Curbing Violence on Television

* In her Column Right, “TV Violence Rouses the Old Itch to Censor” (July 8), Virginia I. Postrel mentions my name as one of the prominent critics of the media who “all seek to use the official violence of government power to wipe out ideas and images they do not like.”

This completely misrepresents my position, since I have always been opposed to governmental interference in the popular culture. My recent book, “Hollywood vs. America,” includes a chapter called “The Censorship Temptation,” in which I unequivocally declare: “Official censorship is not the answer, and attempts to move in that direction will always prove counterproductive.”

Postrel is correct in saying that television never single-handedly “causes” violence in the streets, but she’s dead wrong to insist that it makes no contribution to our problems. To suggest that TV plays no role in shaping our behavior and values is just as extreme--and absurd--as to claim that it’s the only influence on what we do.

Asking entertainment executives to take a more responsible approach to the messages they broadcast to our children and the rest of us is hardly the same thing as “using the official violence of government” to stifle free expression. This call for accountability isn’t censorship; it’s citizenship.

MICHAEL MEDVED

Santa Monica

Medved is film critic for the New York Post and co-host of “Sneak Previews” on PBS TV. *

The television industry’s plan (June 30) to curb the excessive amount of violence on television?

Let’s put a label on it: weak.

ANTHONY KARACH

North Hills

*

In response to “From Wasteland to Land of the Wasted,” by Newton N. Minow and Craig L. LaMay, Commentary, July 9:

I totally agree with the authors that television is exerting a horrible effect on children and, for that matter, on adults too, as may be seen from the almost daily reports of citizens being killed by “disgruntled” friends, relatives and co-workers.

I most strongly disagree, however, with their solution. I suppose it is natural for Minow, as an ex-bureaucrat, to feel that government is the answer. As with most problems, having hordes of government employees with their salaries and benefit packages trying to regulate the trouble away is the last thing we need.

There is a much simpler solution. The television industry, like every other profit organization, only presents their product if they can make money by doing so. Television receives its money from sponsors. If the sponsors did not pay to have blood and violence and sex presented, then there wouldn’t be any.

So the solution is simple. If viewers really want to do away with violence on television, they only have to let the sponsors know that they aren’t going to buy their products and the offending shows would be gone. Very simple, and no expensive government pork involved.