A Cynical but Necessary Evil

Click Click Click. The sound you may hear in the future are “V” chips encoded into TV sets that automatically turn off programs that contain excessive violence. This is a sound that would be music to the ears of many Americans. “V” chips are still years away from production, and Howard Rosenberg suspects they will ultimately prove to be a “cynical, quick-fix strategy that will yield few actual benefits” (“A Chip Off the Same Old Block,” Calendar, Feb. 4). But Rosenberg does say, “Sure, why not give them a try?” Why not, indeed?

Ninety-eight percent of American homes have TV sets. The estimate is that the average American watches 20 to 30 hours of TV weekly. It has also been estimated that a typical youth by age 12 will have witnessed more than 40,000 murders or attempted murders and 250,000 violent acts on the screen. And media critics have noted that TV crimes are likely to be more violent than real-life crimes.

A 1982 study by then Surgeon Gen. C. Everett Koop confirmed that youths repeatedly exposed to screen violence were more likely to commit violent acts in real life. TV violence also serves as negative reinforcement--that violence is the accepted method to solve problems and achieve gains. In 1969, the National Commission on the Causes and Prevention of Violence said pretty much the same about TV: “It can also be suggested that good triumphs over bad through violence--the manly, as well as the only, course of action.”

With black youth, it’s even worse. According to Nielsen Media Research, they spend more hours in front of the tube than whites. (For example, a recent Nielsen survey found that black teen-agers average 5 hours, 14 minutes daily in front of the tube compared to 3 hours, 26 minutes for all American teens.) For many youths, TV serves as a combination of entertainment, escape vehicle and surrogate parent.

*

TV violent characters who seem to be “getting over” or beating the system can have a perverse appeal to many youths who are angry and frustrated. Add to this the bloody toll that shows up regularly on news programs and one has to ask if television isn’t placing a social and cultural imprimatur on real-life violence. I say yes.

With their heads stuffed with a combination of TV realities and fantasies, it’s a short step for some youngsters to translate screen violence into street violence.

The evidence is certainly compelling that the streets have become more deadly. During the past quarter century, according to the National Center for Health Statistics, more than 1,000 black male teens have have been murdered annually. Young black males are seven times more likely than whites to be murdered.

In Los Angeles, some felt the medium became the message. Immediately after the riots, 56% of news directors surveyed by Nielsen Media Research claimed that TV coverage sparked the violence in other cities.

TV programs alone don’t pull triggers or ignite riotous passions. But they clearly contribute to the climate of violence.

The proposals kicking around in Congress are sensible. They include: restricting programs with violent content to late-night hours; periodic FCC reports that list the TV programs that contain the greatest violence and their commercial sponsors; requiring warning labels on TV shows, and advance notice in published TV schedules of those programs with “violence or unsafe gun practices.”

The bills may not be perfect. Some may even strain First Amendment precepts, but are on the congressional table because the industry refuses to police itself.

*

In October, Atty. Gen. Janet Reno appeared before the Senate Commerce Committee and challenged TV executives to “do more” to cut violence. What was the response? TV executives aired a special on alternatives to violence. They promised to formulate anti-violence guidelines and establish an advisory panel to monitor TV violence.

Oh, yes: They also promised to produce more comedies. But these strike me as nothing but half-baked ploys to get Reno and Congress off their backs.

It won’t work. The public is fed up with the TV industry’s foot-dragging on violence. If Congress ultimately decides that it’s politically expedient to keep its hands off the industry, which is likely given the risk and money involved, technology may yet save the day.

That’s why if the “V” chip were on the market today, my guess is that many Americans would use it to do what neither politicians nor TV executives have done--click off the violence on their sets.