medium.
Listen to these shocking reports from
reputable sources and bear in mind that
this is the currículum of children in
95% of America's bornes - day in and
day out. In the words of Dr. Víctor B.
Cline, a researcher at the University of
Utab, here is what the first TV gener–
ation has been weaned on. He has esti–
mated that, "... on the average, be–
tween kindergarten and
14
years of age,
a child witnesses the violent destruction
of
13,000
human beings on television."
Imagine absorbing that much mayhem
by the eighth or ninth grade. Why, even
the most hard-bitten combat soldier
would never have begun to participate
in such slaughter! And, consider this,
Dr. Cline didn't indude chi ldreo
younger than iive years old,
yet we
know they are 11'tttching.
If
he had ex–
tended his figures by even three years
the total would be more Iike
17,300
epi–
sedes of violent death viewed before
early adolescence.
Then, from the television industry it–
self comes a report by the National As–
sociation for Better Bcoadcasting de–
scribing the TV currículum as, " ... a
mass of indiscriminate eotertainment
dominated by sorne 40 animated series,
which in turn are dominated by ugli–
ness, noise, and violence."
Anyone who has watched Popeye,
Batman, or Tom and Jerry can well
sympathize with the Association's dis–
tress at the ear-shattering, overwhelming
avalanche of punching, zapping, cutting
asunder, burning, exploding, head–
smashing, brain-jellying, utter annihila–
tion which is portrayed in such "comic''
programs.
Again, in another important survey,
staff members of the
Christian Science
Monitor
watched seventy-five hours of
eveoing programs in the first week of
the 1968-69 TV season. Their findings
were appalling. During the period of
viewing, they recorded 254 incidents of
The
PLAIN TRUTH
violence - seventy-one murders, sui–
cides, and killings of various kinds p lus
threats of like treatment. That's better
than three such incídents every hour! At
that rate our l iving rooms have become a
grotesque killing ground where the
screaming never dies out and the blood
never dries.
Well, so it goes, report after report
l ike a broken, blood-spattered record.
TV Currículum
Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. summed up
the situation in his powerful commentary
entitled
Violence: America in the Sixties.
"The children of the electronic age," he
wrote, "sit hypnotized by the parade of
killings, beatings, gunfights,
knifings~
maimings, and brawls which flash in–
cessantly across the tiny screen .. ." (p.
54).
And this,, my friends,
is
the TV cur–
rículum - make no mistake about
it.
It
is most interesting that Robert Lewis
Shayon, TV and Radio editor for
Satm·–
day Review
recently made a similar ref–
erence. In his words, "Violeoce, inter–
na! and externa), is the young gener–
ation's hang-up . .. This is the way our
world
is;
TV tells us so -
TV
is the
tme cttrriettlttm of ott1' societ)"'
(January
11, 1969, p.
103,
emphasis ours
throughout) .
Whether we l ike it or not, the TV
script writers and Madison Avenue ad
men have literally become the nation's
de facto curriculwn makers! And, it is
quite dear that their curriculum no
longer teaches A for apple, B for baby,
and
e
for cat - not anymore! Today
it's A for arson and assassination, B for
bullying and brutal ity, and
e
for cru–
dity and crassness!
Depending on the channel you
choose, the "Three R's" have become
russlin, rasslin, and rawhide; or rock,
racket, and ribaldty - all of which
adds up to rubbish !
And make no mistake, it's having a
tremendous effect on young people in
every way from their' posture to their
personal habits to their very outlook
and purpose in li fe .
"But," you may be asking,
"is
it
nec–
essarily a bad effect ?" "Don't
they
say
watching TV is not harmful for chil–
dren ?" "In fact, don't
they
say that
J anuary,
1970
watching violence
heips
children get it
out of their system ?" "And anyway,
don't
they
say that only
criminal types
go out and do what they see on T V?"
"And don't
they
say .. ."
Whoa! Hold it! Wait a minute!
Who are THEY? And where d id you
hear what THEY said? Are you sure your
sources are reliable? Let's take a hard
look at
who
has been saying
what
and
then maybe we can draw sorne con–
clusions about the TV currículum.
Everyooe Is Ao Expert!
If
al! the books, pamphlets, dis–
sertations, articles, broadsides, and other
miscellaneous documents written about
televis ion during the past twenty years
were gathered together in one place,
they would no doubt iill a large liv–
ing room. They might not even leave
space for the TV set. And, if you were
to ask the authors of this mighty pile of
literah.ue, you would find that each one
considers himself an unquestioned au–
thority on the subject.
The situation is not unlike that in the
field of education, where virtually every
citizen thinks of himself as thoroughly
competent to deliver expert opinion
merely because he is a product of tbe
system. You have probably heard (or
made) the remark, "l can tell you
alt
about our schools because I went to one
once!" Welt, much the same thing is
true with television. Being an owner–
viewer or maybe only a viewer of TV
seems to gualify anyone's observations
regarding the medium as authoritative.
Sorne of these "expert" observations
are no doubt based upon sober reflection
and research. However, far too many are
sheer expressions of personal bias. Un–
fortunately, the latter type, lacking in
scientific objectivity, most often appear
in the popular press. And, these tend to
form much of the existing mythology
regarding TV.
If
you think about it,
you wi ll have to admit that most of
what you believe about television was
acquired in this way.
With this in mind, let's scotch the
hearsay and challenge the so-called ex–
perts. Let's bury sorne of these mis–
Jeading fairy tales right now and get
things straight. Let's consider the th ree
questions most often raised, because