Made for Television Movies and Mini-Series
Theatrical Motion Pictures on Broadcast Network Television
On Air Promotions, Previews, Recaps, Teasers, and Advertisements
Emerging Broadcast Networks (UPN, WB)
Broadcast network programming is the primary focus of this study. Although its audience share continues to decline, broadcast network television still accounts for a majority of what is watched on television. The other aspects of the television world--cable, syndication, home video and video games--have been sampled for the purpose of comparison.
Network television has been divided into six areas, each of which was thoroughly examined:
* Prime time series
* Specials
* Made-for-television movies and mini-series
* Theatrical films shown on television
* On-air promotions and other promotional material
* Saturday morning children's programs
This report marks the third consecutive year we have monitored television violence. This year's results, together with the findings from the previous two seasons, allow us to establish a meaningful baseline and draw some important conclusions about the level, type and amount of violence on television. The baseline began with the 1994-95 television season, continued through 1995-96 and now includes the 1996-97 season. The quantitative and qualitative information from the previous years can be compared to that collected this year.
Series still comprise the majority of the networks' programming. They are what most distinguish network television from cable and other video media. More people watch television series than any other format. Series such as Seinfeld; Dr. Quinn, Medicine Woman; The Simpsons and NYPD Blue have continued to attract large numbers of viewers on a weekly basis for many years.
As described in the methodology section, every prime time series in the 1996-97 season was monitored at least four times to determine whether it raised issues of concern with regard to violence. Shows that raised issues continued to be monitored through the entire season, while shows that aired less than four times were monitored each time they aired. Overall, 107 television shows on the four networks were monitored in this way, and a complete listing of each show and the number of times it was examined can be found in the appendix to this report. Another 24 series from UPN and WB, the emerging broadcast networks, were monitored in the same way. The results can be found in a following section.
Of the television series we examined this year, there are two that raise frequent concerns about the manner in which they deal with violence. This compares to nine series that raised frequent concerns in 1995 and five in 1996. (A complete list of programs for all three years appears in Appendix A.) Of the two programs raising frequent concerns this season, one appeared in all three of our annual reports. The other premiered this season and has been canceled. In 1995 seven programs raised occasional concerns about violence and in 1996 the number increased by one to eight. This year the number raising occasional concerns drops by two programs to six. The efforts of the networks' practices and standards departments have contributed to what we see as positive signs in television series. This report makes a real effort to understand the style, nature and goals of each show and the manner in which it deals with violence. These elements comprise the context of each program and are instrumental in examining the violent acts which occur. The violence cannot be adequately understood or evaluated apart from these elements.
Television specials, more than any other category of television, raised many new concerns this year. This is the only area of television programming that is worse at the end of the three years of monitoring. In 1995 there were so few issues in television specials that they did not warrant their own section of the report. The 1996 report found only five specials that raised concerns, but all five dealt with were reality shows featuring real and re-created footage of animals attacking and, in some cases, killing people. The fear that these five specials might signify the beginning of a trend led to a new and separate chapter on specials in the 1996 report. That fear was confirmed as television reality specials featuring graphic footage of death and disaster proliferated greatly in intensity and number. Featuring police shootouts, car chases, near death experiences and, again, animal attacks, specials in this year's report raise serious new issues of concern.
Television movies raised concerns about violence at about the same rate as last year. Over the course of the three years of our study, television movies have been one of the formats with relatively few problems with violence. In 1995, 14% of these movies were found to raise concerns about the ways in which they deal with violence. In 1996, the figure dropped modestly to 10% and this year it rose slightly to 12%. The difference over the past two years is statistically insignificant except to demonstrate that the level of problems has stayed somewhat consistent over the three years. We monitored every television movie that aired during all three seasons. This season, every one of the 184 television movies that appeared on the four networks was examined in detail. Movies that raised concerns usually did so because of a variety of factors, such as lack of advisory, violent theme, "tonnage" or inappropriate graphicness of a scene. In contrast to theatrical films, the networks have complete control over television movies. They decide what movies get made and what the audience will see.
Theatrical films on television were identified in the first year as the most problematic type of programming. This is still true, although there has been fairly significant improvement. We monitored every theatrical film on television that aired during all three seasons. In 1995, 42% of all theatrical films shown on television were found to raise concerns about the use of violence. Last year the percentage dropped significantly to 29%. This season it rose insignificantly to 30% and, importantly, 57% of the films raising concerns this season were repeats of films shown in previous years. Theatrical films are made for a different medium and have to be retrofitted for broadcast television, an often difficult task. They are also purchased far in advance. While there were still a number of films that contained over 30 scenes of violence, there were fewer of them than in the past two seasons. In some instances the broadcast networks did not re-run theatrical films they purchased because of the quantity or nature of the violence. While the percentage of theatrical films raising concerns about violence has decreased from the first season, those theatricals that remain still feature the most intense and disturbing violence on television.
On-air promotions, out of all of the different types of television programming, have demonstrated the most improvement since the 1994-95 television season. This is where the largest improvement was possible and, in fact, where the largest improvement occurred. Networks were able to create new policies and hire new personnel to deal directly with this important issue. This year there were relatively few on-air promotions featuring only scenes of violence from a television series. Theatrical films shown on television still managed to yield promos full of action, but they contained fewer scenes of violence and were almost never shown during programs or in time periods that would draw a large audience of children. The problems discussed in last year's report concerning advertisements for films about to open in theaters diminished somewhat this season. The only problematic trend in this area this year concerns promos for the live-action reality specials. Filled with many scenes of accidents, disasters or crime, these specials raise considerable issues of concern. Not surprisingly, the promos for these programs raise similar concerns.
Children's television was consistent in regard to violence from the second year to the
third, with a few hopeful signs on the horizon. The number of network Saturday morning
programs featuring "sinister combat violence" dropped from seven in the first
year to four last year. This year the number remained at four. While those four still
raised concerns, three of them are older programs and only one new sinister combat
violence program appeared. We are hopeful this is a type of children's programming that is
waning in popularity and that the category may disappear altogether as these older shows
run their course. Moreover, most shows on Saturday morning do not feature intense violence
or combat and include, at most, very minor violence.
In the first year of our report (1994-95) nine programs on the four broadcast networks were found to raise frequent concerns about the way in which they depicted violence. Last season (1995-96) the total dropped to five. In what is an important improvement, in the third year (1996-97) the number of series raising frequent concerns drops to two. Both of these series ran for the entire season.
In the first year of monitoring, seven series raised occasional concerns about the
manner in which they portrayed violence. Last year the total rose slightly to eight. This
year the total drops to six, all of which ran for the entire season.
In the 1995-1996 season the following shows raised frequent concerns about issues of violence:
Two of these shows, Kindred, the Embraced and Space: Above and Beyond, were canceled. Only one show from last season, Walker, Texas Ranger, continued to raise frequent concerns this season and will be discussed shortly.
One of the shows that previously raised frequent concerns, Nash Bridges, moved down to the list of shows raising occasional concerns this year and will be discussed in that section.
In the past two seasons, New York Undercover has raised concerns primarily due to its
trademark "music video" opening, in which contemporary music plays over a
montage of clips depicting a crime. Often, this combination has had the effect of
glamorizing the violence and detracting from its severity, making it seem stylish and
appealing rather than cruel and brutal. Although the rest of the episode may have dealt
with issues of violence responsibly and with sensitivity, we felt that the opening
segments sometimes raised issues of concern. However, this season, although the program
continued to employ the use of the music video sequence, we felt it did so more
responsibly. The choices of music, in conjunction with the depictions of the violence, did
not seem to glorify the violence the same way it has in past seasons.
Last year eight television series raised occasional concerns regarding their portrayal of violence:
None of these shows moved from the occasional to the frequent list. Of these eight
shows, four were canceled: American Gothic, SeaQuest 2032, Due South and Charlie Grace. Of
the four series that continued this season, none raised frequent or even occasional
concerns. Looking at the programs that raised occasional concerns last season and dropped
off the list this year, the following observations can be made.
Now the longest running animated program in prime time television history, The Simpsons appeared on the list of shows with occasional problems in both 1995 and 1996. Rather than a children's animated program, this show is an adult satire that also happens to appeal to children. The Simpsons raised occasional issues not because of slapstick and action typically found in children's programs, but rather because of occasional gruesome violence in some episodes. This violence is usually found in the "Itchy and Scratchy" spoofs of cartoons which are a pointed parody of violent cartoons such as "Tom and Jerry." These feature the sadistic mouse Itchy terrorizing the rather dumb and helpless cat Scratchy. Featuring beheadings, disembowelments and other horrible acts, these scenes which include animated blood and guts are on a level far harsher than what is usually found in animation.
This season The Simpsons featured very little of Itchy and Scratchy or any animation that raised even occasional concerns.
A new animated prime time series, King of the Hill, premiered on Fox later in the
season but raised no violence issues. During the summer the animated South Park appeared
on Comedy Central with a "TV-MA" (mature) rating, raising issues of violence and
taste, although that program was outside the scope of this 1997 report.
Appearing on the list of programs raising frequent concerns in 1995 and dropping to
occasional concerns in 1996, America's Funniest Home Videos--now one of the longest
running series on television--raised few concerns this year. Though not typically included
in discussions about violent television programs, this show previously contained violence
that was completely without context. It usually featured both the studio and home audience
laughing as real-life people, frequently children, were hit in the head, the groin or
elsewhere. Very little of this type of problematic material was in evidence during
1996-97.
One of the two long-running Aaron Spelling dramas (along with Beverly Hills 90210),
Melrose Place raised occasional concerns last year because of some highly stylized action
which included characters engaging in prolonged fights and falling off balconies. Often
these scenes were accentuated by slow motion and other techniques which presented the
violence as glamorous. Few of these techniques were featured in the program this season
and therefore Melrose Place raised no concerns.
One of the handful of programs that switched from one broadcast network to another this
season, JAG raised occasional concerns last year due to the amount and glorification of
violence in the program. This season, now on CBS, JAG contained fewer scenes of prolonged,
action-packed violence as when it was on NBC and typically aired in a later time slot.
Although some degree of glorified violence is endemic to military action-dramas, JAG dealt
with the problem successfully.
These are the television series that raise the most concerns about the way in which
they portray violence. In the three years of our violence reports the number of these
programs raising frequent concerns has dropped from nine to five to two. These two shows
raise concerns because of a large variety of contextual issues, which were discussed in
the criteria section.
The most violent series on television in terms of number of scenes, Walker, Texas Ranger is the only program that has raised frequent concerns about violence in all three years of this study. The program chronicles the adventures of Texas Ranger Cordell Walker, played by martial arts superstar Chuck Norris. In the past two seasons, the program has proved increasingly successful, last year rating in the top ten shows for the season. Walker, which is partially owned by CBS, recently landed one of the biggest syndication deals in television history. This is one of the most popular programs on television and part of CBS's very successful Saturday night lineup. It follows the well-known Dr. Quinn, Medicine Woman and the successful new series Early Edition.
The show's formula has remained relatively unchanged, each week featuring Walker and his fellow officers doling out justice with high flying kicks and punches. The issues raised by Walker range from tonnage to graphicness to glorification, and examples of each are in abundance.
On 11/2/96 Walker is forced to confront an old nemesis from the Vietnam War, Randy Shrader, who has become a high-priced soldier of fortune. After stealing a top secret military helicopter to use in a drug smuggling operation, Shrader, in an effort to prove that he was always a better soldier than Walker, tracks him down for a final confrontation. He pursues Walker in the helicopter, blowing up Walker's truck with a missile. Despite the huge explosion and the fact that the truck flips over and is destroyed, Walker climbs out of the wreckage unscathed except for a slight limp. He pulls out a portable rocket launcher and shoots down the helicopter. The two men square off for a final showdown when Walker persuades Shrader to settle things "man to man" instead of by using sophisticated weaponry. The two men put down their guns and viciously beat each other. The fight consists of countless kicks, flips and punches to the head and midsection. Seemingly defeated, Shrader pulls a knife and tries to stab Walker. As they struggle over the knife, Walker has a flashback about Shrader's traitorous actions in Vietnam which led their platoon into an ambush. He then summons the strength to overwhelm Shrader, stabbing him in the gut with his own knife. The scene lasts for over six minutes and is graphic, antiseptic and prolonged. It is also completely glorified by dramatic, patriotic music that plays in the background throughout the entire fight.
The episode on 12/21/96 was noteworthy for a different reason. A special Christmas episode targeted towards a family audience, Walker and his friends have thrown a Christmas party for a group of orphans. When one of the orphans refuses to join in the Christmas spirit, Walker tells the children a story about legendary Texas ranger Hayes Cooper and how he discovered the meaning of Christmas. The story transports viewers back into the old West with Norris playing the part of Ranger Cooper. Although the show is noticeably less violent than most other episodes, in the final showdown between Cooper and the gang of outlaws he has been pursuing, Cooper shoots six men, none of them fatally. When the leader of the gang, who has been shot in the backside, asks why he has chosen to only wound the men and not kill them, Cooper responds that it is because he "has the Christmas spirit." This episode, which was clearly tailored to a younger audience than usual, apparently envisions itself as a morality tale. At the end of the episode, the cynical orphan learns Walker's meaning of Christmas.
Another example of the problems raised by Walker, Texas Ranger can be found in the episode on 4/26/97 in which Walker takes on a street gang of crack dealers after a little girl is killed during a drive-by shooting. The girl, who comes back from the dead after meeting an angel, embarks on a mission to bring peace back into her neighborhood which has been under the violent control of the crack dealers. Ironically, despite the reiteration of the message throughout the show that you cannot fight violence with violence, this does not stop Walker from beating up gang members and blowing up a car. This is one in a series of instances in which Cordell Walker appears to relish violent conflict. It is also notable that this episode contains ten scenes of violence.
This show seems to be caught in an unusual dilemma. On the one hand, in order to add a moral dimension, Walker often tries to find alternatives to violence. On the other hand, the producers seem to realize that Walker doling out strong justice, usually with his fists, is an essential element of the program and a feature central to its popularity.
Occasionally, characters other than Walker get involved in the fighting. In the episode on 5/3/97 a female cop under Walker's command goes undercover as a tutor for a mafia boss' young son. At the end of the episode, her cover blown, the officer is confronted by the mob boss' wife. The two engage in a knock-down, drag-out martial arts brawl consisting of many kicks, punches and knees to the midsection. At the end of the fight the victorious officer stands over her fallen foe and says, "Boy, that felt good," thereby adding to the already glorified and glib treatment of the violence. Adding to the glorification of the scene is that during the fight the mobster's young son watches, mimicking the combatants' punches and kicks and rooting for his tutor. After the fight is over, the mob boss discovers the victorious tutor and the son and prepares to kill them. Just as the mob boss is about to shoot the undercover cop, Walker bursts in and engages in a vicious fight with the kingpin and his thugs.
Walker, Texas Ranger features more violence than any other series on network
television. Largely a vehicle to showcase Chuck Norris' impressive martial arts abilities,
episodes feature as many as 21 scenes of violence in one hour. The violent behavior of
Walker is glorified and in stark contrast with the prosocial, frequently anti-violence,
themes of the show. The show's heroes are seldom injured or even fazed by violence,
despite the severity of the fights. The consequences of violence, physical or
psychological, are never explored. Although many would defend this program as simply an
action series, it is action that relies solely on the use of violence and does so in a
glorified way. Of the 25 episodes of Walker, Texas Ranger that were monitored, 23 raised
concerns of violence.
A new program, Dark Skies aired on Saturday nights at 8:00 p.m. as the first installment of NBC's "Thrillogy." A serial program set in the 1960s, it follows the life and adventures of John Loengard and his fiancee Kim Sayers. Loengard discovers the existence of a secret race of hostile aliens known as "Hive." They are waging a clandestine war on Earth by implanting themselves into an increasing number of human beings. Loengard is recruited into the service of Majestic 12, a covert government agency in charge of containing and controlling the alien invasion. But when his desire to let the American public know of the danger conflicts with the policy of silence implemented by Majestic, he seeks to expose both the government conspiracy and the alien threat. Thus, while fleeing from both the government and the aliens, he begins his mission to gather irrefutable evidence of the Hive presence.
Dark Skies is a dramatic, science fiction thriller. It is NBC's response to the current interest in aliens and conspiracy theories, in large part brought on by the success of Fox's The X-Files. It combines scary aliens with insidious G-men in an attempt to interweave actual events in American history, such as the Vietnam War or the assassination of JFK, into a complicated web of conspiracy. One of the principal issues with Dark Skies is its 8:00 p.m. time slot. The 8:00 time period, particularly on a Saturday night, is one that especially appeals to young children. Dark Skies always contains violence, much of which is very serious and potentially frightening.
One of the recurring forms of violence found in this program involves the process by which the aliens invade their human hosts. Typical of many alien films (beginning with Alien), the Hive infect their prey by attaching themselves to the victim's face and forcibly inserting a tentacle into his or her mouth. While this is not a bloody process, it is obviously a painful one, as evidenced by the victim's screaming and writhing. This is clearly not a typical form of violence and is simply a means to terrify the viewer, a frequent aspect of science fiction. However, it is very intense and extremely frightening.
Dark Skies also contains much more realistic, and occasionally very intense, forms of violence. In the season premiere on 9/28/96, when the scientists at Majestic attempt to kill an alien presence within its host, they first forcibly restrain him and pour a chemical down his throat. As they are injecting him in the back of the neck with another chemical, he breaks free of his restraint and thrusts the syringe into a doctor's chest, killing him. An intense fight breaks out in which the host hits several men with a chair and slams them into the glass chemistry equipment. When he wrestles a G-man's gun away, another agent shoots him in the chest. Unfazed, he returns fire and tries to get away. The chemicals finally take their effect and he falls while trying to escape, writhing in pain on the floor. The doctors jump on him and force the needle into his neck, thus destroying the alien presence. Although it is not a terribly long scene, it is very intense and violent, especially for such an early time period.
