I feel very saddened by the amount of violence, bad language and generally unsuitable viewing material on TV these days.
I try and avoid letting my girls watch early evening TV whenever possible, and when they do watch any I always stay with them to try and explain, and counter with an alternative peaceful scenario, what they have seen.

We watch about 6-7 hours of tv a WEEK in our house, most of that childrens tv.

Violence begets violence - I firmly subscribe to the belief that impressionable youths (especially young men) absorb and mimic behaviour they have witnessed on tv and in films.

Unfortunately we are in a downward spiral now - I can't see any way that there could be a swing back to a more peaceable existance.

yes

---

by SPIKE
yes

---

'Yes' to which question?

Personally i have no problem with most violence. i watch BTVS so how coud i?

I do think it can affect people though and make them more prone to violence. Perhaps being a woman i am immune to this impulse (huge steriotype there but it could be true).

The only thing i dont like watching is cruelty. There's a scene is cassino that turns my stomach. i will never watch that film again. Se7ev is alother atrocious film (even though most of it's violence is implied, not seen).

In other words i guess i'm OK with a good old fashioned shoot 'em up (like die hard or Buffy, where no one is real) but when the characters become "real" (for want of a better word) i dont like it.

---

by Cat
In other words i guess i'm OK with a good old fashioned shoot 'em up (like die hard or Buffy, where no one is real) but when the characters become "real" (for want of a better word) i dont like it.

---

Well no, you're not supposed to like it, that's entirely the point.

A question - do you think that 'realistically' portrayed violence, with apparent consequences for the victim and/or the perpetrator, is more likely to encourage actual violence, or contribute to the desensitizing effect, than the stylised Hollywood kind? I think it's the opposite.

I got into a little debate elsewhere on the site when someone suggested that they felt that, in Season 6, Buffy was no longer suitable for their kids. I would argue that it hasn't really been suitable for children since, at least, midway through Season 2. Sex, violence, swearing, it's got the lot...

---

Incandenza

Does this worry you?

---

Yes it worrys me that film/Tv producers/writers feel that they need to use violence more and more now to gain ratings

---

Will the constant depiction of violence lead to a more violent society or is television increasingly violent because it reflects events in the real world?

---

The world has always been a very violent place, we just "read" and "see" more about it as we now have Tv and Newspapers,
I do however believe that Violence on Tv/Flim can encourage people to be more violent, but only if they have that tendancy to be anyway, and what better way to find out just how to kill/rape/torture someone than in the comfort of our own homes

---

by In a State of Dan


A question - do you think that 'realistically' portrayed violence, with apparent consequences for the victim and/or the perpetrator, is more likely to encourage actual violence, or contribute to the desensitizing effect, than the stylised Hollywood kind? I think it's the opposite.

---

I totaly agree.

---

I got into a little debate elsewhere on the site when someone suggested that they felt that, in Season 6, Buffy was no longer suitable for their kids. I would argue that it hasn't really been suitable for children since, at least, midway through Season 2. Sex, violence, swearing, it's got the lot...

---

Slightly off topic but I stopped my kids from watching anything past season 1, not that they are really interested in it, although saying that there is far worse violence on a lot of the cartoons they watch, and maybe cartoon violence is worse as it "never" portrays the cartoons dying. Unlike Buffy and the like.

"Violence in the Media.
Okay, so, the Attourney General says there's too much violence on TV and that should stop. But even if you took out all the violent shows, you could still see the news. So until mankind is peaceful enough not to have violence on the news, there's no point taking it out of shows that need it for entertainment value.
Thankyou."

---

by Cat
Se7en is alother atrocious film (even though most of it's violence is implied, not seen).

In other words i guess i'm OK with a good old fashioned shoot 'em up (like die hard or Buffy, where no one is real) but when the characters become "real" (for want of a better word) i dont like it.

---

I think Seven is a fantastic movie with a far less desensitizing effect than (for example) Die Hard.

