ADOLESCENT AGGRESSIVENESS                       101
"family" may well also play an important role in whatever causal se-
quence produces an association between violence viewing and aggres-
sion. Unfortunately, however, the available data are limited in scope. In
sum, they cannot be said to identify "family" as a common origin third
variable; they can rather be said to suggest its candidacy for such a func-
tion and to underline the need for further investigation of the role of
"family" in this process.

Dominick and Greenberg tested the relative strengths of association
between aggressive attitudes and three "antecedent variables," viz.,
"family attitudes toward violence," "social class," and "exposure to
television violence." Their scale of "family attitudes" consisted of sev-
en questions on how children "thought their parents feel about various
forms of violence." Because many of the respondents could not provide
adequate answers, the group was split into two groups: those whose
families were "definitely antiviolence" and those whose parents had not
demonstrated disapproval.* The failure of families to demonstrate dis-
approval was found to be more strongly related to aggressive attitudes
than was "exposure to television violence" in regard to every attitude
scale employed and in regard to both boys and girls. Interpretations of
this finding must be tempered by the fact that the child's perception of
his family's attitude may tell us more about his attitude than theirs, and
by the fact that "exposure to television violence" was found to have
some independent relationship with aggressive attitudes.

Within the studies under review, virtually all other data bearing on the
relationship of "family" to the association between violence viewing
and aggression are found in McLeod et al. (1971a and 1971b). Neither
the considerable number of pertinent variables treated by these investi-
gators nor the extensive data thereby generated can be adequately treat-
ed within this summary report. Suffice it here to say that all of the varia-
bles were measured by indices composed of several questions, and that
in reference to several such indices the replies of the youth and their
parents are combined.3

Two of these variables, "parental control over television viewing"
and "parental interpretation of television violence," cannot be regarded
as "common origin candidates*' in and of themselves, but could con-
ceivably be manifestations of more general aspects of child rearing. Fur-
thermore, they bear directly upon violence viewing. One of these,

`These definitions will be found in Dominick and Greenberg (1971). Tables refer to the
two groups as "low approval" and "undefined" respectively.
`More specifically. McLeod et al. (1971a) employed a sample of Maryland youth and a
sample of Wisconsin youth. McLeod et al. (197lb)dealt more fully with the same Wiscon-
sin sample. but did not deal with the Maryland sample. The measures in McLeod et al.
(1971b)are in many cases relined as compared with similarly named measures in the earlier
study. These more refined measures are. where possible, used in this summary. The use of
the less refined measures. when available for parallel inquiries, would in general either
present a weaker case or would not appreciably change the thrust of the data.


102                           TELEVISION AND GROWING UP

"parental control over television viewing," was found to bear virtually
no relationship to the association between violence viewing and aggres-
sion (controlling for this variable left the originally observed correlation
coefficient virtually unchanged). The other variable, "parental interpre-
tation of television violence," refers to "how often" parents "used to"
indicate to their children that interpersonal violence in "western and
crime shows" was unlike real life and an undesirable way of solving
problems. Surprisingly, the relationship between violence viewing and
aggression was found to be higheramong youth whose parents relatively
often engaged in such interpretation than it was among youths whose
parents less often provided such interpretations. A tempting speculative
explanation of this finding is that parents may be more likely to provide
"interpretation" for youth who view a great deal of television violence,
but the available data do not provide much evidence either for or against
this supposition.4

Other aspects of paiental attitudes and behavior investigated by
McLeod et al. are more generic and thus are more logical candidates for
common origin variables. Of these, the most fully treated are "parental
affection, " "parental punishment, " "parental emphasis on nonaggres-
sion, " and "family communication patterns. "
"Parental affection" was assessed in McLeod et al. (1971a) by re-

spondents' replies to a single question ("How often do y&r parents

. . .show that they love you?") and in McLeod et al. (1971b) by the
combined answers of respondents and mothers' to that question and two
others (". . . tell you they love you" and "show their affection by hug-
ging and kissing you"). As so measured, "parental affection" was
found to be essentially unrelated to violence viewing, to aggression, or
to the relationship between them. Doubts may arise about the adequacy
of the measure, and further inquiry, employing a more refined measure,
is obviously desirable before "parental affection" can be regarded as
unrelated to the phenomenon under investigation.

Parental punishment, including "restrictive
punishment"

McLeod et al. employed a five-item index of parental punishment. A
series of statistical operations, using their most refined measures, indi-
cated that "parental punishment" and "violence viewing" were inde-

4"Parental interpretation of television violence"  was found to be related to violence
viewing at the approximate level of r = .I5 in each of two pooled samples, and to be essen-
tially unrelated to summed self- or other-reports of aggression (r's ranging from -.03 to
.07).

`Appropriate pronoun substitutions were provided for mothers, e.g., ". . .tell him that
you love him ."


ADOLESCENT AGGRESSIVENESS                       103
pendently related to aggression, and at almost the same level.6 Parental
punishment, as thus defined and measured, therefore cannot be regard-
ed as a strong candidate for a common origin variable.

The same investigators, however, also separated components of the
five-item "punishment scale" into measures of "physical punishment,"
"verbal punishment," and "restrictive punishment." The latter index
was found to be significantly related to both violence viewing and ag-
gression in two pooled samples. In one sample, "restrictive punish-
ment" proved to be more strongly related to aggression, as measured by
others' reports (.41) than was violence viewing (.17). The question thus
arises whether "restrictive punishment" or some frustrating child rear-
ing practice it manifests may be a common origin variable, but the avail-
able data unfortunately provide no basis for further inquiry.

Parental emphasis on nonaggression

Under this rubric, McLeod et al. inquired into the degree to which
parents discouraged their children from being "mean to other kids,"
fighting back in self-defensive situations, doing "the bad things people
do on television," and (in reference to one sample) behaving aggressive-
ly in hypothetical situations. Although this index was found to have only
a trivial and generally negative relationship to either violence viewing or
aggression (Chaffee and McLeod, 1971b), it was nevertheless found to
be very strongly related to the relationship between violence viewing
and aggression. Thus, the investigators report that "the average correla-
tion (between violence viewing and all measures of aggression in both of
the samples) is .26 in families where little stress is placed upon nonag-
gression; in families where such an emphasis is found, the average cor-
relation is only .07."' Parental emphasis on nonaggression emerged as a
strong candidate for a third variable. Where such emphasis is low, the
relationship between violence viewing and aggression occurs; where it is
high, the relationship is markedly reduced. This finding is consonant
with the earlier mentioned finding of Dominick and Greenberg, to the
effect that family attitudes regarding violence are more strongly related
to aggressive attitudes than is violence viewing for fourth- to sixth-grade
boys and girls. Taken together;the two findings strongly underscore the

%iolence viewing correlated .26 with aggression, with "parental punishment" and
"parental affection" simultaneously partialled out. "Parental punishment" correlated .20
with aggression, with violence viewing and "parental affection" simultaneously partialled
out. The partial effect of "parental affection" was negligible (McLeod et al., 197lb).