On 10/26/96 Majestic discovers a Hive operating station and attacks it in hopes of stopping the aliens who are experimenting with mind control through subliminal messages. As the government agents burst in with their guns drawn, a female alien implant steps in front of them. Without comment, they shoot her several times in the torso. The bullets graphically pierce her chest.
Another fairly quick but rather brutal scene can be found in the episode on 11/9/96. Sayers is attacked by an older woman implanted by the Hive. After being thrown to the ground by the woman, Sayers recovers and smashes a fire extinguisher over her head. Again, while it is in self-defense and is very quick, it is also brutal.
In the episode aired on 11/2/96, Loengard locates a secret alien base where his fiancee is being held and breaks into the compound with a large truck. As the alien implants open fire on him, he smashes into one with the truck, sending the body flying backwards through the air. This act is gratuitous and only serves to exaggerate the violence. After he locates his fiancee, he keeps the Hive at bay by shooting a pistol at them. When one crashes through the window of the room, Loengard dumps some other leech-like alien creatures on the attacker which makes him scream in pain. He grabs the attacker's gun and dashes for the exit. He is saved when the U.S. military arrive on the scene.
Only a few minutes into the episode on 1/18/97, a scene occurs that contains some of
the most brutal hand-to-hand combat featured in the show. In the scene, a beautiful blonde
agent from Majestic dispenses with two armed guards who are protecting Loengard and Sayers
with a series of kicks and blows to the head. As she runs up the stairs to warn him, the
blonde grabs her and throws her over the railing, knocking her unconscious. When Loengard
comes downstairs, he discovers the unconscious bodies of the two guards and Sayers. As he
kneels over her to check her pulse, the blonde steps from behind the door and kicks him in
the groin. When he falls over, she then picks him up by the throat and chokes him,
throwing him backwards onto the floor. Pulling a gun and pointing it at Loengard's neck,
she threatens to kill him if he testifies against the fact that Lee Harvey Oswald acted
alone in killing JFK. Although the scene is relatively quick and there is no blood spilled
in the ordeal, the attack is surprisingly vicious and the impacts of most of the blows are
depicted graphically.
In another instance of extremely brutal violence, on 3/8/97, Loengard is confronted by Sayers, who has become the enemy after being infected by Hive. Hopeful that he may be able to free her from alien control, he reaches out for her hand only to have her smash his with a police baton. As he tries to talk to her, she continues to hit him with the baton, first in the shoulder, then the knee. Unable to divorce himself from the feelings he still has for her, he proceeds to take the punishment as she hits him in the head and the ribs 11 more times. It is surprisingly rough and excessive. It is also antiseptic as the only consequences he suffers are a small cut on his forehead that is not apparent in the next scene and a broken wrist. Four people are killed in the episode.
As stated several times above, for the most part the real issue here is that of time slot. Had the program run at 10:00 p.m. or even 9:00 p.m., fewer of the above scenes would have raised issues. However, the terrifying nature of some and the disturbing intensity of others cause concerns in the 8:00 p.m. hour. Of the 17 times it was monitored, Dark Skies raised issues of concern seven times.
There was greater anticipation among fans of The X-Files for the premiere of Millennium than for any other series during the season. Created by Chris Carter, who is also responsible for Fox's hit show The X-Files, Millennium airs in The X-Files' old time slot of 9:00 p.m. on Friday night. This series tells the story of Frank Black, an FBI criminal profiler who is able to put himself so deeply into the minds of the killers he pursues that he is able to see and understand their thoughts. When Black's family is threatened by an unknown stalker, he suffers a nervous breakdown and leaves the FBI, moving with his family to a sleepy suburb of Seattle. However, unable to block out the horrific visions of the killers' thoughts, he is driven back into his job, working for a mysterious consulting group of former law enforcement agents. Known only as The Millennium Group, they specialize in exceptional criminal cases. In one of those strange coincidences in television, the plot bears a remarkable resemblance to Profiler, which premiered on NBC.
Each week, Black finds himself aiding local police departments throughout the Pacific Northwest in the investigation of serial killers. Black is drawn as a dark and brooding character and the only joy in his life seems to come from his loving wife and daughter. The rest of his life is plagued with vicious and violent visions which, while useful in capturing criminals, leave Black trapped in a tortured existence, devoid of any kind of extended peace. Throughout the season, Millennium raised issues of concern for a variety of reasons. In fact, because this show raised so many different issues and dealt with them in a wide variety of ways, some commendable and some of concern, this report devotes a considerable amount of time and attention to a discussion of Millennium.
Some viewers may be surprised to find Millennium on the list of shows that only raise occasional concerns. Because of its malevolent tone and intensely dark storylines, some may feel that this show contains the most disturbing violence on television. However, for a show that revolves around the investigation and capture of serial killers, Millennium features a surprisingly small number of violent acts. Rather, the show achieves its objective of scaring viewers and leaving them unsettled through graphic depictions of the consequences of horrific violence. The series premiere provides a good example of this approach.
In this debut episode, aired on 10/25/96, an apocalypse-obsessed killer beheads an exotic dancer and cuts off her fingers. He also buries several men alive after sewing their wrists to their chests and their eyes and mouths shut. The murder of the exotic dancer is portrayed in a montage of chaos, confusion and implied violence. Similarly, the viewer never actually sees the eyes and mouths of the other victims being sewn shut. Instead the victims are discovered alive after the horrible mutilation has occurred. Despite this, the grisly nature of the crimes, coupled with their exceedingly graphic and gory consequences, are enough to warrant concern and raise issues of violence.
Another example of the show's focus on the results of violence rather than on the attacks themselves can be found in the episode aired on 11/15/96. A self-proclaimed "judge of justice" enforces his own version of justice on the wicked, having one of his followers smash a man over the head with a bowling ball and cut out his tongue with a kitchen knife. In that same episode, the judge instructs another follower to cut off a man's leg and leave him to bleed to death. In both instances, the most violent elements of the murders are never shown. However, viewers are not spared the disturbingly graphic images of the victims' severed body parts which are both shown in a medical examiner's lab. Again, although the violent action was never shown in detail, the graphic aftermath was enough to raise concerns.
In some instances, Millennium's depictions of violence are actually commendable. For example, in the episode aired on 1/10/97, two shootings are handled responsibly. In both cases, just as the killers are about to shoot their victims, the camera angle switches to an exterior shot of the building where the action is taking place. The sound of gunshots conveys what has transpired without resorting to needless portrayals of gore.
Another device used by the show to imply violence without showing it is Black's flashbacks. As he proceeds with his investigations and delves deeper into the minds of the killers, the visions progressively provide him with greater insight into the killers' motivations and psychoses. The flashes are always extremely fleeting, often lasting less than a second, are chaotic and are typically distorted by camera techniques. Yet, precisely because the visions are so quick and obscure, viewers are likely to believe that they have seen more than they actually have. Audiences are typically left with the impression that they have seen a glimpse of the gruesome murder previously described in the program when, in truth, they have not really seen much more than the victims thrashing about and screaming, perhaps with a tint of red suggesting blood.
Nevertheless, Millennium does occasionally feature graphic violence and this is when it raises the most concerns. In the opening scene on 3/28/97, a group of medical test subjects is shown having an adverse reaction to a drug treatment. The subjects are driven to psychosis. One man is driven so insane that he presses his own thumbs into his eyes, causing blood to run down from the sockets. The entire scene is very intense, frightening and unnecessarily graphic, particularly as it is the opening scene of the show and comes without warning. This scene is a perfect example of the inclusion of grisly violence, the only purpose of which is to make the audience squirm. The depiction of the man poking out his eyes is gratuitous. Any other self-inflicted injury would have conveyed the same point without being so graphic and disturbing.
In another instance of graphic violence in the episode on 4/25/97, a prisoner, who is earlier seen slitting the throat of a woman, attempts to commit suicide in his cell. He places a previously concealed razor blade to his neck and drags it across his throat. Just after he places the blade on his neck, the camera angle changes to show the scene from behind so that viewers do not see the actual slicing. However, the camera returns to the original angle to show him grasping at his throat as blood pours from between his fingers. This depiction is extremely graphic and gory and was one of the most gruesome scenes of violence on television all year. Although the cutting is not shown, the viewer is left with the feeling of actually having seen it.
Another example of this issue is found in the episode aired on 5/9/97 in which an alleged Russian Antichrist kills his victims by blowing off their faces at point blank range with a shotgun. He then cuts off their fingertips with clipping shears. Although neither the impact of the shotgun blasts nor the actual cutting off of the fingertips are shown, the acts are so brutal and grisly that they raise concerns even though they are not actually seen. As the killer crouches over his victims, viewers hear the loud, deliberate snipping of the shears clipping off the ends of their fingers like carrots being cut. The mutilated hands are shown after the deed is done as are the bloody shears. It is extremely unsettling and vicious, despite the fact that it occurs just outside of the camera's view.
Some critics might argue that every episode of Millennium should raise concerns merely because of the nature of the crimes they feature, regardless of whether the violent acts are shown or not. However, this was not the rationale used in our review of Millennium. The public clearly has a fascination with serial killers as is demonstrated by the success of motion pictures such as Seven and Copycat. The most successful serial killer film of all, The Silence of the Lambs, not only was a commercial success, it was only the third film in history to sweep the top five Academy Awards. The Silence of the Lambs showed that this subject matter can be skillfully portrayed in a quality film. To call every episode of Millennium a problem simply because of the subject matter would be tantamount to censorship, thereby implying that film or television creators are not free to examine these intriguing themes. Therefore, the show was deemed an occasional problem not by the theme of the series as a whole, but rather by the specific handling of specific episodes.
Millennium is clearly not a show for children. The premise and storylines are intense
and are predicated on horrific, frightening crimes. That being said, some of the crimes
are depicted in a contextually appropriate manner while others are exploited through the
use of horribly graphic images. It is because of this wide variety of treatments of
violence that the show, like its sister program The X-Files, raises occasional rather than
frequent concerns. Of the 22 times it was monitored, Millennium raised concerns six times,
five of which are detailed above.
Last year Nash Bridges made its debut as a midseason replacement and ran for only eight episodes. It returned this year for the entire season, airing at 10:00 p.m. on Friday nights. Last season it raised frequent concerns about the manner in which it dealt with violence. In its first full season Nash Bridges raises occasional concerns.
Miami Vice's Don Johnson plays the dashing title character, a cool, wisecracking San Francisco police inspector with a heart of gold and a flare for sleight-of-hand magic tricks. His partner and comic sidekick, Joe Dominguez, is played by veteran comedian Cheech Marin. Together the two try to clean up the streets of San Francisco while Bridges tries to find love, maintain friendships with his two ex-wives, watch after his rascal father and raise his teenage daughter.
A lighthearted, action police show, Nash Bridges is a modern day Magnum, P.I. with perhaps a slightly rougher edge. Replete with smart-alecky one-liners and amusing situations, the program is funny and the characters are extremely likeable. This season there was less violence in the program with a greater emphasis placed on the characters and humor rather than on the violent action. Airing at 10:00 p.m., the program is given more leeway in terms of violence. However, there were several instances this season in which the violence was unnecessarily prolonged for the purposes of titillation rather than plot development.
Frequently, this violence occurred in the opening scene of the program. For example, on 10/4/96 an episode aired in which Bridges and his team take down a crew of high-end thieves. The episode opens with Bridges, Dominguez and another cop rushing to the scene of a bank robbery in progress. As the robbers storm the bank, they brandish high-caliber rifles and pistols, sending the customers to the floor and hitting a guard in the face with the butt end of a rifle. For no discernable reason, one of the robbers snaps and cold-bloodedly shoots a compliant bank patron twice at point blank range, killing him. When Bridges arrives on the scene, the gunfire erupts and continues non-stop for more than two minutes. Midway through the barrage of bullets, the young cop who came with Bridges is shot in the neck. He falls backwards, clutching his neck as blood pumps from the wound. After triggering a smoke bomb, the robbers escape, leaving one dead and one wounded crew member behind. Although this scene is important in establishing how ruthless and coldly efficient these criminals are, the extended length of the scene and the endless hail of bullets are far more than what is necessary to establish this point. The rest of this episode contains no other problems and, in fact, does a good job exploring some of the consequences of the gunshot to the neck of the young inspector. But the opening scene is unduly violent.
In a similar instance in the opening scene of the episode that aired on 12/13/96, Bridges interrupts a jewelry heist at a department store. A prolonged gunfight full of automatic weapon fire ensues and lasts for just under a minute. Two criminals are shot and killed, the second one falling backwards through a large piece of plate glass in slow motion. A third is shot but gets away. The shower of bullets is chaotic and the body smashing through the glass only serves to accentuate the violence of the scene. Also of concern is the conclusion of the scene, in which Dominiguez and Bridges are standing over one of the criminals' dead bodies and Dominguez jokes, "I heard the department stores were murder this time of year." This serves to trivialize and make light of the seriousness of the violence that has just occurred.
On 5/2/97 the program opens with another unnecessarily prolonged gunfight between two drug dealers and Bridges and his partner. Midway through the gunfight, a private security team, outfitted with automatic assault rifles and armored cars, arrives on the scene and opens fire on the drug dealers. The gunfire lasts for a minute and a half and no one is wounded in this incident. The violence is neither graphic nor threatening. In fact, it is treated very casually which has the effect of diminishing the severity and impact of the event.
A final example can be found in the episode that aired on 4/11/97. It opens with Bridges talking to a local mafia boss on a private yacht. Unbeknownst to them, a hit squad, sent by an ambitious mafia underling, storms the boat with automatic submachine guns. After dispensing with the boss' guards, they open fire. For a full minute gunfire is exchanged and eight people are killed. While this scene does set up the ensuing story, it showcases an immense amount of violence in the scene. Interestingly, this was again the only scene of the episode that contained any issues of violence.
Frequently, the violence found in Nash Bridges is glorified. Always cool under fire, Bridges makes it look easy, never being rattled by heavy gunfire and never showing any sort of fear. All of the characters are very nonchalant about the violence. Occasionally, Bridges is forced to use his fists. In an episode on 2/14/97, when an arms dealer makes an inappropriate comment about Bridges' daughter, Bridges turns around and punches him, sending him flying through the air and through a glass table. While deserved, the attack is excessive, over the top and glorified. In the episode on 4/25/97, when two mafia henchmen approach him, Bridges picks up a glass pitcher and smashes it on one guy's face. We see the impact and then see Bridges and his friend beat up the two men. Although the altercation is quick, it is very glorified and conveys the message that Bridges, despite his intelligence and friendly demeanor, is not someone with whom one should mess.
Of the 23 times it was monitored, Nash Bridges raised issues of violence seven times.
Debuting last year in early March as a midseason replacement show, High Incident was one of the first programs to be developed by the highly touted and greatly anticipated DreamWorks SKG. Executive produced by Steven Spielberg, the program is an ensemble cop show chronicling the day-to-day duties of police officers in the fictional Southern California community of El Camino. Though only six episodes aired last season, the show--though more graphic and less gritty than other serial cop shows such as NYPD Blue--intelligently and thoughtfully emphasized the extreme consequences, both physical and psychological, of violence in city life. Also, the program focused more on the development of the characters and their relationships, both in the workplace and in their personal lives, than on the violence of the job. This season, however, in terms of violence, the program took a turn for the worse.
Although last season High Incident contained some very serious and graphic violence,
less emphasis was placed on the actual violent encounters and more on their effects on the
officers' lives. A prime example of this can be found in the series debut in which an
officer sees his partner gunned down by a motorist. Forced to shoot and kill the attacker,
the officer rushes to his dying partner to find him shot in the neck, blood pouring from
the wound. Very intense and also very graphic, the violence was appropriately shocking and
also quite affecting. The rest of the episode, as well as several episodes that followed,
dealt with the extreme guilt, anger and fear this event caused in the surviving cop. The
extremity of the consequences was realistically matched with the severity of the incident.
In contrast, possibly to increase the show's excitement level, this season's violent encounters were stressed much more than their consequences. In the episode aired on 11/7/96, an Asian gang is robbing armored cars. In the first several seconds of the episode two officers arrive at the scene of a robbery in progress. As they approach in their squad car, another car speeds directly towards them, causing them to sideswipe a building. The criminals then open fire on the cops with automatic submachine guns, spraying bullets through the windshield. The cops respond by returning fire, shooting and killing one assailant with a shotgun. As the criminals speed away, gunshots continue to ring out. Although the scene is relatively short, it is full of gunfire and is the first thing audiences see in the episode. Later on in the same episode, two other officers are involved in a prolonged gunfight with the robbers. This scene is longer and much more glorified than the first one, utilizing some slow motion to stress the violence. Two people are killed in the scene and the gunfire blazes non-stop for roughly 45 seconds. The episode later deals with the emotional reaction of one of the officers to having shot someone for the first time in the line of duty, but it does so only tangentially.
A similar instance is found in the episode that aired on 2/13/97, in which several officers engage in a gunfight with a submachine gun-wielding motorist. As the criminal riddles the squad cars with bullets, one officer is hit in the neck and falls to the ground, clutching at his wound. As two officers attempt to save him, two others return fire with shotguns and pistols. The hail of bullets rages non-stop for well over a minute, culminating with one of the officers heroically charging the car and shooting the attacker while the other blows up the car by shooting the gas tank. It is a very long scene of violence, intensified by the nature of the injury suffered by the wounded officer. The use of slow motion, the manner in which the officer risks life and limb to thwart the assailant, and the explosion at the end of the scene all serve to glorify the violence and make it seem extremely exciting. It would be excessive at any time, but is especially so at 8:00 p.m.
