Comm 203 After 1st midterm

Comm 203 After 1st - Comm 203 After 1 st midterm 18:38:00 Television Violence Context of Concern • TV rapidly diffuses in 2 nd half of 20 th

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–4. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: Comm 203 After 1 st midterm 23/02/2009 18:38:00 Television Violence Context of Concern • TV rapidly diffuses in 2 nd half of 20 th century o Leap of difussion 9% of homes in 1950 65% in 1955 93% in 1965 • Time spentviewing oer dat has increased to match diffusion o As TV diffused, people spent more time watching TV o As more people watch TV, US crime Rate increases Not necessarily related, crude patterns have been pointed to express concern o 1960s Vietnam War, Civil Rights Movements, WATTS riors, assassinations rise in television sets, time spent watching, and US violent crimes converged simultaneously • Examination of effects o 1964 senate subcommittee on Juvenile DELINQUENCY o 1968 the national commission on causes and prevention of violence o 1972 surgeon general report on television and social behavior o 1982 television and behavior: 10 year of progresses o 1992 American psychological American task force on TV and Society ← 5 General Questions • 1. How much violence is on television? • 2. What s the relationship between viewing violence and negative effects? • 3. What explains negative effects? o What theories can be used to explain and predict individuals responses to media violence • 4. What moderates the effects? • 5.What can be done about the negative effects? • Findings o (relatively modest in comparison to other studies) o 1. Violence is pervasive on American television There’s a lot of it Trends over 3 years (need to know these percentage of shows with violence) relatively stable Year 1: 58% contained violence Year 2: 61% contained violence Year 3: 61% contained violence 1 st unit of analysis: 18,000 violent interactions 2 nd unit of analysis: 8,000 violent scenes 6 violent interactions per hour o 2. Violence is often glamorized… Almost 40% of violent perpetrators have “attractive” qualities – prosocial, good, or heroic qualities, things that kids who are very young can detect. This can increase aggressive tendencies. 44% of all violent interactions are justified (or presented as socially sanctioned (self defense, or protection of other, or retaliation)) Both of these trends heighten the sense of aggressive responding in kids and adults (more important finding than # of interactions) o 3. Violence is often sanitized…(or stripped of pain and harm) Sanitization (won’t need to know number, just trend) 51-58% of all violent interactions feature no pain to target Pain can trigger empathy. Empathy and aggression are inversely related Absence of pain is a stylistic device that industry can change to reduce impact of what people see on TV About 34-40% Unrealistic pain, pain depicted as less than it would be in real life (home alone example)The harm that should have occurred is underestimated or unrealistically low 13-15% Long term harm and pain-consequences of pain shown 2 or 3 scenes after violent act (boys in the hood example, scene moves...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 04/22/2009 for the course COMM 203 taught by Professor Smith during the Spring '06 term at USC.

Page1 / 46

Comm 203 After 1st - Comm 203 After 1 st midterm 18:38:00 Television Violence Context of Concern • TV rapidly diffuses in 2 nd half of 20 th

This preview shows document pages 1 - 4. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online