`A decreased correlation in the presence of high parental emphasis on nonaggression, as
compared to low parental emphasis on nonaggression, was furthermore observed in all but
one of the eight sex-and-age subgroups, the single exception being senior high school boys
in the Wisconsin sample. McLeod et al. (1971a) and McLeod et al. (197lb) confirm the
direction of effect.


104                         TELEWSION AND GROWING UP
need for more extensive inquiry into the role which pertinent family at&
tudes play in the relationship between violence viewing and aggression.
Family communication patterns
For some years prior to the institution of the present research pro-
gram, Chaffee. McLeod, and their colleagues had been studying various
types of "habitual structure. .of parent-to-child communication"
(Chaff ee and McLeod. 197 1 b). Partly before and partly within the pres-
ent program, some of these investigators have examined the relation-
ships between these patterns and media use and between these patterns
and aggression.
The array of identified patterns is too complex to describe in any de-
tail in this summary report. Suffice it here to say that two basic dimen-
sions were identified and respectively labeled "socio-oriented" and
"concept-oriented." The "socio-oriented" dimension involves "pa-
rents urging rhe child to keep discussions pleasant, avoid controversy,
defer to his elders, and generally maintain harmony at the expense of his
own ideas and opinions" (Chaffee and McLeod, 197lb). The "concept-
oriented" dimension, in contrast, involves "encouraging the child to
challenge parental beliefs. to reach his own conclusions. . . (and to be
aware of) contrasting views on controversial issues." The investigators
found that "about equal numbers of families stress either. neither, or
both of these orientations."
It seems reasonable to suggest that emphasis upon the "socio-orien-
tation" pattern would seem likely to engender considerable frustration
in the child, whereas emphasis on "concept orientation" would seem
likely to minimize frustration at least as regards child-parent communi-
cation.
McLeod et al. generally found relationships between these concepts
and either violence viewing or aggression to be in the direction which the
frustration hypothesis would suggest. Youth living under the presuma-
bly frustrating high "socio-orientation" patterns view significantly more
violence than do those living under low "socio-orientation" patterns.
With respect 10 self-reported aggressiveness, the highest scores are
found under the presumably most frustrating conditions (high socio-ori-
entation, low concept-orientation). With respect to both self-reported
and other-reported aggressiveness, lowest scores are found under the
presumably least frustrating conditions (high concept-orientation, low
socio-orientation) [Chaff ee and McLeod, I97 I b].
The crucial question-whether these family communication patterns
may be common origin third variables- can be answered only by testing
the relationship between violence viewing and aggression within each of
the four patterns. The question remains unanswered, and parent-child
communication patterns remain viable but as yet unvalidated candidates
for common origin third variables.


ADOLESCENT AGGRESSIVENESS

Summary: evidence for the common origin
interpretation

105

The data in the studies here under review have been examined for
evidence consonant with the interpretation that some antecedent condi-
tion or set of conditions (one or more "third variables") may produce
both violence viewing and aggression, or may in some way explain the
association noted between them.

Although we have been primarily interested in possible "common ori-
gin variables," we noted in passing some "interactive" third variables,
which identified different population subgroups in which the relationship
between violence viewing and aggression was variously stronger and
weaker. The behavior of these interactive variables was found to be in-
consistent across studies. Socioeconomic status, for example, was
found to serve this function in one study, but not in another. Sex was
found to serve such a function in at least three studies, but in diametri-
cally opposite ways: in two studies the relationship was found to be as
strong or stronger for girls than it was for boys, while in one virtually no
relationship was found for girls.

Preexisting levels of aggression were found in one study (Robinson and
Bachman) to operate in a manner consonant with the common origin in-
terpretation, but unavoidable limitations of the data left in abeyance the
question of whether or not they actually served such a role. Personality
factors, or what might well be personality factors, were found in several
studies to operate in a manner indicating the need, for further investiga-
tion, but the data at hand were again deemed inadequate either to vali-
date or to reject the candidacy of these factors for the role of common
origin variables.

A number of variables relative toparental attitudes and behavior were
examined. Two of these could be regarded only as manifestations of
possible common origin candidates, but they were noted because of
their direct bearing on television viewing and aggression. Of these, one,
"parental control over television viewing,"  was found to bear no rela-
tionship to the association between violence viewing and aggression
(McLeod et al.); the other, "parental interpretation of television vio-
lence, " was found to be associated with high relationship between vio-
lence viewing and aggression (McLeod et al.), possibly because its oc-
currence might be a response to considerable such viewing on the part of
young people.

Among more logical candidates for common origin variables, McLeod
et al. (and for the most part only these investigators) examined a number
of generic aspects of familial attitudes and behaviors. They found that
"parental affection " was unrelated to violence viewing, to aggression,
or to the relationship between them, but questions exist about the ade-
quacy of this measure. "Parental punishment" was found by the same