Another issue this program raised was tonnage. The episode on 5/8/97 was inspired by the actual events of a North Hollywood bank robbery, in which heavily armed men wearing body armor attempted to shoot their way out of the robbery. The program wished to convey the severity of the situation and the threat posed to police and civilians alike. However, the entire first half of the episode was filled with virtually non-stop gunfire, much of which was glorified. Ultimately, the robbers are both killed, the last one shot in the back of the head. It is an extremely intense episode which becomes even more so when two of the program's main characters are severely injured--one possibly paralyzed and the other left in a coma. The psychological consequences are acutely explored with great emotion. However, despite the powerful exploration of the impact of the violence on the lives of the officers, the sheer amount of extremely real and intense violence (12 scenes to be exact), many of which were several minutes in length, caused particular concerns in an 8:00 p.m. program.
High Incident also raised issues of glorification. The episode on 2/6/97 contained two violent scenes that raised issues of violence with regard to the message of the episode. One of the storylines involves an African American officer, Mike, who, while off duty, is severely beaten by a racist white deputy from the sheriff's department. When the deputy threatens Mike's partner unless she remains silent about the beating, Mike hunts down the other cop and attacks him in a coffee shop bathroom, thrashing him and shoving his face into a toilet bowl. It is a vicious, albeit warranted assault. Although he is criticized by both his partner and captain for his actions and reference is made about him possibly losing his job, audiences are left with the impression that, by taking the law into his own hands, he acted heroically in this instance. Despite the fact that his actions were illegal, Mike feels he is being persecuted by an unjust system.
Another storyline in the episode containing a questionable message involves Officer Marsh's effort to clean up a high-crime, low-income neighborhood under the control of a drug dealer named Chino. When Chino kills the son of a woman Marsh has befriended, the conflict becomes personal. At the end of the episode, Marsh finds himself chasing Chino to a building rooftop. There the two wrestle and Chino is thrown over the edge. Marsh clutches Chino's wrist, preventing him from falling to his death. After coercing Chino into confessing to the murder, rather than pulling him up and arresting him, Marsh lets him fall off the building, killing him. Historically, in television and film heroes have frequently found themselves ultimately faced with the decision of whether to let the villain live or die. With few exceptions, the heroes have always realized that by killing the villain or letting him or her die, they will have lowered themselves to the villain's level. Thus, they decide to spare the villain's life. It is notable when Marsh is faced with this same decision and chooses to kill Chino, particularly since he feels no remorse and faces no consequences. After Chino is allowed to fall to his death, the community comes back to a vibrant life. Clearly, the nature of police drama is changing and the producers wanted to focus on the dilemmas of real cops rather than the cardboard heroes of Jack Webb's Dragnet or Adam-12. However, in this instance, the moral dimensions of allowing Chino to die are not examined. His death is solely portrayed as a good thing.
At the core of the issues raised by High Incident is the time at which it was aired.
Last season the show was aired at 9:00 p.m. However, this season, it was bumped up to 8:00
p.m. even as the amount and intensity of the violence were ratcheted up. High Incident is
an adult-oriented show, dealing with mature themes and intense situations, and would have
been much more at home this season in the 10:00 p.m. time period. The change in time and
tone for the program proved unsuccessful and the show was canceled at the end of the
season. Of the 24 times it was monitored, four episodes raised issues of violence.
At the end of last season, America's Most Wanted, the real-life crime program hosted by John Walsh and one of the Fox Network's first hits, was canceled. A cry of protest rang out from many of the show's fans. Law enforcement officials across the country pointed to the program's extraordinary record in assisting in the capture of close to 500 criminals. After a brief hiatus, the series returned this season with a few new twists as America's Most Wanted: America Fights Back. Still hosted by John Walsh--himself a survivor of violent crime--the program follows a similar format, with a new, tougher subtitle. In each episode, the program profiles some of the country's roughest and most dangerous criminals and re-enacts their offenses, in hopes of catching the eye of viewers able to help lead law enforcement officials to the at-large criminals. In recent years, in an effort to prove that its system really works, the program has expanded to contain profiles of captures that have been direct results of viewer tips. However, over the course of this three-year study, the program also occasionally has raised issues in regard to its presentations of violent crimes. The first year of this study found the show raising occasional concerns while the second year of the study did not. However, this year it again raises occasional concerns, intermittently glorifying and graphically showcasing excessive violence.
In episodes aired on 1/11/97 and 2/1/97, there is a re-creation of an assault and murder involving two men arguing over an unpaid bet. When one bar patron refuses to make good on a bet over a game of pool, his opponent shoves him. When the pushed man responds by grabbing the other man, he is hit in the face with a pool cue, punched in the face twice, slammed into the bar and punched twice more. In self-defense, he grabs a knife from the counter and slashes his attacker across the forehead just above the eye. This is an important event. Though brutal, it is appropriate to the story and sets up the eventual murder. However, when the man who is slashed follows the other man home and shoots him at close range, the choice of camera angle emphasizes the size of the gun in such a way that it is glorified. The segment was shown again on 2/1/97 after the real-life murderer was caught. While it is important to prove to viewers that their calls are important, showing the entire sequence over again was unnecessary and served no purpose, as the footage sometimes does in helping capture a criminal. Instead it seemed like an opportunity to simply show violent footage again.
Another issue frequently raised by this program is the repetition of scenes of violence. For example, in the episode that aired on 2/22/97, real-life footage of a gun battle between police and two men they pulled over is repeated five times, once as a preview, and four times during the segment. In another segment, a re-enactment of twin brothers viciously beating up an old man is shown three times. In instances such as these, it feels as though the program is showcasing violence in the interest of increasing the action level of the program, not to increase viewer interest in catching the criminals.
Another interesting instance of needlessly upping the level of violence in the program was found on 2/8/97. During a profile on a murderer, a re-enactment of him repeatedly shooting a man in a car is shown. During the re-creation, the narrator informs the audience that the man at large ruthlessly fired nine shots into his victim, killing him on the spot. However, in the re-enactment, the killer fires 14 shots into his victim. While these re-enactments are by no means exact in nature, it seems as though the inclusion of five extra gunshots was simply an effort to increase the violence of the scene.
Two years ago, some of the re-creations were far more graphic than were necessary. This season, there was only one such instance. In the episode aired on 5/3/97, there is a recurring segment titled "Street Smart," in which safety instructor and security consultant Sanford Strong advises viewers how to protect themselves in everyday life. Strong recounts a murder case on which he once worked. The re-enactment tells the story of a newlywed who, while waiting for her husband to come home for lunch, is attacked by a man in their home. When her husband comes home and finds the intruder attacking his wife, he tackles the man. While struggling, the assailant stabs the husband five times in the midsection, killing him. The stabbings are far more graphic than is necessary, showing the blade puncture his stomach three of the five times. Also, each stab is accompanied by an unsettling sound effect which only accentuates the violence. Although the purpose of the segment is to instruct men on how not to deal with intruders in their homes, the scene is excessively graphic. It could have been filmed in a much less troublesome way without compromising the program's message.
Because of the occasionally gratuitous nature of some of the violence--in the form of
graphicness, repetition and over-emphasis--it raised occasional concerns. Of the 25 times
America's Most Wanted: America Fights Back was monitored, it raised issues of violence
four times.
In its fourth season, Fox's hit show The X-Files continues to be one of the most elusive programs on television in regard to violence. Sometimes exemplary in its presentation of violence and sometimes blatantly problematic, the show combines elements of humor, horror and science fiction in a blend that has garnered one of the most loyal cult followings in recent television history. This season in its new Sunday at 9:00 p.m. time slot, The X-Files became one of the biggest hits on television. Chronicling the bizarre investigations of FBI agents Fox Mulder and Dana Scully, the program revolves around such supernatural and occult topics as alien abductions, government-orchestrated cloning experiments and witchcraft, to name only a few. It has become that rare television phenomenon that has inspired countless imitations, none as successful as the original.
The program always contains violence, most of which is somewhat grisly in nature. Depictions of violence are sometimes quite restrained, utilizing camera techniques and lighting to conceal unnecessary graphicness, leaving much to the audience's imagination. However, in other instances, unduly graphic violence is shown in an effort to unsettle and disturb audiences, usually effectively. Because of the exceptionally grim nature of much of the violence, whether graphic or not, The X-Files may raise the most concerns for some viewers. It is not surprising, considering that both programs come from the same creator, that similar issues are found in both The X-Files and Millennium. In both cases, the shows do not raise concerns solely because of their dark and disturbing themes. As with Millennium, occasionally The X-Files raises issues of concern with regard to violence.
The sheer brutality of some of the violence in The X-Files is of concern. For example, in the episode that aired on 10/11/96, Mulder and Scully are summoned to a small Pennsylvania town to investigate the murder of a deformed baby found buried alive. When they discover that the murdered child was the unwanted offspring of three inbred brothers and their mother, Mulder and Scully try to track down the guilty parties. In a scene approximately half way through the episode, the three brothers--each horribly disfigured by generations of inbreeding--attack the local sheriff in his home. Storming into his bedroom at night, they beat him to death with baseball bats while his wife watches from her hiding place. They then discover and kill her also. Although the entire scene is extremely dark and the impact of the blows is never seen, the sounds of the bats and the image of the victim's blood spreading over the hardwood floor leave little to the imagination. It is a horrifying scene of violence, haunting and grotesque, that is ironically juxtaposed with a 1950s love song that plays over it. Later on in the episode, Mulder and Scully, with the help of the sheriff's deputy, raid the brothers' home. The deputy falls victim to a booby trap and is decapitated, the portrayal of which is restrained and not particularly graphic. However, like several other scenes in this episode, it is still extremely intense and unsettling.
Frequently, The X-Files features extremely graphic images devoid of any actual violent act. Typically, they are the result of a violent attack or some strange, supernatural event and are fairly gory. This makes the show appear to contain more violent acts than it really does. An example of this can be found on 1/27/97. This episode was broadcast immediately after the Super Bowl and thus aired at 7:00 p.m. in some markets. Although this episode was also preceded by an advisory--a relatively rare occurrence for this program--it contained very graphic and frightening images that were intense for such an early time slot. The episode revolves around the investigation and pursuit of a man with the ability to regenerate lost body parts. He does this by eating cancerous tumors culled from medical patients. In the opening scene of the episode, the man is decapitated during a car accident. His severed head is shown in several subsequent scenes, one of which takes place as Scully is examining it. As she is about to make an incision, the head's eyes and mouth open. Later in the episode, the villain is shown regenerating an entire other self. It is an intense and graphic scene as he is shown, the blood of his most recent victim smeared around his mouth and all over his naked body. He appears in obvious pain as something is moving under his skin. Finally, his mouth is stretched wide open, as another entire head comes out of it and lets out a haunting scream of pain. It is extreme and grotesque, the stuff of nightmares, and, although not conventionally violent, certainly has a similar impact.
In what was perhaps the most extreme and unsettling bit of graphic violence of the whole season, in the episode that aired on 11/10/96, a satanic plastic surgeon obsessed with vanity possesses other doctors and causes them to commit horrendous acts of violence on their patients. These include liposuctioning a man to death, burning a hole through a woman's face with a laser and pouring acid on another woman's face. Towards the end of the episode, the evil doctor changes his identity by literally cutting off his own face and replacing it with another. He is shown placing a scalpel at the top of his forehead and then making an incision around his face. As he cuts, blood runs from the wound down his forehead. The camera cuts away but promptly returns to show him having sliced all around his visage. He then takes a surgical tool and proceeds to peel off his face, pulling his forehead away from his skull.
Gruesome violence is one of the signature aspects of The X-Files and thus it is
examined with considerable scrutiny. Most of the time, the program does an excellent job
of creating a dark and eerie tone which implies violence without actually showing it. When
violence does appear on screen it is usually well done and integral to the story's
development. However, when a program like this constantly pushes the limits in terms of
content, it is not surprising that it will occasionally cross the line. While the first
season of this study found that The X-Files raised frequent concerns of violence, last
year it raised few concerns. This season contained some of the elements that made it a
problem in the first year, however not nearly as often, and therefore falls in the middle
of the first two years by raising occasional concerns. Of the 24 times the show was
monitored, it raised concerns of violence four times.
A fantasy adventure program, Sliders aired on Friday nights at 8:00 p.m. just before Millennium. The show is about the adventures of four friends who "slide" through portals to parallel universes in an effort to find their way back to their home universe. In each new world they inevitably find themselves in precarious situations and are faced with the challenge of surviving.
The genre, writing and time slot of Sliders all indicate that it targets a young audience. Very seldom is the violence in Sliders very threatening or graphic. However, it is frequently antiseptic and glorified and there is a surprising amount of it.
One of the primary issues raised by Sliders is the glorification of the violence. The group's unofficial leader is a young inventor-scientist named Quinn, who is often forced to fend off villains with his fists. In an episode that aired on 11/1/96, the group slides into a desert world where water is the prized commodity. The whole episode is very reminiscent of the post- apocalypse Mad Max films. In one scene, as the sliders try to kidnap a water witch from a ruffian desert rat named Cutter, Quinn pounces on his dune buggy and punches him in the face. When Cutter slams on the brakes, Quinn is thrown off the vehicle and the two square off. Cutter pulls out a large knife and begins slashing at Quinn who defends himself with a metal bar. Quinn jabs Cutter in the gut with the bar and then punches him hard twice in the face. The second punch sends Cutter over the edge of an embankment, rendering him unconscious. While the scene is relatively quick, and the villain is dispensed with only two punches, the violence is very exciting and also very glorified. By attacking Cutter and beating him in a fight, Quinn is painted as a hero.
Another example of glorified violence from this season is found in the episode aired on 3/7/97. The group slides into a world where a drug has turned virtually all its inhabitants into flesh-eating zombies. When Quinn is turned into a zombie, the group is forced to try to find a cure. While exploring a ravaged hospital, they are attacked by zombies. One of the sliders, a female warrior who joined the group in one of the worlds through which they passed, wields a shotgun to fend off the onslaught. When one zombie charges them, she blasts the zombie, sending it flying backwards through the air. The scene is extremely exaggerated in order to accentuate and glorify the violent action. This exaggeration is underscored when another character compliments the slider on her ability to "kick butt."
In a similar example, in the episode that aired on 5/9/97, the sliders go up against a vampire rock group. When one of the female sliders falls under the spell of the lead vampire Morgan, Quinn is forced to fight him. In their final confrontation, Morgan runs down Quinn on a motorcycle, roughly kicking him to the ground as he blazes past him. Morgan turns and makes a second pass at Quinn, but this time Quinn picks up a wooden spear and jams it into the heart of the charging vampire. Morgan is sent flying backwards off the motorcycle with the spear protruding from his chest. As he lies on the ground dying, Quinn walks up to him and, for good measure, grips the spear and twists it, killing Morgan. This scene is extremely overdone, excessive and glorified and was one of the most problematic from Sliders all season. It was surprising to find such an instance of brutal violence in what is essentially a youth-oriented show in a youth-oriented time slot.
Tonnage is also frequently an issue with Sliders. Some episodes feature as many as 20 scenes of violence in one hour. This is in large part due to the fact that the worlds in which the sliders finds themselves are often violent and hostile. An example of this is the episode that aired on 9/20/96 in which the group slides into a world where they are contestants in a deadly game show where the only way to win is to survive. Obviously, this violent premise gave way to many violent interactions. One in particular, in which the sliders do battle with a squad of laser gun-wielding androids, stands out because of its length and the significant amount of gunfire.
A basic issue raised by Sliders is its time slot. Although much of the violence is very
unrealistic and in the vein of science fiction, it is also frequently glorified and
rampant. Occasionally, some of the violence is a little too intense for the early hour. Of
the 25 times it was monitored, Sliders raised issues six times.
Several issues in prime time series television have been identified and are discussed
in-depth below. Several of these matters were addressed in last year's report. While new
and interesting issues from the 1996-97 television season have been distinguished and
addressed, several of those that were raised last year are compelling and important enough
to warrant continued consideration. Where appropriate, several of these previously
identified issues have been updated and illustrated with examples taken from the current
season. In instances where a better example existed in the previous year of monitoring, it
was re-used to better illuminate the issue.
Last year's report commented on the extraordinary quality of some of television's 10:00 p.m. dramas. This trend continued as the 1996-97 season produced some of the best drama ever to appear on television. The overall quality of shows such as NYPD Blue, Chicago Hope, ER, Law & Order, Homicide and Fox's 9:00 p.m. Party of Five (the Fox Network does not have a 10:00 p.m. time slot) reached new heights this season.
These are shows featuring vivid, fully drawn, multidimensional characters who have complex personalities that unfold as the season develops. Though these shows frequently contain scenes of violence--as shows dealing with the real world would be expected to--they rarely, if ever, raise concerns about the manner in which they use violence. The following section will detail the ways in which they portray violence and the lessons that can be learned from these shows.
But these are not just shows that deal with violence well. They contain some of the
highest quality drama created by Hollywood. Considering that a two-hour motion picture
takes a year or more to produce, the fact that a program like Chicago Hope can produce 22
high-quality hours a season is a tribute to the talent of the creators and writers. Many
episodes of Homicide and Law & Order are as well written and compelling as the best
feature films.
In the history of television, law enforcement officials have almost always been portrayed as "good guys." The passage of time and events such as the Rodney King beating have chipped away at the popular notion of the "by the book," Adam-12 or Dragnet police officer. No longer are all police thought of as moral absolutists, upholding the law above anything else. Instead, they are portrayed in more human terms, subject to all the pressures and difficulties that come with their jobs. Nowhere is this better reflected than on television, where the majority of dramatic series are based on law enforcement.
This season, there were many occasions in which police officers crossed over legal boundaries and were excessively violent with criminal suspects. In the past, dramas might have featured a "bad" cop who, reacting to the pressures of his job or the constant fear of death, goes too far and abuses suspects. Occasionally, a show might even focus on a cop who takes the law completely into his or her own hands and either passively or actively allows the death of someone under his control.
