Basic HTML Version
Many recent studies have as–
sailed television aggression,
violence, and immorality for
adversely influencing chil–
dren . But now, research
shows that even adults are
definitely affected by televi–
sion violence. This article de–
scribes sorne of these
profoundly significant studies
and it also discusses the
question, "ls it time to tame
television?"
B
y any measur.e, whether mag–
netic appeaL amount of ex–
posure. or power to change
behavio r. commerc ia l television
now wields th e major educa ti onal
impact in the land.
Does th at sou nd like a sensationa l
exaggeration? Then ponder these
statist ics:
By th e time the average American
child reaches adolescence he will
have spent twice as many hours
watching television as he has sitting
behind his school desk. Beli eve it or
not, he' ll have had 22,000 hou rs o f
television " instruct ion." as opposed
to 11.000 hours wonh of school in–
st ruction.
Even before he reaches age five
he will already have spent more
time in front of a television tha n the
average student in a liberal arts pro–
gram spends in the classroom
th roughou t his entire four years of
college attendance.
And what wil l make up a chi ld's
TV diet? Studi es show that children
favor ad ult TV programs - espe–
cia lly crime thrillers.
J ust how violent are these televi–
sion shows?
In a Washington, D. C. survey.
three major television networks
were su rveyed to determine how
much violence would be viewed in
one week between 3 p.m. and 11
p.m. During this span of time there
were 11 3 sta bbings. 92 shootings,
168 beatings. 9 stranglings. a nd 179
other specific acts of violence per-
The
PLAIN TRUTH August 1976
pe trated before the televi sion au–
dience. There was one specific act of
violence every 16.9 minutes. a ki ll–
ing every 43.8 minutes.
Th ese statis tics take on greater
significance when you cons ider that
the average American fami ly
watches over 6 hours of televis ion
everv da
y.
B.y
th~
time the average American
chi ld reaches age 14 he will have
witnessed the violent destruction of
ove r 13.000 human beings on televi–
sion! His TV diet will have been
filled with thousa nds of bodily as–
saults of one man or woman aga in st
another. He' ll have witnessed thou–
sa nds of violent crimes and seen
cou ntless numbers of belligerent
acts.
Violence Affects Viewers
Does this steady diet ofv iolence and
immoral ity have an effect on TV
viewers? Some socia l scientists say it
doesn't. claiming there is no actual
proof tha t TV violence has any real
effect on ch ildren. Others say. "We
need more refined research
óil
the
su bject."
But the fac t is that numerous
studies ha ve already conclusively es–
tablished that television
does
di –
rectly
inf!uence
not only children.
but also ad ults.
Dr. Harry J. Skornia, professor of
radio and television at the Un iver–
sity of Illinois. states that television
can have a profound effect on view–
ers.
According to Dr. Skornia. "The
most alt-encompassing single find–
ing from educational television re–
search has been that in almost all
projects there has been 'no signifi–
can! difference' between what thou–
sands of students learn from TV
(often from single teachers or pro–
gram series) and what they learn
from face-to-face conventional
teaching.
"Thousands of individua ls can
now learn life-saving (or li fe-de–
stroying or sa fe-cracking) as well
from TV as they. would be able to
learn from th e thousands of individ–
ual teachers (or ga ngsters) that
would be req uired for conventiona l
teaching."
In summing up a ll the research,
which unqu es ti onably shows how
effect ive television is in teaching,
Dr. Skornia says, "Judged by those
cri teria which educators find usefu l
in pred icti ng effect iveness in teach –
ing. the principal characters in wes t–
erns. crime and private-eye seri es,
situation comedies. and other popu–
la r TV programs would seem to rate
fa irly high in teach ing effectiveness.
"There is considerable evidence
or danger that wha t these ind ivid–
uals demons trate regularly wi.ll , by
a ll valid learning theory criteria. be
learned.
"To believe that a ll or most of
these attractive. admi red characters.
often using and illustrating tech–
niq ues of physical violence, revenge,
bu rgla ry, escape. fighting, and do-it–
yourself justice. are unsuccessful as
teachers, fai ling to teach what they
demonstra te,
is direct
!y
al variance
with wha t we know abou t telev i–
sion's su periority, specifically for
demonstration purposes in teach ing
specific sk ills and behavior."
In the ea rly 1970's no ted re–
searche rs J . R. Dominick and Bra–
dely S. Greenberg studied yout h
attitudes toward violence as re la ted
to TV exposure. They found that
"t he greater leve! of exposure to TV
violence, the more the child was
wi ll ing to use violence. to suggest it
as a solu tion to confl ict, and to per.–
ceive itas effect ive."
In ano ther study, F. B. Steuer and
a team at the Univers ity of North
Carolina, compared the aggressive
behavior of nursery school children
matched in pairs accord ing to how
much television they ordinarily
watched. One member from each
pair was shown an aggressive TV
show on 11 different days, taken
from among those ord inarily broad–
cas t on Saturday mornings. The
other member of the pair saw a non–
aggressive show on the same days.
Afterward. the child ren were ob–
served duri ng natura l play.
in eve1y pair of matched children.
the child who had viewed the violen/
13