106                         TELEVISION AND GROWING UP
investigators to be associated with both violence viewing and aggres-
sion, but its association with aggression was found to be independent of
violence viewing, rather than to be the source of violence viewing.
"Parental emphasis on nonaggression" was found by McLeod et al.
to be strongly related to the association between violence viewing and
aggression, to the degree that the association was greatly reduced among
youth whose parents strongly emphasized nonaggression. Related and
supportive data were noted by Dominick and Greenberg, who found that
family attitudes toward violence were more strongly related to aggres-
sive attitudes in preadolescents than was violence viewing. Family atti-
tudes toward aggression and violence thus remain a viable candidate for
the role of a common origin, or controlling, variable.
Parent-child communication patterns were found by McLeod et al. to
be strongly related to violence viewing and to aggression. Communica-
tion patterns presumably creating frustration were found to be strongly
associated with high violence viewing and high aggression, while pat-
terns presumably minimizing such frustration were found to be associ-
ated with low violence viewing and low aggression. Because the relation-
ship of these patterns to the associafjon between violence viewing and
aggression has not yet been adequately investigated, these patterns can
at present be regarded only as promising, but not validated, candidates
for common origin variable status.
Thus, several candidate common origin or explanatory variables have
been identified in the data. Several have failed to operate statistically in
a manner consonant with common origin interpretations. Others have
not been analyzed sufficiently to permit meaningful inferences about the
possibility of their serving as common origin variables. At least two,
"parental emphasis on nonaggression" and "family communication pat-
terns," have operated in manners consonant with such an interpretation,
but the pertinent data are as yet too limited to validate common origin
status for either one.
The common origin interpretation remains viable, however, despite
the fact that these variables, as defined by the scales employed, do not
completely explain or nullify the observed relationships between vio-
lence viewing and aggression. Improved measures might change the pic-
ture, and so might the combination of several of these variables into a
composite index of related conditions. Finally, and probably most im-
portant, necessary limitations of the studies at hand have left largely
unexamined a considerable number of variables which have been found
to be important or determining influences on other behaviors and atti-
tudes. A continued examination of possible third variables is clearly in-
dicated. Findings both in other areas and in these studies suggest that
such investigation might profitably focus on personality factors and on
aspects of family and peer attitudes and behaviors which are both more
inclusive and more precise than those which have thus far been em-
ployed.


ADOLESCENT AGGRESSIVENESS

107

GENERAL SUMMARY

The research studies whose findings are reviewed in this chapter all
report answers by adolescents, or in some cases by younger children, to
questions presented in surveys. In general, the questions were designed
to elicit data on exposure to television violence and on aggressive tend-
encies. The data were analyzed by the investigators to determine wheth-
er there was any relationship between such exposure and aggressive
behavior.

Measures

One or more measures of television behavior and one or more meas-
ures of aggression were used in every study. The measures varied con-
siderably .

Behavior in regard to television was variously measured by time spent
viewing, by preference for violent programs, and by amount of viewing
of violent programs. Pertinent findings suggest that the three are not
equivalent measures for characterizing exposure to television violence.
Under the circumstances, and lacking definitive tests, it seems reasona-
ble to suppose that "amount of violence viewing" is the best measure of
such exposure.

The measures of aggression differed along various dimensions and
along a range within each dimension. Behavior reported upon differed in
degree of reprehensibility, in degree of actuality (including, for exam-
ple, actually accomplished behavior and projected behavior in hypothet-
ical situations), in source (self-reports and others' reports), and in tem-
poral reference (current and past). Pertinent data indicate a degree of
communality among these measures, coupled with considerable differ-
ences between them. It is therefore important to inquire into what meas-
ures of aggression were involved in relationships found to be weak and
what measures were involved in the obviously stronger relationships.

Findings

The several studies investigated the relationship between exposure to
television violence and aggression. employing various measures to do
so. Most of the relationships observed were positive, but most were also
of low magnitude, attaining levels ranging from null relationships to .2l.
A few of the observed relationships, however, reached levels at or just
above .30.These were the relationship between violence viewing and
summary self-report aggression scores reported by McLeod et al. (.30
and .32), and the correlation of .31 reported by Lefkowitz between
mothers' statements of boys' favorite programs at Grade 3 and peer-rat-
ed aggression of the boys ten years later.


108                         TELEVISION AND GROWING Up

On the basis of these findings, and taking into account their variety

and their inconsistencies, we can tentatively conclude that there is a
modest relationship between exposure to television violence and ag-
gressive behavior or tendencies, as the latter are defined in the studies at
hand. The question which must therefore be considered is what this rela-
tionship signifies. More specifically, (1) what is indicated by correlation
at the .30 level, and (2) since correlation is not in itself a demonstration
of causal relationship, what can be deduced from these data regarding
causation?

The meaning of correlation coefficients and the
basis of causal inference

Because the data of this chapter consist so largely of correlation coef-
ficients, the meaning and limitations of this type of statistic must be kept
in mind. As explained more fully within the chapter, a correlation coeffi-
cient of .30 may betoken any of several types of relationship, some of
which do and some of which do not involve the majority of the individu-
als studied. We discussed "variance accountability" in Appendix E and
cautioned against common misinterpretations of this technical term.
Finally, we noted that positive correlation coefficients indicate that a
relationship exists, but do not indicate whether that relationship is cau-
sal. In reference to the present topic, the correlation coefficients indicate
that a modest relationship exists between violence viewing and some
types of aggression. This relationship could conceivably manifest any or
all of at least three causal sequences:

--that violence viewing leads to aggression;
-that aggression leads to violence viewing;
-that both violence viewing and aggression are products of a third
variable or set of variables.

Evidence for the interpretation that violence
viewing causes aggression

Within the studies reviewed in this chapter, all of which present corre-
lational data, the two highest correlation coefficients (both at about the
level of .30) involved correlations in which earlier viewing was correlated
with later aggression ratings. In and of themselves, these data are
supportive of the interpretation that viewing leads to aggression, within
the parameters of a relationship at the .30 level; but certain technical
questions exist regarding the adequacy of the measures. In addition the
findings are equally consonant with a common origin interpretation in
which both violence viewing and aggression are conceived to stem from
an antecedent condition or set of conditions.


ADOLESCENT AGGRESSIVENESS                      109
The data were examined for "plausible mechanisms" by which vio-
lence viewing might cause aggression, if that were in fact occurring.
Three such possible mechanisms ("identification," "perceived learning
of aggression," and "linkage to real life") were identified. All of these,
however, are equally plausible components of a process in which some
antecedent condition or conditions served as the common origin of both
violence viewing and aggression.

Evidence for the common origin
interpretation

The data in the several studies were examined for findings supportive
of the common origin interpretation.

In the course of this examination, several "third variables" were not-
ed. While neither explaining nor accounting for the relationship between
violence viewing and aggression, these variables identified subgroups of
the population in which that relationship was variously weaker and
stronger. However, the findings in reference to these variables were not
consistent across studies: in two studies, for example, the relationship
between violence viewing and aggression was found to be as strong or
stronger for girls than it was for boys, while in another study virtually no
relationship was found for girls.

A number of candidate common origin variables were identified:
preexisting levels of aggression, underlying personality factors, and a
number of aspects of parental attitudes and behavior. Data on "family"
variables related to parental control of television viewing, parental inter-
pretation of television violence, parental affection, parental punishment,
parental emphasis on nonaggression, and types of parent-child commu-
nication patterns.