What is different in contemporary television is that now these actions are sometimes taken by recurring characters whose actions are shown in a favorable, or at least sympathetic, light. All of this is part of a trend to avoid cardboard characters who always do the right thing. Instead these shows attempt to examine the complex motivations and actions of real human beings. Clear divisions between right and wrong are replaced with moral ambiguity and doubt. Some of these cops do the "wrong" thing and everything still turns out well. Parallel to this morally ambiguous world of police is an equally immoral universe of lawyers, working in a judicial system where it is assumed that criminals rarely receive real justice. In this system, the most brutal acts not only remain unpunished, but are also likely to be repeated. Here, where a murderer might laugh at the justice he will never face and is likely to kill again, is it "really wrong" for a cop to shoot a killer in the heart rather than in the leg? This is the type of question that is addressed in modern police dramas.
Last season, in an episode of New York Undercover, a criminal played by rap star Ice-T sought revenge on Detective Williams who, in the line of duty, had killed his brother. In retaliation, Ice-T frames Williams for the murder of a drug dealer and attempts to kill his ex-wife and son. At the end of the episode, Williams captures Ice-T and holds him at gunpoint. Defiantly, Ice-T tells Williams that if he doesn't kill him, he will come after his son. At this critical moment, in a shocking turn of events, Detective Williams shoots and kills Ice-T. It is not rare in television or film for the hero to hold the fate of the villain in his or her hands. In this situation, up until very recently, the hero has always chosen to spare the villain's life, not wanting to sink to his or her level. Typically, the villain was arrested or made a final move for his or her gun, forcing the hero to kill the outlaw. This latter tactic conveniently satisfied the audience's desire to see the bad guy "get it good" while keeping the hero's morality intact. Thus, when Williams, a good cop, murders a man in cold blood and then goes unpunished, the viewer cannot walk away without examining a morally ambiguous situation.
This season there were two more examples of police contributing to the murder of a suspect. One of these is examined in the discussion of ABC's High Incident, a series which raised occasional issues of concern. In the episode on 2/6/97, Officer Marsh, a cop with a tendency towards violence, finds himself holding a drug dealer and murderer, Chino, over the edge of a building. Officer Marsh implies that he is going to drop Chino if he does not admit to a murder. Chino confesses. After hearing his confession, rather than pulling Chino up to safety and arresting him, Marsh instead lets him drop to his death. The clear message at the end of the program is that the life of everyone in the neighborhood improves after the death of the drug dealer. Again, the viewer is presented with a morally ambiguous situation.
In the episode aired 4/25/97, on NBC's Homicide: Life on the Streets, detectives are frustrated over their repeated attempts to arrest a murderous drug kingpin, Luther Mahoney. After witnessing him shoot one of his henchmen and an innocent bystander, Detective Lewis tracks down Mahoney and beats him savagely. However, the tables are turned when Mahoney wrests Lewis' gun away from him. Lewis is saved when his partner, Detective Kellerman, and a narcotics detective arrive on the scene with guns drawn. Mahoney surrenders, lowering his gun, but laughing defiantly, knowing that he has been able to elude justice countless times before. Detective Kellerman then, rather than taking Mahoney in, shoots him in the heart, murdering him. Standing over him, Kellerman turns to his fellow detectives and asks, "Anyone got a problem with this?" Both detectives shake their heads no, although the narcotics officer has obvious misgivings.
In both of the above described instances, the police suffer no consequences and, in both instances, their decisions are rewarded. The problems these criminals posed disappear and the world is a better place because they are dead. It is compelling storytelling, particularly in the case of Homicide, because the next several episodes explore the impact on the officers involved and their remorse or lack of remorse.
In virtually every show about police work, there is a "loose cannon"
character who takes the law into his or her own hands. While this may be an accurate
reflection of reality in some instances, these programs sometimes glorify such acts. It is
possible that some audiences, disillusioned by perceived high crime rates and the stifling
bureaucracy of the legal system, tend to cheer for these characters. Generally, these
programs do a responsible job of exploring these characters and their actions. They
reflect the fact that police work can be stressful and that sometimes officers may crack
under the pressure. Also, most of these programs air in the 10:00 p.m. time slot,
attracting adult audiences who can recognize and understand the moral ambiguities
involved.
Certain genres of television programming and feature films frequently combine elements
of violent action and comedy. This is different from the use of slapstick violence in
situation comedies or the hyperbolic "real" violence found in the Naked Gun
films where the violence itself is the joke. Instead, in these instances, the humor simply
accompanies the violence, typically in the form of dry, snappy dialogue during violent
encounters. Detective shows like Spy Games, Nash Bridges and Mr. and Mrs. Smith are the
types of programs that most often feature this blend of comedy and violence. This union of
elements often has the effect of enhancing the characters' appeal, making them appear cool
under pressure. However, it also functions to trivialize the violence, much of which is,
in reality, very serious. Incorporating comedy into such dangerous and potentially lethal
violence as fist fights, gun battles and car chases makes the violence seem lighthearted
and inconsequential. Scientific research and logic indicate that this can lessen viewers'
inhibitions against violence by making it appear less serious and glorifying it. By
detracting from the severity and consequences of violence, certain audience members could
become desensitized to this type of violence and view it as more acceptable. Because of
children's greater susceptibility to such perceptual influences, this is of particular
concern when it occurs in earlier time slots.
ER was the breakout hit of the 1994-95 television season. It finished number two in the Nielsen ratings for the entire season this year. Created by author, director and physician Michael Crichton and produced by John Wells, it was the first medical show in years to become popular and restored much of the lost luster to television drama. Chicago Hope is produced by David Kelley, the Emmy Award-winning writer and producer of L.A. Law and the creative force behind Picket Fences.
Both series air at 10:00 p.m. and raise interesting issues regarding context and definitions of violence. Both are set in hospitals and ER, of course, is specifically set in an emergency room. It is not surprising, in light of the producers' intent and approach, that both shows very graphically portray the consequences of violence.
Very early in the first season, we had to deal with scenes of doctors using scalpels to cut into patients. We had to decide whether these were scenes of violence and, if so, how to classify them. It was in incidences such as this that the soundness of the contextual analysis of violence became most apparent. We clearly felt that under no circumstances could a scene with a doctor using a scalpel to save someone's life ever be construed as a scene of problematic violence. Early in the 1994-95 season we saw an episode of Chicago Hope in which a doctor makes a long incision into an abdomen during surgery. The camera zoomed in very close and, as the scalpel moved, the viewer could see blood rise to the surface of the skin. It was an extraordinary special effect likely to make many of those watching squirm. While it was an extremely graphic image, it could not be categorized as violence that raises concerns. The context lets us know that this is a beneficial act designed to save a life. The same scene of a scalpel cutting, however, would have been one of the most horrific scenes of violence possible if the knife had been held by a terrorist or a murderer. The difference between a non-problematic violent act and a horrific act of violence has nothing to do with the close-up itself. It is the surrounding context that determines whether the act is interpreted as life-saving or sadistic.
Medical shows frequently contain scenes similar to the one described above. We expect
to see scalpels and blood in medical shows as part of the context. Both of these shows
were examined 19 times each this season and neither ever raised any concerns.
In the 11/1/96 episode of Family Matters, the popular "nerd" character, Urkel, is transformed into a martial arts champion and leads two small children into a brawl with local gang members. Each of the children, with Urkel taking center stage, proceeds to thrash the gang members with an assortment of martial arts-style kicks and punches. The scene, although a parody of karate movies, is actually surprisingly similar to a scene that would be found in one, complete with enhanced sound effects and high flying kicks. After dispensing with eight thugs, Urkel slams down a metal partition on the back of another foe who he had just thrown into a utility shack. The whole scene lasts for nearly four minutes as the studio audience cheers for the boys.
An example of audiences laughing at characters' injuries can be found in the 9/4/96 episode of Sister, Sister. When a male friend climbs up to the girls' second story window at night to apologize for an earlier transgression, they respond by pushing his ladder backwards, sending him falling to the ground. Although this is slapstick and is not meant to be taken seriously, in reality such an act would be terribly dangerous and possibly lethal. In this children's program, the act is never seen as anything more than a convenient and time-tested comedic device.
While comedy does deserve some latitude, somewhere a screenwriter decided that to make
the audience laugh there would be a scene in which someone was beaten up in a gang fight
or pushed off a ladder. This raises the issue of characterizing serious injuries as being
funny.
Sometimes a show that rarely deals with issues of violence will air a program with a violent theme. This raises a very interesting question. The show develops a reputation as one that seldom, if ever, contains violence. Viewers become accustomed to this, rely on it and perhaps it is a major reason they like the show. When, because of violence, a particular episode is out of step with the entire series, is it inappropriate because it is not what viewers expect? Or because the show so seldom raises these issues, is it afforded a measure of latitude to occasionally expand its themes or move in a slightly different direction?
This season, two episodes of NBC's hit show ER stand out as containing atypical amounts of violence. This program regularly features the results of violence, as victims of violence are constantly brought in for treatment, but very rarely does the show actually depict violent acts. In the episode that aired on 2/13/97, a nurse from the hospital, Carol Hathaway, is present during a convenience store robbery. When the robbery goes bad, gunfire is exchanged by the criminals and the store owner. The owner is killed and one of the robbers is seriously wounded. One store patron escapes during the gunfight and notifies the police, creating a hostage situation. The situation is resolved when the man in charge of the robbery is shot repeatedly and killed by police. The episode is unusually violent, graphically depicting several shootings. While they are contextually relevant and handled in a thoughtful and intelligent manner, they are much more than regular viewers of the show would normally expect.
Another episode, which aired on 5/1/97, revolved around a ruthless attack on one of the emergency room doctors. As Dr. Mark Greene is washing his hands in a hospital bathroom, he is assaulted by an unseen assailant who slams Greene's head into the sink and then into the mirror. He then punches Greene twice and kicks him. As Greene tries to stand up, he is thrown against the wall and knocked back to the ground where his attacker kicks him in the back and then stomps on his hand. It is a vivid and brutal attack, as realistic and disturbing as any found on television. Because of its realism and the in-depth examination of the physical and mental consequences, which spans several weeks, this episode did not raise issues of concern. However, the fact remains that this type of violence is not what viewers typically expect to see on this program.
Violence is out of character for these kinds of shows, but they deserve a measure of latitude, particularly as they search for new directions and attempt to deal with real life issues in an intelligent manner. Nevertheless, the violence that occurs must still be contextually appropriate for them not to raise concerns. These types of shows are subject to the same general standards to which all shows are held. Though out of character episodes such as those mentioned above in ER could raise concerns, these particular ones did not. Also of note is the fact that both of these episodes were rated "TV-14," although the program is typically rated "TV-PG."
Reading the preceding analyses might give the impression that prime time series are filled with violent themes. In fact, only a few shows this season consistently raised issues about violence. Many shows impressively conveyed conflict and grittiness without resorting to excessive or contextually inappropriate uses of violence. As mentioned earlier, the 10:00 p.m. dramas were particularly outstanding in how they handled violent themes, almost never resorting to excessive, graphic images or gratuitous or glorified violence. The work of Steven Bochco, David Kelley, Dick Wolf and John Wells is especially notable in its sensitive handling of violence. It is encouraging to see that violence can be portrayed so responsibly and thoughtfully.
An entire season of monitoring NYPD Blue 21 times, Chicago Hope 19 times, ER 19 times,
Homicide 21 times and Law & Order 23 times produced no problematic portrayals of
violence. Although these shows deal with themes containing violence, they generally do so
by portraying violence in a way that is not overly graphic, is relevant to the story and
is in a time period suitable for such themes. There is much to commend in these shows.
They should serve as models for how to deal with violence in an intelligent and
responsible manner. In the following analyses we have tried to explain what is impressive
in these shows. Five programs that were commended in last year's report, NYPD Blue,
Homicide, Law & Order, Chicago Hope and ER, continue to be high quality shows, often
with violent themes, that seldom raise concerns about how they portray violence. All of
these shows except Chicago Hope have been commended in each of the three years of this
report. The programs that deal with violence well this season are discussed below.
Envisioned as broadcast television's first R-rated drama, NYPD Blue consistently deals with violent themes in a responsible manner. Famous for its use of some semi-nudity and explicit language, the show was never found to be irresponsible in its use of violence. Many people unfamiliar with the show associate it with other police shows containing explicit violence. Those who watch NYPD Blue know that it contains little violence. If it does address violent themes, it does so in a manner relevant to the story.
Based on the experiences of New York City Police Department detectives, the show necessarily deals with violence. It would not be possible to portray the lives of New York cops without frequently dealing with violence. Unlike the policemen portrayed on older police shows such as Adam-12, the officers are not completely virtuous. Featuring officers pushed to the wall by the pressures of their dangerous jobs, the show deals extensively with the psychological causes and consequences of violence. The officers struggle and occasionally act brutally when arresting or extracting confessions from suspects.
Violence is depicted as a realistic part of daily life in the city. However, the show is not overrun by guns. The violence, such as slaps or threats, is often born of frustration. Although the police officers frequently consider violent action, they typically demonstrate restraint.
Violence is portrayed as problematic. The police are depicted as human and multi-dimensional characters. The bad guys are not purely evil. This leads to a responsible and realistic handling of violence. The producers understand that it is not necessary to show graphic scenes of violence in order to deal with violence in the show.
Every act of violence portrayed in NYPD Blue is contextually appropriate. Nothing is excessive, everything is realistic and the consequences are always shown. NYPD Blue is close to a textbook example of how to deal with violent material. Others can benefit by studying its methods.
Although nothing changed this season in terms of the way violence was depicted on NYPD Blue, several episodes were especially commendable for their exploration of violence committed by police officers while on the job. Typically, the only on-screen violence occurs when a detective, feeling the pressures of the job and pushed to his wit's end, occasionally crosses the line and physically abuses a suspect during interrogation. In the episode that aired on 1/14/97, Detective Andy Sipowicz is sent in to question someone suspected of a knife attack. The man is suspected of slashing the face of Gina, one of the receptionists who works in the police station. If the suspect confesses, Gina will not have to deal with the terror of testifying in front of her attacker. The station's commander, Lieutenant Fancy, specifically chooses Sipowicz to conduct the interrogation because of his violent character and ability to extract confessions. Knowing what is expected of him, Sipowicz hits the suspect several times in the face and back of the head and finally slams his head down on the table. Fearful for his life, the man confesses to the attack.
Following the interrogation, Sipowicz enters the detectives' locker room where he is confronted by a fellow detective, Greg Medavoy. Medavoy, who had brought the suspect in, had been relieved from the questioning process and replaced with Sipowicz. Obviously upset at what has happened, Medavoy presses Sipowicz about his methods of interrogation, pointing out a variety of bad things that could come out of them: coerced confessions, tainted investigations, even being thrown off the force and sent to jail. What follows is Sipowicz's discussion of what he does, why he does it and the rules he follows. It is not a glamorized account. He points out that before he ever lays a hand on a suspect, he must realize that only he is responsible for his actions and he may ultimately pay a serious price for them. He explains that it is just his way of getting results and not the right method for everybody. It is a thoughtful and compelling conversation that explores the moral ambiguities that police officers face on a daily basis. Their exchange concludes as Lieutenant Fancy enters the locker room to ask who is going to write the suspect's confession. As Fancy enters, he is barely able to look Sipowicz in the eye, his own misgivings about assigning Sipowicz to interrogate the subject apparent on his face. It is truly a remarkable scene that deals with a socially important issue of violence with gravity and intelligence.
In a continuation of this storyline, in a later episode that aired on 2/25/97, Detective Medavoy tries being more physically aggressive with suspects in an effort to get the same results as Sipowicz. While he initially meets with success as he gets a gang member to give up information about a shooting by hitting him in the head with a phone book, he is obviously shaken by his own actions. His partner is also surprised and unsettled by his uncharacteristic outburst. As the episode continues, Medavoy finds himself progressively getting rougher with suspects until it backfires on him when a suspect refuses to give him a statement because of his approach. His partner's anger toward him, in conjunction with his own doubts about his behavior, ultimately lead him to the conclusion that, while sometimes appropriate and effective, roughing up suspects is not for him. Again, the exploration of this idea is well done and responsible. The episode never portrays Medavoy's actions as glamorous or heroic, but rather as awkward as he stumbles through his tough guy act. The portrayal of his behavior is quite realistic, painted in real life shades of gray.
This program reaches a level of dramatic quality usually found only in the best feature
films. Thus, it is not surprising to find such complex themes and characters as one does
in this show. The result, in terms of violence, is a program which approaches the violence
of urban America with sensitivity and truth, dealing far more with the consequences and
impact of violence than with its graphic and gory details.
The story of an ex-Marine turned high school teacher with a heart of gold, the show stars Annie Potts as the main character Louanne Johnson, affectionately referred to as "Ms. J" by her class. In each episode, Ms. J deals with her multi-ethnic and intelligent but at-risk students as they face many of the social ills that plague urban America: teenage pregnancy, poverty, racial tension and gang violence. Much of this subject matter necessarily involves violence. However, because of the show's prosocial and positive message, the violence is always presented as problematic, an evil that must be stopped.
A particularly noteworthy aspect of Dangerous Minds is a cinematic technique used whenever a violent scene occurs on screen. Whenever violence happens, the camera shot becomes grainy and the scene is blurred. The effect of this is that the actual violent act is obscured, diminishing its graphicness, without compromising the severity of the attack or confusing the audience. This camera technique was extremely effective. It indicates a desire for viewers to focus on the message and the plot significance of the violence, refusing to exploit it for the purposes of excitement.