Henchmen (for want of a better word) are simply there to problematize the hero's jounrey to his eventual goal and it is considered acceptable for him to shoot, stab, punch and kick his way through them with narry a thought or twinge of guilt. In so doing, these people are shown to be no more than objects to the hero's will. This, it seems to me is what encourages the perception that violence is acceptable because it discourages empathy.

---

by Sweet Sange
The world has always been a very violent place, we just "read" and "see" more about it as we now have Tv and Newspapers,

---

There is a theory that says films (specifically horror films in this instance) have *had* to become more gratuitously violent simply to enable them to compete with what can be seen on the news everyday.

---

by Incandenza
Does this worry you? Will the constant depiction of violence lead to a more violent society or is television increasingly violent because it reflects events in the real world?

---

I think people are violent... NOT programms. People don't watch violence on Tv and then think, hmmm... might be a good idea. Some people are just violent. You could take away every violent picture, video and words, people would STILL be violent, I think this should be emphasised, not have Tony (insert swear word) Blair's idiotic opinion all people are good, they're not.

To prove my point (as if I need to), in the last year, the two most horrific, violent things I've seen were:-

1) people throwing themselves out of the Twin Towers, knowing they will die.

2) the old lady, battered on her door-step in Briton. The picture every newspapers showed, made me feel sick... Tv has NEVER done that!

---

by KieranFrost
(quotes)

I think people are violent... NOT programms. People don't watch violence on Tv and then think, hmmm... might be a good idea. Some people are just violent. You could take away every violent picture, video and words, people would STILL be violent, I think this should be emphasised, not have Tony (insert swear word) Blair's idiotic opinion all people are good, they're not.

---

There have been hundreds of cases where people have copyied violence they have seen on screen, I agree to do this there must be something in these people to make them do it , but IMO violence on tv/flims can and does have an effect on people.

---

To prove my point (as if I need to), in the last year, the two most horrific, violent things I've seen were:-

1) people throwing themselves out of the Twin Towers, knowing they will die.

---

Not violence Panic

---

2) the old lady, battered on her door-step in Briton. The picture every newspapers showed, made me feel sick... Tv has NEVER done that!

---

We will never know , but what makes anyone commit such a foul crime

---

by Sweet-Sange
We will never know , but what makes anyone commit such a foul crime

---

Not Tv, that's for damn sure. These people attacked an old lady, on her door step, for her chips, battering and bruising her face. NO-ONE can tell me Tv had any link to that, the people were just born that way, they didn't learn it from Arnie or some programm.

---

by Sweet-Sange
There have been hundreds of cases where people have copyied violence they have seen on screen, I agree to do this there must be something in these people to make them do it , but IMO violence on tv/flims can and does have an effect on people.

---

To date no-one has managed to prove a concrete link between tv and violence that I am aware of, let alone find hundreds of cases.

I have heard it said that TV doesn't make peaceful people violent so much as it gives violent people ideas.

---

by Incandenza
I have heard it said that TV doesn't make peaceful people violent so much as it gives violent people ideas.

---

That sounds pretty feasible actually.

Ok I thought I do a bit of research on Violence on TV and the effects it can have.

Children in Britain watch an average of three to fours hours of television daily. Television can be a powerful influence in developing value systems and shaping behaviour. Unfortunately, much of today's television programming is violent. Hundreds of studies of the effects of violence on television have found that children and teenagers may:

* become "immune" to the horror of violence
* gradually accept violence as a way to solve problems
* imitate the violence they observe on television
* identify with certain characters, victims and/or victimisers

Extensive viewing of television violence by children causes greater aggressiveness. Sometimes, watching a single violent program can increase aggressiveness. Children who view shows in which violence is realistic, frequently repeated or unpunished, are more likely to imitate what they see. Children with emotional, behavioural, learning or impulse control problems may be more easily influenced by TV violence. The impact of TV violence may be immediately evident in the child's behaviour or may surface years later, and young people can even be affected when the family atmosphere shows no tendency toward violence.