Of this group of candidate common origin variables, several failed to
operate statistically in a manner consonant with common origin interpre-
tations. Others have not been analyzed sufficiently to permit meaningful
inferences about the possibility that they are common origin variables.
At least two, "parental emphasis on nonaggression" and "family com-
munication patterns," have operated in ways consonant with such an
interpretation, but the pertinent data are as yet too limited to validate
common origin status for either one.

The common origin interpretation remains viable, however, despite
the fact that the candidate variables here observed, and as here meas-
ured. do not completely explain or nullify the observed relationship
between violence viewing and aggression. Improved measures, includ-
ing indices which represent combinations of antecedent conditions,
might possibly change the picture. In addition, there is need for further
and more refined investigation of the role played by personality factors
and by family and peer attitudes and behaviors.


110                          TELEVISION AND GROWING UP

Conclusion

The studies reviewed in this chapter indicate that a modest relation-
ship exists between the viewing of violence on television and aggressive
tendencies. Because all of the studies present correlational data, defini-
tive conclusions about causal relationships cannot be drawn. The evi-
dence reviewed here is consonant both with the interpretation that vio-
lence viewing leads to aggression to a limited degree and among a limited
number of young people, and with the interpretation that both the view-
ing and the aggression are products of an as yet unidentified third varia-
ble. The data are also consonant with the interpretation that both these,
processes occur simultaneously.


Chapter 8

Current Knowledge and
Questions for Future
    Research

In this brief closing chapter we shall try to do two things: draw togeth-
er the evidence from laboratory studies of children's responses to filmed
violence (reviewed in Chapter 6) with the evidence from field surveys of
television viewing and aggressive behavior (reviewed in Chapter 7). and
identify remaining gaps in knowledge which future research should ad-
dress if we are to know with confidence what television viewing does to
affect the development of children.

INDICATIONS FROM THE DATA

The best predictor of later aggressive tendencies in some studies is the
existence of earlier aggressive tendencies, whose origins may lie in fami-
ly and other environmental influences. Patterns of communication with-
in the family and patterns of punishment of young children seem to re-
late, in ways that are as yet poorly understood, both to television view-
ing and to aggressive behavior. The possible role of mass media in very
early acquisition of aggressive tendencies remains unknown. Future
research should concentrate on the impact of media material on very
young children.

While the data are by no means wholly consistent or conclusive, there
is evidence that a modest relationship does exist between the viewing of

111


112                         TELEVISION AND GROWING UP

violence and aggressive behavior. The correlational evidence from field
studies is amenable to either of two interpretations: that the viewing of
violence causes the aggressive behavior, or that both the viewing and
the aggression are joint products of some other common source. Several
findings reviewed in Chapter 7 can be cited to sustain the hypothesis that
viewing of violent television has a causal relation to aggressive behav-
ior, though neither individually nor collectively are the findings conclu-
sive. First, we note that, among the correlations of violence viewing
with aggressive behavior, two of the strongest ones, on the order of -30,
are between earlier viewing patterns and later aggressiveness; both of
these findings, however, involve methodological problems and could be
explained by operation of a "third variable" related to preexisting con-
ditions.
Second, the experimental studies reviewed in Chapter 6 provide some
additional evidence bearing on this issue. Those studies contain indica-
tions that, under certain limited conditions, television viewing may lead
to an increase in aggressive behavior. The evidence is clearest in highly
controlled laboratory studies and considerably weaker in studies con-
ducted under more natural conditions. Although some questions have
been raised as to whether the behavior observed in the laboratory stud-
ies can be called "aggressive" in the consensual sense of the term, the
studies point to two mechanisms by which children might be led from
watching television to aggressive behavior: the mechanism of imitation,
which is well established as part of the behavioral repertoire of children
in general; and the mechanism of incitement, which may apply only to
those children who are predisposed to be susceptible to this influence.
There is some evidence that incitement may follow nonviolent as well as
violent materials, and that this incitement may lead to either prosocial or
aggressive behavior, as determined by the opportunities offered in the
experiment. However, the fact that some children behave more aggres-
sively in experiments after seeing violent films is well established.
The experimental evidence does not suffer from the ambiguities that
characterize the correlational data with regard to third variables, since
children in the experiments are assigned in ways that attempt to control
such variables. However, the experimental findings are weak in various
ways, and not wholly consistent from one study to another. Neverthe-
less, they provide some suggestive evidence in favor of the interpreta-
tion that viewing violence on television is conducive to an increase in
aggressive behavior, although it must be emphasized that the causal
sequence is very likely applicable only to some children who are predis-
posed in this direction.
Thus, there is a convergence of the fairly substantial experimental
evidence for short-run causation of aggression among some children by
viewing violence on the screen and the much less certain evidence from
field studies that extensive violence viewing precedes some long-run


CURRENT KNOWLEDGE, FUTURE RESEARCH                113

manifestations of aggressive behavior. This convergence of the two
types of evidence constitutes some preliminary indication of a causal
relationship, but a good deal of research remains to be done before one
can have confidence in these conclusions.

The field studies and the laboratory studies also converge on a number
of further points.

First, there is evidence that any sequence by which viewing television
violence causes aggressive behavior is most likely applicable only to
some children who are predisposed in that direction. While imitative
behavior is shown by most children in experiments on that mechanism
of behavior, the mechanism of being incited to aggressive behavior by
seeing violent films shows up in the behavior only of some children who
were found in several experimental studies to be previously high in ag-
gression. Likewise, the correlations found in the field studies between
extensive viewing of violent material and acting in aggressive ways seem
generally to depend on the behavior of a small proportion of the respon-
dents, who were identified in some studies aas previously high in aggres-
sion.

Second, there are suggestions in both sets of studies that how children
respond to violent film material is affected by the context in which it is
presented. Such elements as parental explanations, the favorable or
unfavorable outcome of the violence, and whether it is seen as fantasy
or reality may make a difference. Generalizations about all violent con-
tent are likely to be misleading.

Thus, the two sets of findings converge in three respects: a prelimi-
nary and tentative indication of a causal relation between viewing vio-
lence on television and aggressive behavior; an indication that any such
causal relation operates only on some children (who are predisposed to
be aggressive); and an indication that it operates only in some environ-
mental contexts. Such tentative and limited conclusions are not very sat-
isfying. They represent substantially more knowledge than we had two
years ago, but they leave many questions unanswered. We turn now to
review the questions that still need answering.