Less preachy and more realistic than last season's Matt Waters, Dangerous Minds is a
positive show that deals with relevant issues of violence from a thoughtful and prosocial
perspective. Although some critics have faulted the show for being overly sentimental, the
show is worthy of praise for earnestly handling important, contemporary issues in a manner
that is both constructive and genuine. Regrettably, Dangerous Minds was canceled at the
end of the season.
Homicide contains few scenes of violence. Some episodes contain none at all. Frequently scenes contain no violence other than a dead body that is the basis of a subsequent homicide investigation. Thus, the show is often a murder mystery that does not even depict the murder. The focus of the program is typically the investigation and psychological dimensions of the crime, rather than the graphic and exciting nature of the violent act itself. Like NYPD Blue, Homicide presents a world in which violence and conflict are prevalent in urban life.
Almost all of the violence is realistic and demonstrates consequences. Frequently,
action is taken to prevent violence. Homicide effectively avoids gratuitous violence while
at the same time portraying the gritty reality of urban life.
"In the criminal justice system, the people are represented by two separate but equally important groups: the police, who investigate, and district attorneys, who prosecute the offenders. These are their stories." With this statement, Law & Order begins. This is an unusual show which dedicates approximately half of the one-hour program to a police investigation and the other half to the follow-up prosecution of the case. The goal of the show is to depict the justice system in a realistic light. This is achieved through character and plot development which is gritty and intense, and illustrates consequences.
Typically, Law & Order features the results of an act of violence at the beginning of the show. This is usually the crime which is being investigated, which acts as the storyline's driving force. Thus, this act of violence is always contextually appropriate (as are all of the other violent acts in the show). More often than not the crime itself is not seen, and the audience is presented with the aftermath of the violent action, i.e., a "dirty dead body." Moreover, the consequences of the violence are dealt with in a commendable manner. One example of the show's admirable portrayal of consequences occurred in the season finale that aired on 5/22/96. In this episode the four main characters are witnesses to a state execution. The remainder of the show is dedicated to how the characters deal with what they have seen: two turn to alcohol, one has a brief affair and the other questions the law and even her career choice. In speaking with one of her old law professors, she says, "What happened this morning will stick with me for the rest of my life."
In attempting to make the show true to life, it occasionally portrays the police as bullying some suspects with threatening language or physical coercion. In one episode, a police officer pushes a suspect during an interrogation. However, these acts are never overdone or gratuitous in nature.
Law & Order integrates violence into the plot in a responsible fashion. The violent
acts are not heroic, glamorized or prolonged. Instead of showing the violent act, Law
& Order substitutes graphic images and realistic consequences. This gives the program
a more violent feel without having to show actual violence. The dramatic edge is provided
by portraying the detailed rigors of police investigations. These investigations often
involve mysteries that the District Attorney's office must solve. Then, the dramatic
tension is continued by the atmosphere of the courtroom, in which the outcome of the trial
is never predictable. This is a cop show without a lot of violence and yet it has
compelling elements that keep viewers riveted to the show.
Similar in premise, both Chicago Hope and ER follow the lives and work of doctors in Chicago hospitals. Both are high quality shows featuring strong characters and well crafted stories. Focusing on the treatment of injury and disease, both programs necessarily include a degree of violence as patients are often the victims of attacks, car accidents, fires and other incidents. Sometimes the acts of violence occur in the hospital itself and are directed against the medical staff. Both programs deal with the full consequences of violence, making it clear that death or permanent injury is a frequent result of violence and that the toll on the victims, their families and friends, not to mention the doctors themselves is usually devastating.
On the occasions when violence is portrayed within the shows, both Chicago Hope and ER have handled it with commendable gravity and realism. An episode of Chicago Hope that aired on 1/22/96 contained the most realistic depiction of an explosion and its consequences all last season. Unlike what is typically seen in many theatrical films, the explosion on Chicago Hope was in no way stylized or glamorized. It was shown as a horrible event with horrendous consequences. Often when something explodes on television the explosion is filmed in slow motion from multiple angles as smoke and red, yellow and orange billows of fire unfold across the screen. However, in this episode of Chicago Hope, in which an extremist anti-abortion organization bombs a clinic, the explosion was handled in a manner that was in no way glamorized. Instead, viewers were confronted with a realistic blast and its effects, thereby achieving a far more dramatic impact than if it had been treated in a manner more typical of action genre shows.
At no time during the season did either program raise any issues of concern in terms of
violence. All violence contained in both shows was integral to the development of
characters and plot. It was also portrayed in a realistic manner that fully dealt with the
consequences of the violence.
SUMMARY:
These dramatic series are commendable, but not because they avoid dealing with violence. Most comedies do this. What is so impressive about these shows is that they achieve a high level of grittiness and excitement without overemphasizing violence, but by placing it in an appropriate context. A recommendation that a police or hospital show simply avoid violence would be unrealistic given the demands of the genre. These shows deal with violent themes but consistently do so in a contextually appropriate manner. Some conclusions regarding responsible depictions of violence are as follows:
1) Violence is a part of city life. These shows understand that violence does occur in twentieth century urban America. They do not have to invent unusual or unrealistic ways of portraying violence.
2) The violence must be realistic. When violence is depicted on these shows, it is never exaggerated, cartoonish or sanitized and the consequences are shown.
3) Characters who commit violent acts do not do so easily and frequently demonstrate remorse. Violence does not exist in a vacuum. Rarely do police officers shoot or kill suspects, even guilty ones, and call it a day. Deciding to commit a violent act can be difficult. Often a character struggles with other options before resorting to violence. After committing a violent act, one often undergoes a painful process of self-examination and reflection.
4) It is not always necessary for the audience to see the violence. Violence need not always be shown in order to make a point, advance the plot or develop a particular character. Graphically depicting violence is seldom necessary and often serves merely to sensationalize rather than illuminate.
5) It is more difficult to write and produce these kinds of shows than typical action shows. These shows require the creation of multi-dimensional characters whose actions are not always predictable. The characters cannot be superficially drawn because viewers have to understand their backgrounds and personalities in order to comprehend their actions. More traditional action shows, on the other hand, can use simplistic characters who reflexively resort to violence as the solution to problems.
These guidelines point to ways in which programs can effectively deal with violent
themes in a contextually appropriate manner that rarely, if ever, raises concerns.
In the first year of the monitoring, there was no section in the report on television specials. Of the several dozen television specials during the 1994-95 television season only one or two raised issues of concern. A new section was added last year because of a worrisome trend that started to develop in that season. Although representing only a small fraction of the total number of specials, The World's Most Dangerous Animals I and II on CBS and When Animals Attack on Fox were heavily promoted and achieved respectable ratings. It was our fear that this was the beginning of a trend that could escalate in the 1996-97 television season. Unfortunately, our fears were well founded.
These specials are a combination of real-life footage and re-creations of animals attacking and, in some cases, killing and eating human beings. The sometimes blurred distinction between the real tape and the re-creation causes confusion in the viewer. There is no question that a morbid human fascination exists with this kind of macabre video tape. Although almost everyone decries motorists slowing down to crane their necks at an automobile accident, almost everyone does so as they drive by. This is a normal, albeit not admirable, aspect of human nature. As was mentioned in last year's report, however, "The programming of a television network should not seek to emulate a car wreck at the side of the road." We also pointed out that even though "Shark Week" on The Discovery Channel--the highest rated week of their season--features shockingly violent images and scary music, viewers also learn about the mating habits and migratory behavior of sharks. Those programs have essentially remained documentaries, despite some admittedly terrifying footage. But many of the specials that appeared this season depict only the terror and carnage.
Concerns about the images in some of these animal specials were first raised in last
year's report. These concerns were echoed over the next few months in publications such as
the Los Angeles Times and Newsweek as well as several broadcast outlets. These specials
contain some of the most graphic and terrifying images to be found anywhere on network
television. And, most worrisome of all, this is a trend that seems to have spread. These
programs proliferated over the 1996-97 television season. It is our hope that there are
now so many that the market has become saturated and the number will begin to decrease.
One of the reasons these programs are so popular with programmers is that they are so easy
and inexpensive to produce. Over the past season the genre extended beyond animal attacks
to include car chases, near-death (or death) experiences, stunts, disasters and shootouts.
While last year the report was able to talk about each of these specials in detail, this
year there were so many that only a few can be highlighted.
This trend of reality-based shows began with specials about animals attacking and sometimes killing people. There are still many examples of this programming in the current season. This season saw the airing of programs like The World's Most Dangerous Animals Part III, When Animals Attack II, and When Animals Attack III. All three programs raise concerns similar to those expressed about their predecessors in the last report.
The World's Most Dangerous Animals Part III aired on CBS on 2/27/97, profiling some of the planet's most ferocious and feared creatures. Although this third installment of the series is not quite as gory as its predecessors, the show still remains a showcase of wild animals mauling and killing their human victims. One of the most violent scenes is a graphic re-enactment of a bear attack which is surprisingly intense and bloody for network television. As a whole, the program raises concerns because of the tonnage of similarly vicious scenes.
The show did air with an advisory, but it silently scrolled across the screen along with an opening montage, making it very easy for many viewers to have overlooked it.
Many of the factors that make The World's Most Dangerous Animals Part III troubling are only amplified in the two sequels to Fox's When Animals Attack. It would be extremely difficult to overstate the severity of the violence presented in When Animals Attack II (11/3/96, and repeated on 11/18/96) and When Animals Attack III (2/17/97). The slight educational value of The World's Most Dangerous Animals Part III is entirely absent from either of these two programs. Both programs open with an unusually graphic montage of violence, featuring images of attacks by bears, sharks, alligators, deer, pit bulls and many other animals. Later in each show, violent previews of upcoming footage appear before each commercial break to lure viewers back to the program.
These programs also raise serious concerns because of the way in which they glorify violence. Each show employs the use of ominous music and slow motion to underscore the brutality of each attack. Moreover, in certain instances both shows repeat the most violent portions of an attack as many as four or five times in an apparent attempt to further shock and disgust the viewer. For instance, one of the most graphic scenes in When Animals Attack III shows a bull impaling a woman with its horns and tossing her through the street like a rag doll. By the time the segment concludes the attack has been shown no less than three different times.
Another disturbing element in these shows is that they feature real-life footage of animal attacks. Unlike injury or death depicted in other televised formats, viewers cannot comfort themselves with the reassurance that what they are watching is just a fictional story, or that the injuries they are looking at are just the product of a skilled makeup artist. Rather, these shows capitalize upon the opportunity to show extraordinarily gory images of actual injuries. One segment of When Animals Attack II features actual footage of a gruesome shark attack, culminating in an extended close-up shot of the victim's bloody, wounded arm.
An argument could be made that shows of this variety could potentially inspire
unreasonable fear of certain animals. To varying degrees, The World's Most Dangerous
Animals Part III, When Animals Attack II and When Animals Attack III all exploit viewers'
fears in the way they present these violent attacks. One noteworthy instance of this
effect concerns an attack by a house cat. When it aired on The World's Most Dangerous
Animals Part III, the attacking cat was portrayed as vicious and deadly. Interestingly,
the exact same footage was shown on a different program as a comedic moment when it aired
on NBC's TV Censored Bloopers (2/22/97).
Another variety of reality-based specials this season featured criminal activity that had been caught on tape. Fox aired three such programs, World's Scariest Police Chases, World's Scariest Police Shootouts and Video Justice: Crime Caught on Tape, all of which present a multitude of images that bring to mind George Gerbner's "mean world syndrome."
Attempting to present itself as a warning against trying to outrun police, World's Scariest Police Chases showcases a collection of video clips. The program proudly declares that there are "no re-creations." What follows is actual footage of police chases, primarily focusing on the final outcome of each chase--in virtually all cases a violent crash or a pursuit on foot ending in a shootout.
This program raises some concerns because it airs at such an early time, 7:00 p.m. In addition, many of the crashes are shown without any accompanying consequences. Several clips show innocent motorists becoming the victims in these out-of-control pursuits, but do not pay much attention at all to the bodily injury that would undoubtedly result from these violent collisions. As mentioned above, last year's report likened the appeal of reality-based specials to the "morbid human fascination that leads people to gawk at auto accidents." World's Scariest Police Chases is the most literal possible example of that statement.
World's Scariest Police Shootouts delivers much of what its title promises. The seemingly endless scenes of gunfire and bloodshed in the program become overwhelming after a certain point, leaving the typical viewer somewhat unmoved by what would otherwise be perceived as truly heinous acts. Still, the most extreme images continue to horrify, as in the case of a desperate man who flips his car off the highway and then holds his wife hostage at gunpoint. A standoff ensues, and after several hours he turns the gun on his wife for no apparent reason. As she stands next to him, he fires directly into her chest and the viewer sees the bloody aftermath of his actions. She tries to flee and he fires a few more times at her, but within seconds the police have gunned him down. The entire sequence is astonishingly graphic and intense, made only more so by the fact that it is real.
The third special of this type that raises concerns is Video Justice: Crime Caught on Tape. This show tries to make the case that video cameras have become an important weapon in the fight against crime. By the end of the hour, the viewer sees two different policemen hit by oncoming traffic as well as a trio of thugs assaulting and fatally shooting another officer.
All three of these specials share certain elements. They all feature extensive use of
slow motion and repeated showings of the most intense pieces of video tape. They also rely
heavily on dramatic music and an especially violent opening montage. The minute-and-a-half
opening montage of Video Justice: Crime Caught on Tape included two shootings; 13 acts of
physical violence (punching, kicking, striking with an object); eight instances of
shoving, pushing, or struggling; eight threats with a gun; two firings of a paintball gun
and one instance of an officer being hit by a passing truck.
Many other of these "shock-umentary" programs center around terrifying instances of accidental violence. One such show is Close Call: Cheating Death which aired on Fox on 11/25/96. Featuring footage of boating and helicopter crashes, bungee jumping mishaps and other severe accidents, this program tries to make the point that the line between life and death can be very thin indeed.
Nonetheless, this program raises serious concerns because of the way in which it glorifies many of the horrendous accidents it depicts. One such scene shows a member of a bomb squad leaning over a chamber where a possible explosive is stored, only to have it detonate in his face. The explosion itself is repeated seven different times throughout the program. Many of the repetitions are in slow motion. The camera focuses on the gore following the accident, featuring a close-up of the man's hand which is missing three fingers as a result of the blast. Interestingly, the excessive graphicness in this scene is followed by a later sequence in which a man, in the process of rescuing his friend from a helicopter crash, inadvertently reveals the top portion of his buttocks, which are digitally blurred. One can only assume that the creators of this program felt that there was no problem showing viewers a man having his face blown up seven different times, but that viewers needed to be protected from the image of a "butt crack."
This show also raises concerns because several of the segues between segments are comprised of unrelated clips of excessive violence. Examples of these gratuitous images include an indoor bear attack upon an unsuspecting woman, two people falling several stories down a ladder, ski jump accidents and a bull impaling a man on its horns. None of these images are explained or put into any context; rather, they exist simply to shock and titillate.
A similarly violent show, When Disasters Strike, aired on Fox on 10/28/96. This show demonstrates the awesome power of nature's forces, focusing on the aftermath of earthquakes, floods, tornadoes, hurricanes and fires. One especially disturbing sequence shows a burning high-rise in Sao Paolo, Brazil. The fire completely engulfs the building in flames and traps hundreds of people inside. In their desperate attempt to escape, many of the victims hurl themselves off the building, ultimately falling to their deaths. This unusually disturbing sequence is reminiscent of films like Faces of Death, which purportedly show actual footage of people caught in the act of dying by falling, electrocution or suicide. It is also interesting that a very similar scenario, a burning building in a Latin American setting, is shown in a far more appropriate manner on ABC's I Survived a Disaster. This program emphasizes personal recollections of the event rather than gruesome footage.
However, When Disasters Strike raises concerns for other reasons as well. A montage of wreckage that introduces a segment on technology is filled with out-of-context scenes of death and destruction such as automobile, plane and boat crashes, as well as people falling to their deaths from hot air balloons. The montage is accompanied by sensationalized, pulsing, tension-building music which detracts from the severity of the violence. Later, an air show disaster is highlighted, showing a collision between two planes that explode and land on the audience. The language used by narrator Martin Sheen gives some idea of the brutality of the images that accompany it. He states simply, "The fireball instantly incinerates 61 people."
Many of the same issues are raised by Fox's When Stunts Go Bad, which aired on 5/14/97. This program purports to emphasize the dangers involved in daredevil stunts, but amounts to little more that sensationalized, titillating carnage. The show features botched motorcycle jumps and fiery car crashes in an attempt to appeal to the same human impulse that drives individuals to crane their necks on the highway to witness an automobile accident. Many of the acts depicted are especially disturbing. A stunt skier accidentally falls down the side of a mountain, flipping 13 times before coming to rest at the base of the incline. In another sequence, a man dies in a bungled Houdini-like stunt as he is literally buried alive under tons of dirt and cement.
Other problematic specials are centered around a different type of accidental violence. Programs such as TV's Funniest News Outtakes contain the type of comedic violence that has raised concerns on shows like America's Funniest Home Videos. TV's Funniest News Outtakes, which aired on Fox on 3/16/97, raises concerns because of graphic images such as a judge at a track and field meet being impaled by a javelin. Astonishingly, this life-threatening scene of graphic violence was played for laughs without any exploration of the consequences suffered by the victim.
Other examples of this type of violence are found in Fox's Funniest of the World's Funniest Outtakes (4/13/97) and Oops! World's Funniest Outtakes 5 (2/23/97). The first of these shows presents a clip of a man dressed in a Scottish kilt singlehandedly attempting to hoist a log into the air. As he loses control of the log, it slips from his hands and clobbers him in the head, knocking him to the ground. He remains motionless for the remainder of the clip. Oops! World's Funniest Outtakes 5 shows surveillance camera footage of a drunken robber's attempt to hold up a liquor store. Two female employees bludgeon him in the head with glass bottles. As the man bleeds profusely and staggers away, the studio audience watching the clip giggles with delight at this horrific act of graphic violence.