While TV violence is not the only cause of aggressive or violent behaviour, it is clearly a significant factor.


Also I found a few articles
ccp.ucla.edu/Webreport94/ib.htm
www.parenthood.com/parent_cfmfiles/pros.cfm?n=1861&target=
www.aacap.org/press%5Freleases/2000/0726.htm

Infact the list of studies done regarding TV violence and the effects it has is amazing, and the amount of reported crimes that have included imitating violence on TV. No we cant say 100% that watching a violent Film caused someone to commit a crime, but the studies done and the conclusions drawn seem to indicate that violence on TV can have a dramatic effect on how and why some people commit some crimes.

Ah the old “life imitating art” argument.

For me, it comes down to whether the violence portrayed is appropriate. Most studies concerning the imitation of violent acts on TV focus on children; and a certain level of imitation has occasionally been shown. (For example, the now infamous Tango advert that led to a spate of “ear-clappings” in playgrounds and was subsequently removed from circulation.) However, the extent of copycat behaviour, which is minimal where it exists at all, is often vastly exaggerated – for example, the utterly groundless link the tabloids made between Child Play 3 and the James Bulger killing – and the response to this is often equally irrational.

What would I consider appropriate? For children, it depends on the material in question, and the individual; certain restrictions obviously need to be set, but can be flexible, taking into account the child’s maturity and ability to separate fantasy and reality. As for adult entertainment, here any firm proof of imitation is virtually non-existent, and balancing freedom of artistic expression against the perceived “danger” posed to society, I firmly support allowing adults to see virtually whatever they wish. Those with a strong enough propensity to violence will likely act on it regardless of media images.

I certainly don’t want to be in a society that proscribes the likes of Se7en and Crash (that movie being a perfect example of baseless tabloid hysteria, especially the nauseating Daily Mail), bans books such as Last Exit to Brooklyn, or prevents programmes such as BBC2’s Taboo – a serious examination of the taboos society holds, which included some graphic violence to illustrate its point and contained a taboo word; when quoting from Henry Miller’s Tropic of Cancer – from being broadcast.

One question I'd be interested to find out is why people feel the need for such graphic detail in Films/TV?

Do you think that the same "enjoyment" wouldn't be achieved from watching a flim that left more to your imagination?

Or do you feel that you have to see all the gory details? and if so why?
For an Example:
I found that certain scenes from Hannible just made me feel sick and certainly didn't add to my enjoyment of the film.

IMO the scariest horror films have always been the ones were they haven't decided to show me everything, the old Hammer films certainly get me on the edge of my seat without the need for blood and guts.

---

by Incandenza
(quotes)

I think Seven is a fantastic movie with a far less desensitizing effect than (for example) Die Hard.

---

I never said it wasnt a good film, it is. I just cant watch it.

I also think that films like Die Hard, where the characters are clearly fictional dont de-sensitise us. We all know that snapping someones neck isnt that easy and the bad guys are such terrible shots, it couldnt possibly be a true film. We dont feel anything for the dead people becaus they arent "real" to us.

Its the filsm where characters are "real" that we have to worry about. When we empathise with their pain again and again it looses it's affect on us and as such, looses it's impact in real life IMHO.

---

by Yvonne
But even if you took out all the violent shows, you could still see the news. So until mankind is peaceful enough not to have violence on the news, there's no point taking it out of shows that need it for entertainment value.

---

From what i can remember when i saw this item on the news (yes i do watch it sometimes! ) it said that the News on TV was one of the worst (if not the worst?? ) for voilence.

---

by Incandenza
There is a theory that says films (specifically horror films in this instance) have *had* to become more gratuitously violent simply to enable them to compete with what can be seen on the news everyday.

---

The good old 'chicken and the egg' debate .....



(Edited by Bryany 26/04/2002 12:51)