FOCUS ON THE FUTURE

The research reviewed here has uniformly been sharply focused on
exposure to televised violence on the one hand, and on aggressive tend-
encies on the other. The narrowness of this focus is not surprising, but
exposure to televised violence does not exist in a vacuum. The narrow-
ness of concentration in these studies has severely hampered the inter-
pretation of results. Some of the most important questions that this
committee would like to answer are relegated to the realm of future re-
search.


114                          TELEVISION AND GROWING UP

The research to date has whetted rather than satisfied our desire to
increase our understanding of the complex psychological and social in-
fluences leading to antisocial tendencies. On the basis of the findings we
have reviewed in this report, we recommend that future research con-
centrate in the following areas:
(1) Television in the context of other mass media. It is reasonable to
expect that there is a positive relationship between an individual's use of
television and his use of other mass media. As indicated earlier, when a
stimulus exists in a constellation of highly related stimuli, any member
of the constellation can, if studied in isolation, receive credit for the res-
ponses evoked by the entire constellation. So far, the attempts to isolate
exposure to television have resulted in possible confounding of attribu-
tion.
(2) Mass media in the context of the total environment, particularly
the home environment. If the analogy is not too far-fetched, we would
recall that "high fever" is seldom if ever listed as a cause of death; yet if
high fever were studied in the same isolated way that exposure to televi-
sion has been studied, we might reach some startling conclusions. The
importance of developmental history and social environmental context
is emphasized in the testimony of Federal Communications Commission
Chairman Dean Burch before the Subcommittee on Communications of
the Senate Commerce Committee. On September 28, 1971, Chairman
Burch posed the question: "To what extent does what the young viewer
brings to the TV screen determine what he carries away-which is an-
other way of asking where the television ranks among all the other as-
pects of a child's environment?"
Indeed, the studies `reviewed in Chapter 6 suggest several specific
directions for further exploring the relationship between television and
aggression. First, identify the predispositional characteristics of those
subgroups of children who display an increase in aggressive behavior in
response to televised violence. Second, ascertain at what ages different
reactions occur. Third, check on the moderating influence of labeling,
contextual cues, and other factors under the control of television produc-
ers which may reduce the likelihood that predisposed children will re-
act adversely to televised violence. Fourth, further investigate the possi-
bility that content other than violent content may increase the likelihood
of subsequent aggressiveness, the possibility that violent content may
instigate other behavior besides aggressiveness, and the applicability of
such findings to preschool children, youngsters, and adolescents. Final-
ly, we must call attention once again to the gap in longitudinal research
on the effects of television programs on children. This gap needs to be
filled before we can learn something dependable about the long-term
effects of repeated exposure to standard television fare on the personali-
ty development of the child.


CURRENT KNOWLEDGE, FUTURE RESEARCH                115

(3) Functional and dysfunctional aggressive behavior. The lines
which separate violence, hostility, aggression, and vigorous competition
tend to become blurred in studies of the kind we have reviewed. Certain-
ty, our society does not assign negative value to all these concepts; al-
though traditional sex roles may be breaking down, there are few boys
who are not taught to "stand up for your rights and defend yourself."
There are those who argue that the realities of life require a certain set or
readiness for aggressive behavior. The study of values, mores, and the
realities of adaptation in this area would provide an important backdrop
for our interest in media effects.
(4) Modeling and imitation of prosocial behavior. In our concentra-
tion on potential antisocial effects, we have seriously neglected any bal-
ancing effect that may occur. Perhaps this question ought to be more
broadly stated as a cost-benefit problem, involving a balance between
potential damage and potential benefit. In -the current trend toward
rejection of alleged overpermissiveness, are we risking a swing of the
pendulum all the way to overprotection and overmanipulation? To state
this position another way: we want children to climb trees, even though
it would be easy to prove that tree climbing causes broken legs.
(5) Teaching and Iearning of values about violence: We have noted
and deplored the paucity of research about the manner in which values
with respect to many areas of behavior, including violence, are transmit-
ted, and about the role played by television and other mass media in this
communication. In the long run, societal values are shaped by a great
variety of environmental forces and institutions; television programs
may contribute a great deal or only a small amount to the process. It is
conceivable that prolonged exposure of large populations to television
violence may have very little immediate effect on the crime rate, but that
such exposure may interact with other influences in the society to pro-
duce increased casualness about violence which permits citizens to re-
gard with increased indifference actual suffering in their own or other
societies, and to reflect that indifference in major political and economic
decisions. Research may indicate that such fears are unfounded, but the
research needs to be done.
(6) Symbolic functions of violent conffict in fiction. The experience of
humanistic scholars suggests that, for adults at least, violent content in
fiction is sometimes a vehicle for presenting to a general audience "mes-
sages " about important social and cultural issues. The authors and pro-
ducers need not be fully aware that they are doing this. The Oedipus plays
are perhaps the best-known example from the humanities. They have
widely been held to be not merely "violence on stage," but also power-
ful statements in a symbolic medium about pervasive psychological or
cultural conflicts. To suppose that plays about the tragic life of King
Oedipus were significant to the early Greeks merely because people


116                            TELEVISION AND GROWING UP

liked stories about violence would be simplistic. It would likewise be
far-fetched to accuse the Greek theater of inciting Greek warriors to
repeated assaults on Troy by exposing them to episodes of meaningless
violence.
There is a considerable body of literature on the symbolic meanings of
primitive (and not-so-primitive) myths and legends, which often are ex-
tremely violent. Anthropological literature supports the contention that,
whatever else it may do, such folk literature communicates conventional
social values and moral standards, and also provides folk interpretations
of the pervasive conflicts and problems of life in a given society at a par-
ticular point in its history. It would be desirable to look upon television
drama and cartoon programs-crude as they may be-as folk literature
in this sense. It would be important, in order more fully to understand
the role of television in American life, to investigate the latent symbolic
"messages" that even violent television plays and cartoons may convey
over and above the content of individual scenes.
These are but a few examples of the kinds of research that have been
discussed at meetings of the Advisory Committee; for the good reasons
described earlier, little attention has been paid thus far to the contextual,
developmental, and societal variables. It is our sincere hope that, as per-
tinent research continues, these more fundamental questions will be at-
tacked.


Chapter 9

The Unfinished Agenda

The committee has not had an opportunity 10 process this chapter in the way in which it
has dealt with the foregoing sectrons. theretore, since we have not been able to subject
this material to the same procedures of detailed review and discussion we have applied to
the other chapters, the material to follow represents, to a greater extent than the forego-
ing, personal opinions and points of view rather than a formal position of the committee.
However, the committee endorses the spirit and intent of these concerns as representing a
significant broadening of the perspective of this report, and feels that even though they
have been incomplerely worked over by the group they should be made available to the
readers of this report.