These type of reality-based specials--whether they are based on animal attacks,
crime-related brutality or accidental violence--are among the most violent shows on TV.
Their proliferation during the last few television seasons represents a disturbing trend
in television broadcasting.
Other specials that raised concerns include:
Beginning in the 1970s, movies of the week (MOWs) and mini-series became a staple of broadcast network television. Some of the most memorable moments of the past 25 years of television come from this format. Similar in many ways to theatrical films, but specifically written and produced for television, movies of the week and mini-series began as an important forum for the discussion of society's concerns and problems. Earlier mini-series and movies--such as Roots, Holocaust, Something About Amelia, The Day After and The Burning Bed--not only captured extremely high ratings and many Emmy awards, they also sparked valuable national discussions about racism, the attempted extermination of the Jews, incest, nuclear war and spousal abuse.
Originally intended as "events" in a television world largely comprised of series, they quickly became a regular part of television programming and have lost some of their luster. Television movies abandoned important and provocative themes and soon settled into a "disease of the week" format. At the same time, mini-series, intended to be television's blockbuster events, frequently seemed bloated in length and concept. To satisfy commercial demands and to recover some of their frequently very high production costs, two-hour television movies are stretched into three hours and four-hour movies into six.
One important difference between MOWs and theatrical films is the speed with which MOWs can be brought to the television screen. While a feature film may require one to two years of production, a MOW can be conceptualized, produced and aired in a matter of months, and even less in some cases. Now, many MOWs specialize in bringing very recent events to the small screen. Within months of the resolution of the Amy Fisher case, three networks aired television movies on this sensational story. NBC authorized a television movie on the Branch Davidians in Waco, Texas and it was half-way completed before anyone knew whether the followers of David Koresh would get out alive. Whatever the outcome, the television movie would air. Fox aired The O.J. Simpson Story during the early days of the trial. Next year promises at least one television movie on the murder of Gianni Versace and perhaps several on the death of Princess Diana.
As discussed in the history section, MOWs and mini-series in the May 1993 sweeps period were a major source of the belief that television violence had reached new heights. Most of the concern, but not all, was focused on the television movies claiming to be "based on a true story."
We went back and looked at earlier MOWs and mini-series programming, including some shows from the May 1993 sweeps, and saw that there has been progress since then. This is an area over which the networks have total control, and advertiser and political pressure may have influenced them to make some changes in this area.
In the 1995 season we monitored 161 television movies and mini-series and in the second year, 198, an increase of 23%.This season the number shrank a bit to 184. There was no sampling with regard to television movies. Every one of the 184 movies was viewed in its entirety and examined to determine whether it raised concerns about its use of violence.
In 1995 23 television movies, or 14%, were found to raise concerns. That figure dropped modestly in 1996 to 10% (20 out of 198). This year the percentage of television movies raising concerns about violence increased slightly from 10% to 12%. Twenty-two out of 184 television movies raised concerns, a statistically insignificant change. In none of the three seasons were the relatively few television movies raising concerns considered a serious source of violence on television. Although many of these films are based on a violent premise, the elements of violence are handled well almost 90% of the time. Last season this was found to be one of the areas of broadcast television most free of problems. There was less room for improvement here than in other areas such as theatrical films, on-air promotions and children's programming. Also of note is the fact that television movies still seem to be the one type of programming for which the networks are most reluctant to use advisories. Although only a small percentage of these movies raised concerns, those that did were usually lacking advisories. This is a situation that only applied to the first three months of the season as the new television labeling system was implemented shortly after the first of the year.
The first part of this section will discuss some particularly relevant examples of made-for-television movies that raise concerns. The second part will delineate some issues and themes which run through most of the programs that raise concerns.
A made-for-television movie from acclaimed Hong Kong action movie director John Woo, Once a Thief is as close to a big-budget action feature film as one will find in this category of television programming. Airing at 8:00 p.m. without an advisory, the film is about a three-person team of covert, international police who must stop a Hong Kong mafia kingpin from setting up shop in Vancouver before his bank money is seized by the Chinese government. Complicating their mission is the fact that two of the team are not only former members of the crime boss' organization but also his adopted children. Further complicating their mission is the fact that the two male team members both fall for their female teammate and are constantly trying to sabotage and outdo each other as they vie for her affection.
Full of highly stylized, action-packed violence, Once a Thief contains many of the directorial elements that have become the signature trademark of John Woo. Showcasing Woo's reputation is obviously the reason his name was placed in the title of the program. Lots of slow motion and freeze frames give the violent scenes tremendous flair, which is reinforced by the extreme number of explosions, shooting matches and scenes of hand-to-hand combat. The highly choreographed, fast-paced fight scenes are flashy and dazzling, making the action seem extremely glamorous and exciting. Much of it is also highly romanticized. All of the characters are very attractive, smooth-talking individuals. Their toughness and nonchalance enhance their appeal and trivialize the severity of the violence.
Containing 30 scenes of violence in two hours, Once a Thief has the highest
concentration of violence of any television movie this season. Although no one scene is
particularly graphic, the sheer amount, glorification and extreme excess of violence in
this program make it stand out from other television movies. While most of the violence is
so hyperbolic that it is cartoonish, the antiseptic treatment of consequences, in
conjunction with the quantity of scenes, raises serious issues of concern.
Boasting the stamp of approval from the prolific horror-thriller novelist, an honor Stanley Kubrick's 1980 feature film version cannot claim, Stephen King's "The Shining" was one of the most highly anticipated and promoted made-for-television movies of the season. King, unhappy with Kubrick's film adaptation of his popular novel, bought back the rights and decided to produce his own film version of the book. Broken into three parts, the film stars Wings' Stephen Weber as the lead character, Jack Torrance--a role made famous by Jack Nicholson--and Rebecca DeMornay as his wife Wendy. When Torrance takes a caretaking job at a remote, vacated hotel in Colorado, his family comes with him, hoping to rebuild the relationships that have suffered because of his history of alcoholism. However, things go awry when he becomes the target of evil spirits. The ghosts in the hotel slowly drive him insane, convincing him to kill both his wife and their son Danny.
Each segment of Stephen King's "The Shining" was aired at 9:00 p.m. and preceded by some sort of advisory. The first two installments were prefaced by a voice-over, stating "parental discretion advised," and a statement written in small text across the bottom of the screen, warning of intense subject matter. Only the third part was introduced by an actual advisory warning of "violent content." Even then, it was only written in very small text across the bottom of the screen and could have been easily overlooked. Surprisingly, no spoken advisory was issued for part three, despite the fact that it was by far the most violent segment. While the first two installments of this mini-series were extremely intense and very frightening, they did not raise concerns about violence. They were models of raising viewers' fears and creating a general sense of dread and unease. Although they were both dark and unsettling, very little violence actually transpired in either episode and that which did was well handled and crucial to the plot. However, in the third part, when Torrance is finally driven insane and tries to kill his wife and son, the level of violence increases sharply.
In a prolonged scene in which Torrance chases and tries to kill his wife with an
oversized croquet mallet, the violence is exceedingly graphic and brutal. The impacts of
several blows with the mallet are shown in graphic detail as he smashes her in the
abdomen, knee and head. Each blow makes the audience wince in sympathetic pain as he
bludgeons her without mercy. As she tries to escape him, she throws a croquet ball at his
head, splitting his forehead open and covering his face in blood. Slowed down but not
stopped, he continues his pursuit, only to have her slice open the back of his hand with a
razor blade. It is remarkably disturbing, atypical of the violence which is usually found
in this realm of programming and far more graphic than is necessary. This type of program,
a horror-psychological thriller, can be expected to contain some form of unsettling
violence. However, in this instance the overly vivid depictions of brutal, mean-spirited
violence raised some important concerns.
Suzanne, an obsessively competitive and mentally unstable woman, will not rest until all of her childhood disappointments have been addressed and she has been vindicated. After assuming a new identity, she targets a college classmate who upstaged her years ago at a youth talent show. Suzanne attempts to ruin her classmate's life by appropriating it as her own. In the process of executing her plan, she kills a young man who threatens to reveal her past. While the classmate discovers Suzanne's mental instability and her past (including yet another murder that she committed), the only punishment Suzanne suffers is losing to her rival again in a "Battle of the Bands"-type contest.
While the amount of violence in this film is not troubling, the graphic nature of one particular scene stands out as especially grim. In a darkened alley outside a nightclub, Suzanne kills a young man by hitting him in the head with a brick. Despite the fact that she offers a half-hearted apology to her victim for what she is about to do to him, the blow to his head is extremely brutal. Not only does the audience see a tremendous amount of blood as a result of the impact, but they actually hear his skull crack.
Another reason why this film raises concerns is the apparent lack of punishment that
Suzanne suffers for her violent crimes. The viewer is left with a vague sense that perhaps
Suzanne's evil deeds will catch up with her, but this is a questionable assumption at
best.
Set in a college environment and starring Beverly Hills 90210's Shannen Doherty, this
film is very likely to attract a young audience. At the same time, parents who were not
aware of the plot may have been misled by the somewhat benign title.
A psychologically disturbed young man kills his girlfriend when he suspects she plans to leave him. He covers up the murder and surfaces two years later in another city where he preys upon a different woman. In order to cover his tracks, he must kill the man whose identity he has stolen. His obsession with his new girlfriend becomes so intense that he refuses to let her leave his life. The girl, aided by her mother, is able to escape and confront her stalker.
This film raises serious concerns due to the sheer volume of violent scenes as well as the gratuitous incidents depicted. The antagonist commits two different brutal murders: one in which he bludgeons his girlfriend with a cutting board and another in which he beats a young man to death in the shower with the porcelain lid of a toilet tank. Some of the violent scenes (a street fight and a rape) are entirely unnecessary to advance the story.
Of further concern is that the deranged killer suffers no legal consequences for his ruthless crimes. In the final scene of the film, the audience sees him with his next apparent victim, sending the message that violence can and often does go unpunished.
This film seems aimed at a young audience because it also centers around college
students and stars another Beverly Hills 90210 star, Tori Spelling. However, the violent
nature of the film is not communicated through any type of advisory.
This is the second installment of a two-part mini-series about a lawyer defending his sister-in-law who has been accused of murdering her ex-husband's new wife. The first part of the mini-series did not raise any issues with regard to violence. With the exception of one graphic scene, there was little violence. In the final moments of the film, the viewer learns that the true culprit is the accused woman's son Danny and that she has been withholding her own alibi in an attempt to protect him. In a flashback, Danny enters the victim's bathroom, where he intends to commit suicide before her eyes. She tries to wrestle a gun from his hands, but it goes off and shoots her in the forehead. A thick stream of blood pours onto the bathroom rug as she falls backwards into the bathtub.
Some latitude may be extended to the film because the most graphic scene aired at nearly 11:00 p.m. Taken as a whole, the film shows restraint in many areas. Much of the action is played out in a courtroom, where the past is recounted in extensive dialogue rather than being shown in potentially violent flashbacks. In addition, a few scenes of gunfire are shown realistically and appropriately. However, the final scene stands out in marked contrast to the general lack of violence featured throughout most of the film. The scene in which a person is shot through the head may shock or dismay viewers given that there is so little violence in the film up to that point.
Another element of the film that raises serious concerns is the lack of punishment for
the crime. Once the lawyer learns the truth about his nephew, he and his recently
acquitted sister-in-law decide that the boy has already been through enough trauma and
mutually resolve to sweep the matter under the rug. It is the ultimate irony that the
protagonist, who has so diligently and vocally pursued truth and justice throughout the
film, decides to disregard the criminal justice system once he has discovered that the
guilty party is a family member. The notion that family bonds or other values can
overshadow legal principles is arguably a dangerous message to send.
A troubled man who has just been released from jail meets Sue Anne, a high school cheerleader, who lures him into a plot to kill her mother. Along the way, Sue Anne senselessly bludgeons a security guard in the back of the head with a wrench. As he lies on the ground with an enormous amount of blood pouring from his head, she decides that her work is not yet done. She rolls him down a hill into a river. She then proceeds to sit on his back and plunge his face repeatedly into the murky water until his flailing arms stop moving. Particularly for a film aimed at a young audience, the depiction of the murder is extremely graphic.
Sue Anne's second murder is presented in an even more intense manner. She shoots her mother at point blank range at the top of a staircase, sending her tumbling backwards. The act itself is already bloody and intense, but is made even more so by the addition of slow motion and music.
Sue Anne's sensuality and coyness enable her to pin both crimes on the ex-con, fooling the entire town into believing that she is innocent. The audience finally learns that Sue Anne murdered her mother so that she could be with the mother's boyfriend.
Perhaps most disturbing of all, the film concludes with Sue Anne entirely escaping
punishment. Given that the female lead is a high school cheerleader and the film's star is
Melrose Place's Grant Show, the film appears to be aimed at a youthful, female audience.
In light of the intended demographic, reinforcing the idea that good looks and a devious
mind can successfully accomplish even the most sinister scheme is especially troubling.
Jason, a young man bitter over what his life has become since he failed out of high school, returns to the school to seek revenge. He goes on a killing spree, making sure to murder the one teacher who initially encouraged but ultimately flunked him. A hostage situation results when Jason sequesters a classroom full of students at gunpoint. After bargaining with the police over the phone, Jason finally releases the hostages and surrenders himself.
Although this film aired with an advisory, it raises issues for a variety of reasons. The most intense scene shows Jason entering the school, randomly terrorizing students and teachers with his shotgun. This especially violent scene lasts well over two minutes. Although the impact of Jason's bullets is not actually seen, the severe consequences of the gunfire are shown. The most gratuitous image is an extended close-up of a victim's blood-soaked hand. Most disturbing, though, is the accompanying soundtrack. Not only does the music serve to intensify the action, but it attempts to justify the insanity of the killer's behavior through the desperate lyrics: "Is anybody listening?" A strangely dichotomous scene results. On one hand, the audience is witnessing powerful images of multiple murders, but on the other hand is lured by the music into feeling a sense of excitement about what is happening, or at least a certain sympathy for the perpetrator.
Sympathy for the killer grows as the film continues. The plot tends to portray Jason more as a misunderstood victim of unfortunate circumstances than as a cold-blooded killer. It is not inconceivable that young viewers, drawn to the film by the high school setting, might see a bit of their own troubled adolescence in Jason.
While it is clear that the story is driven by the violent attack upon the school and
subsequent stand-off, there is much room for restraint in the way the story is presented.
The violence in the film clearly exceeds what was necessary to tell the story.
The cast of the old TV series reunites in Hazzard County only to discover the nefarious plans of Mama Max to convert the swamp into an amusement park. Bo, Luke and Daisy Duke join their other old friends to unravel Mama Max's scheme. The tone of this film is true to the original series, but it is not without scenes that raise concerns about violence.
Not only does the film contain fight scenes that are unnecessarily prolonged, but the violence is exaggerated and antiseptic. Several different bad guys are victims of potentially deadly violence, but emerge relatively unharmed. On two separate occasions, a character is thrown through a pane of glass, yet he suffers only minor injuries.
Beyond these concerns, the violence is also laced with comedic elements that serve to downplay its seriousness. At the same time, the film glorifies violence perpetrated by the good guys. In one instance, the Duke brothers instigate a bar fight simply because they are offended by a remark made to them about their car.
All of this violent material is made especially accessible to a juvenile audience by
airing the film at 8:00 p.m., rather than the more appropriate start time of 9:00 p.m.
En route to a family vacation in Italy, an ex-Navy SEAL named Harry Gordini accidentally intercepts a suitcase full of illegal drugs. The drug lord to whom the suitcase belongs kidnaps Gordini's wife and son. Gordini becomes impatient with the way the police are handling the case and decides to take matters into his own hands. He rescues his family and ultimately leads the authorities to the drug lord. However, in a final frustrating twist, the criminal is released to become a DEA informant.
This final plot twist is not an inconsequential one since the release of the villain supports the idea that crime can and does pay. After all the terror inflicted by the drug lord, he is treated like a king by the government. In addition, this film contains several violent scenes that are extremely intense for broadcast television. One scene that raises serious concerns shows Gordini swimming out to and boarding a yacht where his family is being held hostage. He kills several guards. The depictions are especially graphic. His first victim is shot at close range with a spear gun. The viewer sees the spear protruding from both the front and back of the man's torso. Another victim is killed with a brutal twist of the head that snaps his neck. Even Gordini's wife shows her killer instinct by plunging a knife into the back of yet another of the henchmen.
Despite advisories about the film's violent content, each break into or out of a
commercial features clips from the film that entice viewers by playing up its violent and
sexual content, without providing any context. As a whole, the film also raises issues of
tonnage. So much of the plot involves violence that, without it, there would not be much
of a story.
Shown during the May "sweeps" period and heavily promoted by the network, this three-part mini-series was one of CBS's biggest television events of the season. Based on the novel by Mario Puzo and very much in the style of The Godfather, the film tells the story of one of the last great mafia families, the Clericuzios. Danny Aiello plays the title character, a man who is vehemently opposed to his grandchildren becoming killers and adopting his lifestyle. However, despite the Don's struggle to guarantee the security of his family, his grandchildren ultimately get caught up in the family business.
Any film about organized crime must be given some degree of latitude to deal with the harsh realities of this subculture. Credit is due to the network for airing the film with multiple advisories about its violent content--twice in the first two episodes and once during the third episode. Nevertheless, many of the images in the film are extremely intense and graphic.
