|
Article Excerpt
From industry self-censoring to punitive responses from the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), attempts to manage the content of electronic media have a long history. For example, Elvis Presley on the Ed Sullivan Show raised the issue of "hip-notic gyrations" (i.e., the network refused to show Elvis below the waist) and Sam Peckinpah's movie The Wild Bunch defined "choreographed violence." More recently, there have been similar controversies over the content of Howard Stern's radio programs (now exiled to satellite radio), Janet Jackson's "wardrobe malfunction" during the Super Bowl XXXVIII halftime show, and Pamela Anderson's proposed pole dancing on NBC (ultimately censored by the network) as part of an Elton John extravaganza.
The sex and violent content of television has been well documented (Fisher, Hill, Grube, & Gruber, 2004; Potter & Warren, 1996; Ward & Friedman, 2006) and research suggests that violence and sex content on television has been increasing (Kunkel, Cope, & Colvin, 1996; Kunkel, Cope-Farrar, Biely, & Donnerstein, 2001; Kunkel et al., 2003; Signorielli, 2003) although there are alternative views about patterns of change over time (e.g., Hetsroni, 2007). Violent content in particular has provoked responses from organizations representing public health professionals (Committee on Public Education, 2001). At the same time, industry concerns about sex and violence have motivated network discretion and voluntary regulation via various types of content warning labels (Bushman & Cantor, 2003; Hemphill, 2003; Hoy & Andrews, 2006).
From the governmental perspective, sex and violent television content has raised important First Amendment issues since the beginning of television broadcasts (Hoerrner, 1999; Potter & Warren, 1996) and continues to do so (Fallow, 2004). The FCC regulates sex on television through the provisions of the United States Code, Title 18, Section 1464 (2006) that indicates "whoever utters any obscene, indecent or profane language by means of radio communication shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both." While taking into account the First Amendment and Section 326 of the Communications Act prohibiting FCC's censorship of programs, the FCC prohibits broadcasting indecent and profane material between 6 a.m. and 10 p.m. There is a regulatory asymmetry vis-a-vis sex and violence: The FCC has no authority to regulate television violence even though violence is included in voluntary content warnings (Federal Communications Commission, 2006; Schneider, 1994-95).
Why is Media Sex and Violence an Issue?
Virtually all academic research on the effects of sex and violence as well as associated legal commentary (e.g., Edwards & Berman, 1994-95) is motivated by a concern for the effects of media sex and violence on children and young adults. For example, the 2001 report Media Violence (Committee On Public Education) was sponsored by the American Academy of Pediatrics, Anderson et al.'s 2003 comprehensive summary of research on violent media content on attitudes and behavior is entitled "The Influence of Media Violence on Youth," Potter and Warren's review (1996) of proposals to limit exposure to violent content is entitled "Considering Policies to Protect Children from TV Violence," and Wiley and Secrest's 2005 summary of regulatory actions and proposals is focused on children and young adults. This concern is no doubt due to the perception that children and young adults are developmentally susceptible to negative attitudinal and behavioral cues based on media sex and violence, a type of "media effect" to which adults are perhaps not so vulnerable.
This assumption of negative media effects on children and youth tends to be corroborated by research studies looking at particular levels or types of sex and violence media exposure (either experimentally induced or naturally occurring) and outcomes such as aggression (Huesmann, Moise-Titus, Podolski, & Eron, 2003), desensitization (Funk, Elliot, Urman, & Flores, 1999), ethnic self-concept (Rivadeneyra & Ward, 2007), normative beliefs about sexual activity (Chia & Gunther, 2006), the extent and timing of sexual intercourse (Aubrey, Harrison, Kramer, & Yellin, 2003), as well as intentions to have sex and a range of sexual behaviors (L'Engle, Brown, & Kenneavy, 2006; Somers & Tynan, 2006). This media effects literature on adolescent sexual attitudes and behavior is large, and comprehensive narrative summaries spanning multiple media and multiple outcomes are provided by Ward (2003), Escobar-Chaves et al. (2005), and Ward and Friedman (2006).
Public Opinion on Sex and Violence in the Media
In spite of network restraint, advisory notices, and governmental regulation, pollsters consistently find that citizens believe that there is "too much sex and violence" on television. Smith (1984) reported on Harris and Gallup polls from the 1960s and 1970s that indicate that a majority of males and females reported that there was "too much" violence on television, expressed high "disapproval" rates of the type of violence on television, and endorsed the belief that television violence was related to rising national crime rates. More recent polling data are consistent with these results. For example, a 1999 Pew Research Center survey of 1,179 adults found that 63% thought that TV news was "too full of violence" and 70% felt that there "is too much violence portrayed on television programs today, not including news programs." (Pew Research Center, 1999). Similarly, a survey conducted by Fox News/Opinion Dynamics in 2004 among 900 registered voters found that 88% of the respondents agreed with the statement that there is "too much sexual and violent content on television and radio these days." More than half who agreed (52%) also thought that the government needed to take a larger role in responding to the public concern regarding "too much sexual and violent content on television and radio" while over a quarter of the respondents who agreed (26%) thought the entertainment industry should be responsible for responding to this public concern (Fox News/Opinion Dynamics, 2004). Similar results have been reported by Gallup opinion polls. A 2004 Gallup survey of over 1,000 respondents found that 75% thought the entertainment industry needed to make a serious effort to reduce the amount of sex and violence in movies, television shows, and music and 58% indicated that they were offended by televised profanity and sexual content. When asked whether or not CBS should be fined or penalized for broadcasting Janet Jackson's wardrobe malfunction, 36% indicated that CBS should be fined (Gallup, 2004).
Research Questions and Their Rationale
However, less is known about the opinions of citizens on the issue of consequences for adolescents of sex and violence on television and the regulatory response to sexual and violent television content. Here the Annenberg National Health Communication Survey (ANHCS) is analyzed to answer the following research questions:
[RQ.sub.1]: What is the perception of the amount of sex and violence on television?
[RQ.sub.2:] What are the beliefs of survey respondents about the effects of television sex and violence on adolescent behavior?
[RQ.sub.3:] How do exposure to television, perceptions of TV sex and violence, and beliefs about the effects of TV sex and violence on adolescent behavior affect a specific regulatory response: fining television stations for broadcasting sex and violence?
The first research question focuses on the respondents' perceptions of the prevalence of sex and violence on television. The authors want to know how exposure to TV influences one's perceptions about the prevalence of sexual and violent content on television. From a cultivation theory perspective (Gerbner, Gross, Morgan, Signorielli, & Shanahan, 2002), it seems reasonable to assume that the more TV one watches, the more one is likely to see sex and violence. However, because total television viewing time is not as precise a measure (at least for adolescents) as more content specific exposure measures (Potter & Chang, 1990) and because selective exposure on the part of viewers affects exposure to television content (Knobloch, Callison, Chen, Fritzsche, & Zillmann, 2005), it is...
|