FURTHER NOTES ON COMMITTEE PROCESS

When a committee as diversely composed as this one embarks upon a
project as global as studying and reporting upon "the effects of televi-
sion violence on children," it will scout a vast terrain. Not all of the
material and ideas encountered will be thoroughly explored, and at the
end of its tenure many important issues will remain which have been less
than fully examined. While the reasons for this uncompleted business
are many, some of the ideas and observations we generated but did not
fully develop are of sufficient importance to justify reporting them even
in their less than fully considered condition. Also, a few additional
comments are in order about the nature and the dynamics of our work
and the psychological processes which determine partially the outcome
of this and any committee's work.

We have remarked several times in earlier sections of this report that
there is a conspicuous paucity of information about the influence of tele-
vision on the psychological growth and development of young children.

117


118                         TELEVISION AND GROWING UP

One of the conclusions of our report notes the high probability that some
factor (or factors) in early childhood experience substantially shapes the
aggressive potentiality of most (or many) children, which may then be
later influenced in any of several ways by the ongoing effects of violence
viewing on television. This conclusion is no surprise to clinicians work-
ing in the psychotherapeutic professions; indeed, it would be an a priori
hypothesis for most such persons. In the early and the ongoing discus-
sions of this committee, this probability was frequently noted, and the
strong recommendation to explore such a hypothesis was the subject of
much committee discussion. Nevertheless, only a small proportion of
our research focused on this crucial area. This fact is a reflection of the
life history of this committee and the way in which it was organized and
functioned,
When a committee like this is formed, it is usually under the aegis of
some political body, such as Congress, which urgently desires an answer
to some question far too complex for easy solution. Such committees
are usually organized in haste, staffed under nearly emergency pressure,
and sent upon their work mission with unrealistically short deadIines.
Not surprisingly, the work product will usually be below expectations
and less fruitful than a somewhat more deliberate course of action could
have provided.
If asked to do so, the multidisciplinary experts who comprise the
membership of this commitee could have rendered a sophisticated set of
"expert opinions" on the effects of television violence on children, with
no additional research work whatever. While their views would have
lacked the reassuring quality lent by "hard" scientific research data,
they still would have warranted substantial weight. We described in
Chapter 1 the course which our committee followed. What alternative
strategy might have been followed? Let us suggest a proposal for future
projects which might make them potentially more valuable.
After an advisory committee for the project is selected, sufficient time
should be allowed for ir to involve itself in committee process and to
explore adequately the multiple views of committee members. This
would engender reasonably clear images of the kind of work which they
wished to carry out. At that point in time and not before, the kind of
staff selection and hiring should be carried out which would facilitate
implementation of all of the committee's goals.
After a committee's research is completed and the results are in, the
second important logistical need is to assure the committee adequate
time to subject that data fully to the "committee process." There should
be sufficient time to enable the committee to thrash out thoroughly the
complex and controversial material they have obtained through their
research, in the context of the various professional viewpoints repre-
sented in the committee membership. Such deliberation inevitably gen-
erates useful ideas which reflect the varied insights and skills of the sev-


UNFINISHED AGENDA                            119

eral disciplines. However, such a process is slow and very time-con-
suming. The necessary time for such a process has rarely been available
to committees concerned with important public issues.

SOCIALIZATION AND REPRESSED BEHAVIOR: SOME
      RELATIONSHIPS TO TELEVISION

In order for human beings to live in social groups, group members
must share their common interests, beliefs, and communication, and
they must attempt to exclude from the group setting behavior which is
disruptive to the group. Every social group makes value judgments
about hostile behavior, sexual arousal, elimination of body wastes, dis-
quieting excitement, and inadequate respect for group values, and when
such things are defined as forbidden, they must be repressed and exclud-
ed from direct expression in the group by all who are mature enough to
be socialized. Repressions of this kind constitute a part of the learning,
conditioning, socializing, and acculturating processes experienced by
every individual.

In sports, entertainment, and fine arts forms such as literature, drama,
art, music, and dance, repressed group-disruptive impulses can be
permitted expression within the group context in symbolic form. For
this reason, among others, television viewers may be strongly attracted
to content which portrays conflict and violence. The relationships be-
tween television viewers' interests and their repressed behavior have
received very little attention in this committee's deliberations or in anyI
other setting.

As we have noted in Chapter 4, persons making decisions about tele-
vision program content, like all other people, may be largely uncon-
scious of some psychological pressures, inside or outside their minds,
which influence their behavior by inhibiting or reinforcing one pattern of
judgment or another. By selection of content, by omission of content, or
by minor distortion, all taking place on an unconscious basis, a news
reporter can record what is in fact a "faithful" record of what he him-
self sees and hears, even though he may be much in error. The report-
er's preexisting set programs his perception so that, literally, he tends to
comprehend only that which fits what is already in his mind. Sensitive
viewers may respond aggressively to underlying biases and prejudiced
opinions which they might perceive in the content, even when the re.
porter is completely unaware of their existence.

Since the media compete with one another for the attention and in.
volvement of the audience, they must choose emotionally involving con
tent. The more emotion and conflict connected with an issue, the more
newsworthy that issue is, and by the same token the more are false be
liefs apt to be evoked in relation to it. Unconscious identification am


120                       TELEVISION AND GROWING UP

projection mechanisms from early childhood, as well as many vaguely
conscious attitudes and interests which impute "good" and "right" to
one's own views and "evil" and "wrong" to outsiders, may be impor-
tant determinants of viewer responses to television content. It is quite
possible that television can arouse unconscious responses in adults that
can facilitate violent behavior much later in time. This possibility should
be explored by appropriate research methods, including longitudinal
case studies with psychoanalytic methodology.

ON OUR STEREOTYPES OF WHATCONSTITUTES AN
          ADULT OR A CHILD

We generally discuss children and adults as if they functioned through
simple, one-tracked systems, and fail to perceive mature reactions in
children and immature reactions in adults. We do not often talk of "nor-
mal childishness" -that is, the child-parts of each person which remain
throughout life, and which may come into dominance under certain cir-
cumstances every day. Television producers are generally aware of this
emotional mix and cater to all of its parts in their competitive program-
ming. Likely as not, if a person is deeply enjoying a program, some
child-part of himself is much engaged emotionally, even while a more
"mature" part, critical of that indulgence, may be encouraging attention
to "more appropriate" interests and concerns. Viewed from this
perspective, the committee might have included adults in its charge by
formulating the question: What is the effect of televised violence upon
the child-part of adult viewers? In this connection, both the Cantor and
the Baldwin and Lewis papers note that sometimes producers respond
to network pressures and networks give in to audience wishes, regard-
less of other judgmental considerations.