There are an enormous number of murders throughout the story. Some of them are handled well, but several of them are unusually explicit. One scene in the first installment shows the extermination of an entire rival mob family, following the wedding of the rival family's youngest son. After shooting several guards in order to gain entry to the compound, a group of Clericuzios enters the house and approaches a gathering of several family members in their living room. The Clericuzio mob shoots them all dead at point blank range. Heading upstairs, they storm into the bedroom of the ailing rival Don. The Don holds a pillow up to his face before they shoot him in the head. The murderers then proceed to the honeymoon suite of the bride and groom. The groom is yanked from his bed, forced to his knees and then ruthlessly strangled. The image of the strangulation is especially vivid and is brought back in a flashback later in the film. Although this scene sets into motion a number of important plot twists, its depiction is much more graphic than is necessary.
In fact, much of the violence seems more like that typically found in feature films. A scene in the second installment of the mini-series shows the Don's evil grandson Dante mercilessly knife a small-time hustler. As the hustler is restrained by bodyguards, Dante repeatedly plunges a knife into the victim's abdomen. A wider shot shows a seemingly endless gush of blood from his abdomen before the victim collapses and dies.
Approximately ten minutes into the same episode, another of the Don's youngest relatives, Cross, "makes his bones" by committing his first murder. He approaches the parked car of his victim and taps on the window. After the driver lowers his window, Cross puts a pistol to the man's forehead and fires several times. A view of Cross shows his face being showered with more and more of the victim's blood with each consecutive bullet.
This type of intense violence is peppered throughout the entire film, raising concerns about all three installments. While the story is a compelling one, the level of graphic violence raises serious issues of concern.2. Additional MOWs and Mini-Series Raising Concerns
In addition to the those listed above, the following television movies and mini-series were found to raise concerns about the use of violence:
The networks have control over television movies from their inception. They decide
whether or not to make the movie, they approve the script and they choose whether to
include or remove offensive or gratuitous scenes. Theatrical film is a different medium
with different types of content and is less accessible to young children. It thus has a
greater opportunity to feature more violent fare. Many violent theatricals aired on
television need to be edited to meet the standards of that medium, but they cannot always
be cut, nor have their scenes changed, without significantly impairing the film's plot
coherence. Examples of such films include Hard Target, Terminator 2, Under Siege and
Cliffhanger. This being the case, it is debatable whether the most violent theatrical
films, whether edited or not, are at all appropriate for the broad medium of network
television. On the other hand, network television has complete control over television
movies and thus is entirely responsible for their content. It is not surprising that the
quantity and degree of the violence in television movies is considerably less than that
found in theatrical films shown on television.
The last two reports have pointed out that the broadcast networks were less willing to use advisories for television movies than for almost any other form of programming. Granted, it is easier for networks to use an advisory for theatrical films that are made by someone else and then retrofitted to television than for programming that is created by the network itself. Both reports called for more use of advisories in television movies.
Some broadcasters feel that the television content labeling system that went into effect early in 1997 served as an adequate substitute for advisories. This position was strengthened for those networks that adopted the revised labeling system with content descriptors on October 1. The first three months of the 1996-97 television season were examined using the same standard applicable in the previous two seasons, namely that advisories serve an important function. Those three months demonstrated a continuing need for more advisories in the television movie area.
Only in a handful of instances did the three original networks introduce a made-for-television movie with a violence advisory. Even in these few cases, the advisories were not always readily apparent, instead only appearing across the bottom of a title screen in obscure, fine print.
In the past, the Fox network has seemed more willing both to preface their television
movies with advisories and then to run them several times during the program. Due to the
network's lack of a 10:00 p.m. time slot, they must air films at 8:00 p.m., rather than at
9:00 p.m. as the traditional networks do. This season, however, Fox did not use advisories
quite as liberally. In fact, there were some very surprising instances in which films were
aired on Fox without an advisory. John Woo's "Once a Thief" was one of the most
violent television movies this season, containing as much violence as many theatrical
action films, yet it was not preceded by an advisory.
Perhaps in an effort to emulate their theatrical counterparts, made-for-television
movies frequently include greater amounts of graphic and brutal violence than are found in
most television series. With a few notable exceptions, television series rarely feature
graphic violence. However, a few television movies this season contained such images as
soldiers impaled with spears, a woman shot in the forehead at point blank range, a
bodyguard shot through the chest with a spear gun, necks snapped and a woman bludgeoned
with an oversized croquet mallet. The topics of many television movies are similar to
those of feature films, such as murder, abuse and stalking, and thus lend themselves to
some graphic and vicious depictions of violence. Scenes of violence in CBS's The Last Don
mini-series were reminiscent of those from The Godfather in terms of their graphicness and
sheer brutality. NBC's The Lottery is loosely based on one of the most famous short
stories in American literature. In this movie, during a struggle between two men, one is
impaled on a spike. Although the actual fight is largely obscured as a swinging lamp casts
light on and off the altercation, its outcome is clear: the spike protrudes from the
loser's bloody chest. This type of graphic and savage violence is rarely, if ever, seen in
a television series.
In the past, a large number of made-for-television movies bore ominous or threatening
titles implying that the program would be violent, whether or not it actually was. It is
readily apparent from a list of the past two seasons' television movies that many of the
titles are filled with violence-portending words such as "dangerous,"
"killer," "fatal" and "death." This season, there was a
modest decrease in such menacing titles. However, foreboding terms such as
"murder" and "deadly" were still evident. Examples of such
deliberately foreboding titles are: Murder in My Mind, In Cold Blood, Touched By Evil, A
Kiss So Deadly, A Deadly Vision, Murder at My Door and Murder Live! Another interesting
point is that, despite their titles, none of the above films raised issues in terms of
their presentation of violence. While this is not a terribly important issue with regard
to the debate over television violence, it is interesting to note the strategy that it
suggests. The people who make these films do not seem to believe that they can capture
viewers' attention without making the movie sound dangerous.
The first year of this study revealed several examples of titles that were misleading
in terms of their violent content. Such innocuous, or even warmhearted-sounding titles as
Gramps or Falling For You conjure images of tender stories of family or romance. Instead,
the first was an extremely violent tale of a deranged old man who goes on a killing spree.
The second was the story of a serial killer who throws women out of building windows. Last
season, there were no examples of such misleading titles. This season, there were two new
examples of such titles, The Perfect Mother and Friends 'til the End. The Perfect Mother
is the story of an overprotective mother who disapproves of her daughter-in-law and uses
her mafia connections to have her murdered. Friends 'til the End tells the tale of an
insanely jealous college co-ed who tries to take over another student's identity and kills
a man in the process. Obviously chosen for their dark irony, it is conceivable that the
titles of these films could lead viewers to believe these were sentimental stories of
familial relationships and undying friendship instead of tales of murder and betrayal.
Many television movies proudly fly the banner "Based on a True Story." They
do not mention, however, that many of these movies are, at best, only loosely based on
true stories. A preponderance of these "true" stories seem to be about
shockingly horrific and depraved atrocities that people commit. Very seldom are these
stories about the triumph of the human spirit or heroic deeds. For every story of an
inspirational teacher or parent, there are tens of tales about crazed killers, sociopathic
personalities or obsessed stalkers. The inclusion of such qualifiers as "Based on a
True Story" only reinforces Gerbner's "mean world syndrome," according to
which people continually exposed to media portrayals of violence perceive society to be
much more dangerous and violent than it really is.
In some instances, the entire premise of a television movie is based on an act of violence. A large percentage of the films in this genre are predicated upon some sort of violent criminal activity. The world of some television movies is a world of murderers, psychotics, stalkers and abusers. Although violence can be a legitimate and frequently constructive story device when treated responsibly, we occasionally found ourselves asking why this particular violent story was chosen as the subject of a film. Arguably, violent acts such as the Heaven's Gate mass suicide or the murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman are so inherently fascinating and say so much about our society that they merit dramatization in television movies. However, some subjects featured in television movies during the 1996-97 season seemed to have no relevance or significance. They just seemed to be sensationalized stories of criminal acts.
One sometimes gets the impression that the people who make these movies are searching for the most abysmal and sordid crimes that can be found in the depths of the human experience. Seldom do these stories inspire or uplift. They are depressingly detailed accounts of the worst people in society in the worst possible situations. Examples of this include The Secret She Carried, Every Woman's Dream and When Secrets Kill.
One particular type of violent story in this genre seems to emerge time and time again.
Several different television movies that were monitored this season revolved around a
deranged stalker hunting an unsuspecting victim. A Kiss So Deadly; Mother, May I Sleep
With Danger?; Friends 'til the End and Her Costly Affair are all examples of this
recurring storyline.
A message conveyed in many different television movies this season is that evil deeds do not necessarily get punished. In the world of some television movies, if one is clever enough or has been through enough hardship already, one can quite literally get away with murder.
This theme is found in Part II of Undue Influence, when a young murderer is let off the hook when his mother and uncle agree to ignore the crime he has committed. The decision reflects the belief that the young man has already endured an abundance of mental suffering. Although one could argue that the mother and the uncle have good intentions, the film still communicates the idea that it is acceptable for some vicious acts to go unpunished.
The femme fatale in Pretty Poison makes the point that if a woman is devious and willing to exploit her sexuality, she can commit multiple murders without penalty. The same moral could be extracted from Friends 'til the End. Lest any male viewers feel at a disadvantage, they can learn how to get away with murder by studying the moves of the lead male character in Mother, May I Sleep With Danger?, who evades arrest after committing a series of murders and other crimes.
Admittedly, this may be realistic. Many real-life crimes go unsolved or, even if
solved, unpunished. One can only speculate that the crimes in these movies are left
unpunished as a way to add a provocative plot twist to the end of a film. But added
excitement must be weighed against the dangerous messages being sent to viewers.
The use of slow motion is obviously not exclusive to television movies. Its use has already been examined in the preceding discussion of several television series. But its relevance to television movies, where it raises many of the same issues, is addressed here. Although directors would argue that it is an artistic device used to make scenes more dramatic, what it often does is just prolong and emphasize the violent act.
This technique was heavily used in television movies last season and was commonly found
this season as well. Among those films that used slow motion or other cinematic techniques
to prolong or accentuate scenes of violence were Pretty Poison, Walker Texas Ranger: Sons
of Thunder, The Dukes of Hazzard Reunion, The Lottery, Home Invasion, Her Costly Affair,
When Secrets Kill, Quicksilver Highway, Buried Secrets, Jack Reed: Death and Vengeance,
Night Sins and Sleeping With the Devil.
In light of all the violent content that has been observed in television movies, one
especially disturbing trend is the apparent targeting of a young audience. Certain
television movies are aimed at a predominantly teenage crowd by virtue of their settings
and casts. Of those television movies that raised concerns, Mother, May I Sleep With
Danger?; Friends 'til the End; Detention: Siege at Johnson High and Pretty Poison all take
place within the context of either a high school or college environment and feature young
celebrities from popular youth-oriented shows. Three of these four films, as well as
others such as Sweet Dreams, star current or former cast members of Beverly Hills 90210
and Melrose Place.
While made-for-television movies were only introduced in the 1960s, theatrical films--films first released in movie theaters--have been an important and essential part of programming content since the beginning of television. Most channels could not afford enough original content to fill a 24-hour schedule. Many went off the air around midnight, but others filled their schedule with old motion pictures that had been sitting in studio vaults. Before television, motion picture studios had nothing to do with their films once they finished their run at the box office. Only a few films like Gone With the Wind, The Wizard of Oz or the Disney animation classics could be re-released every generation or so. Today, a motion picture studio can sell its films to cable, home video, airlines or television. But back in the 1950s television represented the only real opportunity for studios to further distribute their products.
Thus, theatrical films became an important part of television. They were high-quality productions, the costs and risks of which had already been assumed by the studios. While a blockbuster film would be expensive to license on television, a network knew it was money well spent because the film had already proven itself with the audience. This was in direct contrast to expensive, unproven original television shows, the production costs of which were lost if they did not attract an audience. Theatrical films had already been made, represented substantially less risk and had an established reputation, making them popular with television programmers.
The situation began to change after the emergence of cable television in the 1970s. Before the advent of cable, a film would normally find its way to broadcast television about three years after it was released in theaters. The big films would go first to prime time network television, then to prime time local television and eventually to late night or afternoon on the local stations.
Starting in the 1970s, cable inserted itself between the theaters and networks in the distribution process. HBO began as a pay cable service in 1972, dedicated to running theatrical films shortly after they were seen in theaters. Rather than having to wait several years, the pay cable audience could see films only months after they opened in theaters. Furthermore, as a pay service supported in its entirety by subscribers, HBO ran its recent films uncut and uninterrupted. All of the sex, violence and language of the original could be seen and heard on the home screen, and there were no commercial breaks to interrupt the flow of the story.
Pay cable moved down the distribution chain when home video became a significant force. Pay cable was forced to take theatrical films after they were available for rental or purchase, but still acquired and aired them before they appeared on broadcast television. Subsequently, pay-per-view pushed cable down another notch. Today, the broadcast networks only get a theatrical after it has been seen in the theaters and on airlines, pay-per-view, home video and pay cable. There are very few exceptions. In May of 1995, NBC ran Steven Spielberg's Jurassic Park less than two years after it was seen in theaters. NBC, by paying a substantial premium (allegedly $60 million), was able to bypass pay cable in the distribution sequence. This year NBC went back to Steven Spielberg and paid for the rights to air his Oscar-winning film of the Holocaust, Schindler's List. Not only did Spielberg again bypass cable to go directly to network television, but this time his extraordinary film was shown with only the most minor of cuts and practically without commercial interruption. NBC made the airing of the film a major event in the February 1997 "sweeps" period. Recently, ABC paid a large sum for the rights to Paramount's theatrical film Mission: Impossible. Obviously, the networks cannot pay these prices for more than a handful of films.
The fact that broadcast television gets a theatrical film so late in the distribution process means that when a big film comes to television (e.g., Terminator 2, Lethal Weapon) a substantial portion of the potential audience already has seen the film one or more times in the theater, on home video or on cable. By the time George Lucas' blockbuster Star Wars was scheduled on broadcast television, it had been seen by so many people in so many different media that its television ratings were unimpressive. This would have been unthinkable ten years earlier.
Theatrical films represent a real challenge for the broadcast networks that air them. Almost all other programming in their schedule is either created by them or by others who must work with them and adhere to their standards. With all other programming except theatrical films, the networks decide whether it gets made, who makes it, how it is made and edited, and what it looks like. The networks apply their own standards to language, sex and violence. Those who create programming for television know these standards and make decisions accordingly.
Theatrical film is a completely different medium with different standards and First Amendment treatment. The 1952 Miracle decision established motion pictures as a significant medium for the communication of ideas protected by the First Amendment. Currently motion picture content is not regulated by the government. While protected by the First Amendment, television, because of its use of the scarce electromagnetic spectrum and its accessability to children, is subject to governmental regulation. There is no Federal Communication Commission for the movie industry. The film rating system, administered by the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) under the direction of Jack Valenti, is completely independent of the government. Film, while in theaters or on home video, is not subject to the indecency regulations applied to broadcasting. With few exceptions, filmmakers are free to include whatever type of content they want.
In contrast to theatrical film, broadcast television shapes its original programming to the unique world of commercial television. Theatrical films shown on television have to be retrofitted to meet the standards of the much stricter television world. The broadcast practices and standards of the television industry are irrelevant to the production of a motion picture. But when the motion picture is scheduled for television, those standards must be applied after the fact rather than during the production process.
Television networks buy popular films filled with graphic sex, violence and language and then must reshape them for television. As we have come to realize in our monitoring of theatrical films, changing them for broadcast without destroying their artistic integrity is a significant challenge.
The 1995 report on television violence found that theatrical films shown on television contained the greatest concentration of violence in general as well as the greatest concentration of violence that raised concerns. There is a progressive increase in the amount and severity of violence in moving from television series to television movies to theatrical films. This is not surprising considering the greater freedom that film has to appeal to young adults less bothered by this content. In 1995, 42% of the theatricals films shown on television raised concerns about how they depicted violence. Our recommendation was that broadcasters reconsider which films are suitable for network television. Some films with well over 30 scenes of intense violence could not be adequately edited for television, though broadcast practices and standards departments put in a great effort. The network is faced with the dilemma of either removing the worst moments of the worst scenes--thereby leaving a film still full of intense violence--or removing so much of the violence that the film becomes incomprehensible and unsatisfying.
Theatrical films present a problem that is more difficult and takes longer to correct than any other television programming. As stated earlier, this is the only type of television programming over which the broadcasters have no control during the production process. Furthermore, motion pictures are purchased, often in packages, as much as several years ahead of the time they are aired. Many of the theatrical films shown on television this season were acquired several years ago at a cost of many millions of dollars. It is unrealistic to expect commercial broadcasters to refrain from airing such expensive films which they were contractually committed to purchase. Considering this fact, it was impressive and encouraging to see the percentage of films that raised concerns drop from 42% in 1995 to 29% in 1996.
This year, the percentage of theatrical films raising concerns increased slightly to 30%, a statistically insignificant rise. In 1995 we monitored 118 theatrical films on the four broadcast networks. In 1996 this number dipped modestly to 113 and this year it rose to 114. (We examined many more films in syndication, on cable and on home video, which will be compared and discussed in later sections.) Therefore, we feel that although theatrical films still account for the bulk of troublesome violence on television and that there is still room for improvement, the gains made last year have not been lost. Furthermore, over 55% of the films that raised concerns this year are repeats from earlier seasons. More precisely, only 15 of the 34 theatrical films raising concerns this season ran for the first time in 1996-97. It is our hope that as the licenses for these films expire, the percentage of new films purchased by the networks that raise issues of violence will drop even more.
While recognizing some improvement, there are still problems to be examined and corrected with regard to theatrical films. Much of the violence in series and television movies was only of concern because of the time period in which it was shown or because it was too graphic or gratuitous. The number of violent scenes in theatricals and the highly graphic nature of that violence are unlike anything else on television. Some films, which contain several scenes of violence, can be judiciously edited to easily air on television without concern. Many films, however, have so many scenes of violence that they could not possibly be edited enough to run on broadcast television without raising concerns.
