Violent death as entertainment
"We will lose our audience", the senior executive of an Irish television station told me. "We will lose our audience for the night if it becomes known that we would not be showing any violent death in our entertainment programmes that evening."
This comment was made during a serious conversation. I had rung to ask if his TV station would mark World Peace Day on 21 September by making it the one day each year when no violent deaths would be shown for entertainment purposes.
I first became concerned about the use of violent death as entertainment when I stumbled across the following statistic: the average child in
Apparently, an average adult watches about 15,000 violent deaths for entertainment. To satisfy yourself that this figure is accurate, it is worth trying to count the number of such deaths in a typical Bruce Willis or Steven Segal movie. In fact, I recommend you encourage your children or teenagers to run a sweepstake to guess the number of violent deaths they will see, the next time one of these adventures is broadcast.
Give Smarties to the winner!.
A typical action movie can have as many as 150 violent deaths. Oh, and do look out for the especially graphic end reserved for the villain — very satisfying.
Opinions differ about whether this continuous exposure to violent death is just harmless escapism, or whether it has some affect on our children or on us.
However three serious effects have been identified by research (for example, that set out by Professor Joanne Cantor as part of testimony to a US Senate commerce committee: see www.joannecantor.com/senate2003.htm ).
First, we become desensitised to violent death. The images that would have upset us even a few months earlier no longer have the same impact. For example, the graphic image in a road safety advertisement of a small boy being killed by a careless driver becomes so familiar that we just don't notice it any more.
However, that desensitising doesn't make us immune to the effects of violence. The second finding is that exposure to violent entertainment makes us generally more nervous and insecure. We become more convinced that the world is a dreadful place, full of hostility and threat.
The third finding, not surprisingly, is that there is a relationship between watching violence and becoming more violent. The research findings are subtle so the link should not be overstated. It is best be compared with the relationship between smoking and cancer: not all smokers get cancer, and not everybody with cancer has smoked. Similarly, people who watch violence do not all become violent, and not all violent people have been watching too much violence on television. Never the less a clear link has been established.
Experts tell us repetition of advertisements eventually makes an impact on us. This, no doubt, is the reason why that road-safety advertisement is still being shown.
If this is true of paid advertising, then surely it is equally true of ordinary television. Every time we see a fictional violent death, we pick up the subconscious message that "life is cheap." The more violent deaths we see, the more this idea is reinforced in our minds. Every time the hero shoots the bad guys, or blows up a car in the chase scene, the message is repeated: “life is cheap”.
Every time the grenade is thrown into the bunker, or the guard has his throat cut, the message is reinforced. “Life is cheap”.
Perhaps it is more than a coincidence that suicide, careless road deaths and violent crime are all most common among young adult males, a group that is constantly exposed to this subliminal message that life is cheap. However, I have yet to find published research on this issue.
The routine watching of violent death as entertainment has apparently become important in 21st-century civilisation.
We can only form a balanced opinion on this phenomenon when we are aware of some of the influences. One problem is that any balancing messages are weak: you rarely see reinforcement of the idea that every human life has value.
It is suggested that one day each year could be used to provide a focus for understanding this issue. It would seem appropriate to mark 21 September, United Nations World Peace Day, by giving attention to this date is neutral and does not have with any religious or political connections world-wide.
Can television stations be persuaded to observe World Peace Day by showing no violent death for entertainment purposes on this day, and can teachers at all levels could focus their classes and lectures on this theme for this one day each year? If the could then we could begin to have an informed discussion about the issues involved.
Unfortunately, experience has shown that there seems to be little possibility of voluntary action on the part of television stations. Under these circumstances, some external stimuli are necessary to encourage a change of attitude. Politicians say that they are powerless because they cannot try to influence the content of television programmes. So what options remain?
Churches could adopt the idea as part of their demonstration by focusing on current social issues.
Advertisers could ask commercial television companies not to place their ads in programmes portraying violent death.
And finally, anyone can exercise their rights on 21 September by simply turning off any programme that contains violent death.
After all, do you really rate violent death as entertainment?