TELEVISION IN THE CONTEXT OF OUR NATIONAL
             ETHICS

In our quest for more ideal social structures, we have developed in the
United States a basic philosophy and many laws which observe, honor,
and seek to protect certain basic rights defined for all human beings.
However, in the interpretation, administration, and living out of these
philosophies and laws, we have employed sociopolitical processes1
which regularly favor and idealize some people while devaluing and ne-
glecting others. Despite the aspirations for a more human society held by
some of the founders of this country, the institution of slavery, racism,
various forms of classism, and discrimination based upon sex also
emerged.


UNFINISHED AGENDA                            121

The idealization of some persons and the denigration of others charac-
terized this process. Even inequitable distribution of resources and
power may be more palatable if each person's worth as a human being is
acknowledged as equal to that of any other person. Affection and sup-
port for the social order, and trust and belief in it, are widespread and
strong when this equal worth is reflected (1) in mutuality of considera-
tion, (2) in equality of opportunity for health and liberty (as long as it
does not infringe upon the health and liberty of others), and (3) in the
equal application of laws to all individuals and groups. These desiderata
have been sought after and partially achieved under various kinds of
governments and in differently structured social orders from time to
time, but never in any lasting way.

In the normal behavior of children with their parents, we can observe
an example of this occurrence. Between the ages of three and seven,
many children transiently select one parent as the preferred one with
whom they are primarily affectionate, while the other parent may be
renounced and related to in a competitive or aggressive way. The differ-
ence in the nature of the attachment does not reduce the importance or
worth of either parent to these children, although there may be a clear
preference to be with one parent rather than the other. Moreover, the
children identify with, empathize with, and have some fondness for the
parent toward whom there is a more competitive feeling. Although feel-
ings tend to be split between the two parents and a preference devel-
oped, usually there is no dehumanization, and the object of aggression
retains importance as a human being of equal worth and importance.

When people form groups and relate to one another as representatives
of groups, affectionate feelings are freely directed toward members of
one's own group, while aggressive feelings are easily diverted toward
outsiders. However, when this happens, humanization of one's own
group members and dehumanization of the outsiders is a frequent con-
comitant. Such dehumanization offers rationalization potential and also
reduces associated guilt. This facilitates the exploitation, neglect, vio-
lence, or other aggressive behavior which may then be directed toward
those outsiders. Any perception of these exploited victims as humans
with whom we can identify, empathize, or feel fondness, increases our
personal discomfort and reduces our freedom to exploit or do violence
against them. These psychological factors are extremely relevant to tele-
vised violence, since whenever victims are devalued or dehumanized,
violence toward them may become more acceptable or even endorsed.

Antisocial acts may occur among human beings from any group and
from any walk of life, and within the context of tragedy and conflict they
always do occur. Since special circumstances in the lives of some indi-
viduals or groups can reinforce antisocial behavior, it becomes impor-
tant to identify and change those circumstances if we wish to alter that


122                         TELEVISION ANDGROWING UP

kind of behavior. Whether presenting drama or news, it would therefore
seem important for television decision-makers to convey, insofar as
possible, the human contexts and conflict-filled human circumstances to
engender, rather than discourage, humanitarian responses to the plight
or behavior of other human beings.

Television should seek to avoid presenting any human beings as ani-
mal-like, without conscience, or without concern for the persons they
care for or who care for them, since to do so endorses and facilitates the
dehumanization and destruction of the victims of that treatment. Overt
or subtle cues about the victims' characteristics may reinforce in the
viewer's mind images which he identifies and dislikes in himself. He
then represses, renounces, and imposes them upon some dehumanized
outsider. Insofar as television presents victims with which viewers can-
not identify and empathize, it may encourage viewers to accept and
endorse violence as a simplistic solution to the conflict portrayed. Inso-
far as television more realistically presents both human beings and hu-
man conflicts in their complex human form rather than in simplistic de-
humanized form, it could well offer opportunity for more full experience
as a human being. While there might be less pleasure and more conflict,
more humanity would be encouraged in viewers.

This view is not unique. In fact, it parallels a view expressed in the
report of the National Commission on the Causes and Prevention of Vi-
olence on "Violence in Television Entertainment Programs." The
Commission noted that the code of the National Association of Broad-
casters prohibits the presentation of alarming and offensive material,
including emphasis upon the pain, helplessness, despair, and uncomfort-
able conflicts in persons involved in violent interactions. Portraying the
humanity of perpetrators and of victims in a manner which permits
viewers to identify with and vicariously live through their experience is
not often done. The Commission points out that part of this "sanitizing"
process results in only rare portrayal of violent interactions between in-
timates, although this type of violence is actually quite common in real
life. The hurts delivered to one's loved ones are seldom portrayed, while
conflict between representatives of different groups is emphasized. The
Commission report contained a speculation that if viewers were exposed
to the horror and painful results of violence, it might sensitize them to
their own potential for harming or being harmed.

A MORE HUMAN DEFINITION OF VIOLENCE

In order to define violence as realistically, as ethically, and with as
much psychological accuracy as possible, the definition should be
broadened to include the experience of its victims. Everyone who consi-
ders humanitarian values important should have concern about the ex-
perience of all persons who are physically or psychologically victimized
or destroyed unnecessarily.


UNFINISHEDAGENDA                            123

When deaths occur from air, water, or food pollution, or from unsafe
drugs which have been authorized. or from defective mechanical equip-
ment, the violent annihilation of human beings has been caused by the
acts of other human beings. Also, the operation of a vehicle or factory.
or the casting of a vote in Congress, or the signing of an executive order
have only rarely been defined as violence, when such acts have had vio-
lent effects on a few or a multitude of persons.
The physical and psychological violence experienced under the cir-
cumstances just described may go unrecognized when violence is de-
fined only in terms of the physical acts of perpetrators who are account-
able. In situations where responsibility and accountability are unclear, it
is essential to define violence in terms of the victims' experience if we
are not to overlook or neglect the extensive misery experienced through
such acts. When a society legislates and institutionalizes the definition
of violence in terms of victims, then all violent experience becomes a
matter of concern. When the definition reflects only accountable de-
structive behavior, much, if not most, violent experience may not even
be acknowledged.
When accountability is divided among many people, it is easy for each
individual person to avoid any sense of responsibility. When an action is
taken by an organization, a company, or a bureaucracy, decision-mak-
ing and action-taking may be so well rationalized and divided between
many levels, departments, or individuals, in a maze of interlocking
complexities, that individual responsibility and accountability are in
some respects impossible to assign. Persons in a large organization may
have no conscious awareness of its destructive effects nor of their own
personal contributions to them. The mass violence and genocide admin-
istered to six million European Jews could only have been accomplished
through such an institutional arrangement, with its own obscure individ-
ual accountability. Similarly, mass violence and slavery were imposed
upon uncounted millions of Negroes in a nation where freedom and
equality were valued. Such authorized and legitimized aggression is
usually not even seen as violence, and sometimes efforts are made to
define the perpetrators as intelligent people of good will who were mere-
ly doing their jobs according to their assignments under the laws and
codes of their day.
The ease with which a definition can be used unwittingly to justify, to
rationalize, or to obscure from our awareness vast amounts of violent
experience is apparent. It seems very possible that television has great
potential as a social force to modify progressively society's definition
and awareness of violence. Clearly, this would necessitate a marked
change in current practice, where it largely entertains and informs.
When violent real-life experiences are televised, the audience is con-
fronted with uncomfortable visual and auditory stimuli which must be
interpreted and dealt with in some manner which can ultimately reduce
discomfort. For that reason, the violence is often rationalized. justified,


124                         TELEVISION AND GROWING UP

or denied by the viewer, if perpetrated by people with whom he identi-
fies. Violence arouses sadness, indignation, rage, and urges to retaliate
or reform when it victimizes people with whom we identify. If it is over-
ly painful, we may turn it off or campaign against the televised content
which disturbes our complacency. Clearly, some of the violent content
televised in newscasts during the 1960s evoked complicated responses
of these kinds in viewers. Just as politicians believe in the value of tele-
vision, so persons who wished to direct attention to some matter about
which they were gravely concerned found that televised demonstrations
and confrontations helped to produce the interest and excitement need-
ed to attract attention. This attention and response on the part of per-
sons sympathetic to the cause, as well as those antagonistic to the cause,
enlarged the arena of confrontation, often to the point of creating a pub-
lic issue. Television became one of the principal media, along with radio
and newspapers, through which confrontations on issues could be por-
trayed in B manner which aroused widespread concern and interest.

It is a matter of record that the Civil Rights movement led by Dr. Mar-
tin Luther King, Jr., in the early 1960s was based upon mutual love, re-
spect, and consideration, equality of opportunity and correction of in-
justice in line with our most cherished national and religious ethics.
Large numbers of blacks and whites sympathized with and supported
this movement until 1965-66. Also at that time, many whites, who were
stirred from their indifference and threatened as the integration move-
ment'gathered impetus, disrupted demonstrations and precipitated vio-
lent confrontations. The strength and influence of this "White Back-
lash" countermovement became one of the factors which partially neu-
tralized the movement led by Dr. King, even as it mobilized others to
join him. The size and intensity of confrontations, and the frequency
with which violence occurred during them, converted the movement
from one of hope into one of pain, failure, and despair. The integration
movement progressively appeared'to many as a nonviable political ap-
proach to the problems of black Americans in the face of white indiffer-
ence on the one hand and "White Backlash" on the other. Such frustra-
tion and despair, fused with mounting impatience, fed into a counter-
movement of blacks referred to as the "Black Power Movement."
Black ethnic group formation, with emphasis upon development of
group integrity and strength to deal with the white strength opposing
them, began to compete with integration as a goal. This polarization
effect became an important factor in the ongoing struggle for integra-
tion, as well as the continued pressure for segregation. The swift pas-
sage of information about this swirl of conflicted emotions and ideolo-
gies can surely be attributed in large part to the communication efficien-
cy of the television medium.

The development by blacks of forceful responses as a group when
they perceived unjust force being used against a black person led to
remarkably violent interactions between large numbers of whites and


UNFINISHED AGENDA                            I25

blacks in 1966-68. These violent interactions, together with the violence
of the war in Vietnam and a series of assassinations of leaders with inte-
grative orientations, emphasized with clarity that the dynamics of power
between polarized groups led only to more violence. Since 1968, integra-
tive activity has been undertaken with renewed effort because further
polarization seemed nonviable. Conflict between polarized groups has
been contained and undermined by the invocation and organization of
greater power to manage confrontations and other polarized situations.
The dynamics and ethics of power continue to be operative between in-
dividuals and groups with conflicting interests, but they are modulated
by stronger forces which manage conflict in our society. Conflicts be-
tween management and labor, men and women, whites and red people,
English-speaking and Spanish-speaking people, educators and students,
and the rich and the poor have been analogous to those between whites
and blacks in their dynamics and central issues.

Television has been unparalleled as an instrument of mass communi-
cation in its capability for engaging the interests, feelings, attitudes, be-
liefs, and behavior both of the participants in telecasting and of viewers.
The dynamic interplay of the forces involved in each important social
issue can be readily observed in television news, dramatic, and enter-
tainment content. Moreover, since television is perceived as an instru-
ment with potentially powerful impact upon the outcome of social, polit-
ical, and economic issues, it has become an instrument which individu-
als and groups seek to influence and manipulate in their own interests.

The excitement and entertainment potential of televised violence has
engaged the attention of both viewers and programmers. This reality has
become a "cause" for many, and has stimulated general concern. On
the other hand, the discomfort of audiences and television programmers
with the plight of victims and with injustice constitutes another reality
that leaves us with a problem. It seems very possible that television
could stimulate a more general awareness of the plight of many victims
whose needs now go unattended. Moreover, if an orderly means were
found for bringing attention to these victims, so that they might receive
appropriate consideration and concerned response, it might be unneces-
sary for them to rely upon social conflict in order to get attention. Also,
it should not be forgotten that when conflict is used to gain attention and
interest, the underlying cause may go unattended as social concern is
shifted and focused on management of the disruption. Since access to
media also follows the dynamics of power and influence, it follows that
by comparison most victims in society are relatively without power and
without influence. How, then, can victims gain access to television and
other media so that their plight may receive the attention and appropri-
ate human concern which is their due?

Television entertainment may contribute to insensitivity. In such pro-
grams the primary victims seldom exhibit the repulsive physical conse-
quences of violence, and the effects of. such violence on secondary vic-