In the remainder of this section, we will examine several theatrical films aired on the broadcast networks this past season that raised considerable concerns about violence. Then we will list the rest of the theatrical films which raised concerns and, finally, we will examine issues arising from theatrical films.
This action movie, starring martial arts expert and actor Steven Seagal, has aired each of the past three seasons, three times on ABC and once on CBS. The film tells the story of a group of terrorists, led by Tommy Lee Jones and Gary Busey, who take a United States battleship and its crew hostage. Seagal's character is the ship's cook and an ex-Navy SEAL who foils the terrorists' plot and prevents them from using the ship's nuclear missiles.
Based on a violent premise, it is not surprising that Under Siege contains a high number of violent scenes. Most of these scenes contain prolonged exchanges of gunfire and show Seagal using his martial arts skills to dispense with terrorists. However, there are also various explosions and other sorts of violent conflict, including a climactic knife fight between Seagal and Jones. The motion picture studio which produced Under Siege did not have to be concerned about the large number of violent acts because it was made for a theatrical audience and was rated "R."
Both networks made efforts to try to pare down the violence in this film, shortening
scenes significantly and cutting out others entirely. However, with over 30 scenes of
violence still remaining, it is clear that only the most graphic moments of the most
violent scenes could effectively be removed without rendering the movie incomprehensible
to viewers. Virtually no amount of editing could make a film like this appropriate for
broadcast television. The very concept behind this film is to exhibit and celebrate
violent action and thus too many extremely violent encounters were central to its story.
To edit out all or even most of them would totally compromise the picture's design and
undoubtedly disappoint Seagal fans in the process.
Airing at 8:00 p.m. with several advisories, Tombstone is a film about legendary lawman Wyatt Earp. Earp, played by Kurt Russell, and his two brothers leave law enforcement to head west and make their fortunes in Tombstone, Arizona. Upon their arrival, they repeatedly clash with a group of outlaw cowboys that dominates the town and keeps its inhabitants living in constant fear. Compelled to help the innocent townspeople, Earp's two brothers decide to take up peacekeeping again and, despite Earp's protests, accept posts as U.S. Marshals. However, after the cowboys kill one of his brothers and cripple the other, Earp is drawn into the fight to avenge his brother's murder.
In an effort to make this two-and-a-half-hour film fit into a two-hour time slot, and
to remove some of the violence, Fox edited Tombstone heavily. Many scenes were
significantly shortened and others were cut out entirely, almost to the point of making
the film difficult to follow. In a Western, pistol-packing gunslingers and shootouts are
to be expected. To their credit, the people at the Fox network did an admirable job of
removing the most graphic elements of scenes. However, approximately an hour-and-a-half
into the broadcast, when Earp decides to take on the cowboys, he goes on a killing spree,
gunning down numerous villains in a collection of violent scenes. The last half hour of
the film amounts to a non-stop series of gunfights. Blasting away at the roguish outlaws,
Earp and his sidekick Doc Holiday are extremely glorified. At the film's end, in its
edited version, it contained 24 scenes of violence, many of which were gunfights that last
several minutes. Despite the fact that throughout the film Earp tries to avoid conflict,
he ultimately is forced to resort to violence and does so with tremendous zeal. Although
the impacts of the gunshots were largely edited out, sparing viewers from the most graphic
and gory images in the film, the glorification and sheer amount of violence are enough to
raise concerns, especially in light of its 8:00 p.m. starting time.
One of the films that catapulted Jim Carrey into superstardom, The Mask was one of Fox's most promoted films this season. In fact, it was so big that the network centered an entire week of programming around it, adding special effects similar to those in the movie to some of their staple sitcoms. In the film, mild-mannered Stanley Ipkus finds a magical mask. When worn, it unleashes his id and transforms him into a loud-mouthed, magical cartoon character, "The Mask." As The Mask, Stanley crosses a group of mobsters and incurs their leader's wrath. When the mask falls into the lead mobster's hands, Stanley must stop him from using its powers for evil. In the end, Stanley foils the bad guys, saves the girl of his dreams and realizes that he does not need the mask to be a success.
A hugely popular film that grossed over 100 million dollars at the box office, The Mask is replete with bathroom humor and cartoon antics, targeting a young audience. (The film was later turned into a children's cartoon on Saturday morning.) As it appeared on Fox, the film showed few signs of editing. A few instances of off-color language were omitted and one scene of violence was shortened. However, despite the editing, this latter scene of violence still raises concerns. In the scene, the mobster, Dorian, who is turned into a monster by the mask, attempts to take over the local mob kingpin's racket. Dorian and his henchmen barge into a charity event held at a popular nightclub owned and operated by the mafia boss. They exchange many rounds of gunfire with the boss' henchmen, shooting several of them. When the shooting stops, Dorian, made invulnerable to the bullets by the mask, challenges the boss, who responds by firing many shots into Dorian's torso.
The number of gunshots has obviously been lessened in an effort to reduce the amount of
violence in the scene. However, Dorian is still shot six times. Unfazed and using his
super powers, Dorian is able to spit the bullets back at the boss, riddling his body and
sending him flying backwards in slow motion. In light of the humorous tone of the film, it
is a surprisingly graphic and malevolent depiction of violence. The scene continues as
Stanley confronts Dorian and fights him for control of the mask. Despite being extremely
exaggerated and peppered with funny lines, the fight is still very brutal and many of the
blows are especially fierce. It is also quite long, lasting several minutes. Because of
the film's reputation as a comedy, particularly one aimed at young or pre-teen children,
this violence raises concerns due to its intensity, maliciousness and graphicness.
Although most of the 28 scenes of violence were slapstick in nature and did not raise
concerns, the scene in question could have benefitted from further editing.
A woman enlists the help of an explosives specialist in order to avenge the deaths of her parents who were the victims of a mob hit. The specialist himself becomes a target of a former CIA buddy who is now on the mob's payroll. Not surprisingly, there is no shortage of explosions in this film, many of them heavy on special effects. What is noticeably absent, however, are realistic consequences of the explosions. In one scene, two main characters become the latest victims of the specialist's handiwork. They are together in a one-room cabana when a bomb goes off destroying the entire structure. Yet, as their bodies are removed from the wreckage, the only apparent consequences amount to nothing more than some bruises and a bit of soot on their clothing. Although one of the victims is killed by the explosion, the other survives the blast and appears only a few scenes later, apparently unharmed.
In addition to the unrealistic consequences and the intensity of certain scenes, the tonnage of violence raises concerns. The number of violent acts is quite high and much of the story rests upon the powerful explosions plotted by the protagonist. The level of violence far exceeds that which is normally seen on network television.
The film stars Sylvester Stallone and Sharon Stone, whose characters are drawn together by her desire to exact revenge as well as by their mutual attraction. Their relationship is portrayed as sexy and exciting, serving to glorify the numerous violent acts that they commit. After all of the carnage, inflicted primarily by Stallone's character, the couple blissfully drives off together in their convertible. This is a clear case where the perpetrator of most of the film's violence is portrayed as heroic and even sexy, making the violence itself glamorous.
Despite the fact that The Specialist aired with an advisory about its violent content,
many scenes are very intense for broadcast television.
This comical, kid-oriented movie tells the story of three young brothers who learn ninja skills from their grandfather. They put these skills to use when they are kidnapped by the grandfather's evil former partner. The children are ultimately rescued through a combination of their own actions, the efforts of their grandfather and the work of their FBI agent father.
This film raises serious concerns. The theme of the film as well as its broadcast time of 8:00 p.m. on a Saturday night--rather than the more traditional 9:00 p.m.--suggest that it is primarily intended for a pre-teen audience. However, this film contains an inordinately large number of violent scenes and was aired without any type of advisory.
Most of the violent scenes also raise concerns because of the way in which they are presented. The violence is largely cartoonish, dubbed with silly sound effects (very much in the style of The Three Stooges) and accompanied by comical music. The net effect is to trivialize the vicious acts that are being committed by very young children. The violence could also encourage imitation by young viewers by failing to show any consequences and by presenting the violent behavior as "cool" or fun.
A prolonged scene, very reminiscent of Home Alone, shows the three boys antagonizing their potential kidnappers. The boys combine their ninja skills and the common household items available to them to cause great harm and injury to a threesome of bumbling crooks. By the time the boys are finished, one of the bad guys has had his fingers slammed in a grand piano, another has had CDS hurled at him as if they were Chinese throwing stars and the third has nearly been strangled with a necktie used as a makeshift noose.
It is even more disturbing that, after having established this tone of comedic violence throughout the entire film, the final showdown between the grandfather and the villain is especially intense and aggressive. In surprising contrast to the earlier playful depictions of violence, the climax contains much more dramatic images involving a sword, guns and even a pepper bomb. The scene is not graphic or gory, but is likely to be too severe for some of the youngest audience members.
A great deal of the story seems to be concerned with showing violence for its own sake.
In fact, so much of the plot centers around violence, that removing it would destroy the
continuity of the film. This film is arguably inappropriate for broadcast in any form, but
at the very least this film should have aired with an advisory warning of its violent
content.
This big-budget action film tells the tale of Harry Tasker, a man who lives a double life as a secret agent and a mild-mannered computer salesman and husband. Suspecting his wife of infidelity, Harry tries to inject some excitement and romance into a seemingly dull marriage. His botched attempt ensnares his wife and daughter in a web of terrorism and reveals his secret life to his family. In the end, Harry and his wife manage to prevent a nuclear disaster and strengthen their marriage in the process.
Some credit should be given to the network for its diligent airing of advisories throughout the film. Nonetheless, this film raises serious issues for several reasons. In order to accommodate its long running time, this film was shown at 7:30 p.m., a time that makes the movie especially accessible to young viewers. In addition, many of the violent scenes are unusually prolonged. One of the most violent scenes aired before 8:00 p.m. and lasted nearly eight minutes. The scene begins with a brutal attack in a public restroom, involving automatic weapons and vicious hand-to-hand combat. At one point in the scene, Harry rips a hand dryer from the wall and smashes it into his opponent's face. The man is rendered nearly unconscious, but Harry finishes the job by slamming his head into a urinal and leaving him face down in the pool of water at its bottom. The scene continues outdoors with showers of gunfire and an extended chase involving a motorcycle and even a horse.
Also troubling is that nearly all of the violence is entirely antiseptic and often glibly treated. In one scene, a terrorist fires an automatic weapon at Harry's partner in the middle of a crowded street. With only a skinny lightpost as protection, Harry's partner and several spectators surrounding him are left completely untouched by the countless bullets discharged in their direction. This and many other scenes show either no consequences of the violence depicted or, at most, unrealistic consequences.
This film features the type of over-the-top action violence that has become the
trademark of its star, Arnold Schwarzenegger. However, it is these same type of images
that raise concerns.
Based on Anne Rice's popular novel, this film tells the story of two vampires who prowl around eighteenth century New Orleans, killing unsuspecting victims in their quest to ward off mortality. The story is a compelling one, and given that it centers around vampires, a certain amount of violence is to be expected. However, many of the graphic and prolonged scenes in the film raise concerns.
One of the most gruesome of the many bloody scenes in the film shows a young vampire, Claudia, slitting the throat of one of the other vampires. This brutal murder is followed by the image of an enormous puddle of the victim's blood flowing across the carpet.
Few other films this season feature the types of images seen here. Violence against and perpetrated by children is shown throughout the movie, as is violence involving animals (sucking blood from rats, for instance). Another issue raised by the film is its sporadic coupling of violence and sex. A few of the kills made by the vampires occur within a somewhat sexually arousing context.
A message immediately preceding the film states that the movie has been edited for
content. However, the number of violent scenes still seems inordinately large. More
extensive editing would be necessary to allow the film to air without raising concerns.
Steven Seagal plays a American Indian named Forrest Taft, working for an Alaskan oil refinery. After Taft learns that a series of oil spills are not accidents, but rather the result of illegal procedures and fraud, he wages war against the company. Ultimately, Taft blows up the refinery to put an end to the situation.
The heavy-handed, anti-corporate message and peace-seeking culture with which Seagal attempts to affiliate himself in this film ironically clashes with the enormous amount of gratuitous violence. The film is loaded with violent images such as gunfire, martial arts combat and a seemingly limitless number of explosions. A great deal of the violence is also glorified by very extensive use of slow motion effects.
This film also raises concerns because violence is used in situations where peaceful
alternatives exist. Rather than utilizing legal procedures available to him, Seagal's
character resorts to terrorism to achieve his goals and faces no consequences. Moreover,
many violent scenes are not connected to the plot, but rather seem to exist simply for
entertainment value. A bar fight led by Seagal's character is both graphic and prolonged,
for no apparent reason other than to torture a bar bully. This film did air with an
advisory.
In this sequel to the hugely popular film Home Alone, through a remarkably similar chain of events, Kevin again finds himself separated from his family for the holidays, this time in New York City. Armed only with his wits and his father's wallet, Kevin takes the Big Apple by storm, getting a suite at the Plaza Hotel and befriending the owner of New York's finest toy store. Free of his pestering family, Kevin could not be much happier until he runs into his old nemeses from the first movie, the recently escaped Wet Bandits, Marv and Harry. When he learns that the bumbling thieves are planning to rob his friend's toy store, Kevin feels compelled to stop them. Rather than notifying the proper authorities, he instead decides to lure them to an abandoned apartment building and subject them to a series of booby traps similar to those in the first film.
Upon initial review, many people question the notion that either Home Alone movie could raise concerns about violence. They assume that, as children's movies, they are merely filled with harmless, cartoon-like violence. However, a contextual examination reveals something quite different.
Even more mean-spirited and vicious than its predecessor, Home Alone 2 contains surprisingly brutal violence. Despite the children's theme and the perception that the Home Alone series is now a perennial Christmas classic, this is actually a mean and ugly film filled with sadistic violence. It is especially troublesome that a child is the perpetrator of this cruel violence. Although it is slapstick and always portrayed as comical, much of the physical abuse Kevin doles out to the unwitting thieves is incredibly cruel and would in fact prove lethal in real life. For example, while standing on the roof of the building, Kevin hurls a brick at the two criminals on the sidewalk three stories below, landing it squarely on Marv's forehead. Despite the severity of the assault, Marv suffers only a red mark and temporary dizziness and appears to be fine moments later.
The ensuing 40 minutes of the film consist of a seemingly endless number of pranks and snares masterminded by the clever protagonist, each one more malicious than the last. In one of the first, Kevin rigs a staple gun to fire industrial staples into the rear, groin and nose of Marv. Later, Kevin arranges for an entire duffel bag of hand tools (wrenches, hammers, etc.) to open and fall on Harry's head. In a subsequent scene, Harry's head is set on fire and he dunks his head into a toilet bowl of kerosene, causing an explosion. In other incidents, Marv has a bookshelf fall on him, is shocked with electricity, has a 100-pound bag of dry cement dropped on his head, and, along with Harry, is hit in the face with a thick piece of pipe. Ultimately, the two thieves are captured when they are covered with birdseed and swarmed by hungry pigeons. These are only a few of the many traps that Kevin sets for his unwitting pursuers. Despite the quantity and severity of so much of the violence, virtually no attention is payed to consequences. Although the victims do express pain, the degree to which they do so is unrealistic and they show very little evidence of injury.
While much of the violence contained in the original Home Alone involved the two burglars falling down and running into things, the violence in this film is much more harsh. So many of the violent scenes are so vindictive and dangerous that it is remarkable that this is intended to be a children's movie. Airing at 7:00 p.m. without an advisory, this film is obviously targeted at a young audience. This is of particular concern due to the fact that Kevin is continually rewarded for his efforts, being portrayed as both clever and heroic. He also seems to have the time of his life torturing his pursuers. This, in conjunction with the fact that many of the tricks Kevin plays on Marv and Harry involve items that would be readily accessible in most homes, raises serious concerns of imitable violence.
While some may feel that this type of slapstick violence is not a problem, and that this is simply funny, cartoon-like violence that appeals to every child's fantasies, we hope it is not every child's fantasy to use his or her wit and intelligence to sadistically torture fellow human beings, even if they are criminals.
This is hyperbolic violence intended to make people, particularly children, laugh. It
is never intended to be realistic, but it does send the message that people getting hit in
the head with heavy objects or being shocked with electricity is funny. In light of its
youthful appeal, this message is especially worrisome and should be at least considered
before letting younger viewers watch unsupervised.
Dennis the Menace raises many of the same issues as Home Alone except that most of the incidents of violence occur as a result of Dennis' mischievous nature rather than careful, calculated planning. Dennis is almost always the unwitting assailant as he accidentally causes pain and misfortune to everyone he meets. His actions, even when they are deliberate, are never punished and are played for laughs. Children would be likely to admire Dennis the way they might admire Kevin in Home Alone.
In one scene Dennis accidentally sets a thief on fire. Although he does this by
accident, the fact remains that audiences are expected to laugh at the burning of a human
being. Dennis the Menace contains more than 25 scenes of violence, most caused by Dennis'
antics and designed to elicit laughter from the audience. There was no advisory.
A typical Jean-Claude Van Damme action film, Hard Target is full of the excessive and graphic scenes of violence Van Damme's fans have come to expect. The film was directed by Hong Kong's most successful action film director, John Woo, now working in the American studio system. Set in New Orleans, the film tells the story of Chance Budrow, a merchant sailor who discovers that wealthy sportsmen are paying millions of dollars to engage in hunts in which the prey are desperate homeless people. It is a non-stop action film that builds its entire story around violent encounters, which serve as little more than a showcase for Van Damme's impressive martial arts skills.
Preceded by an advisory, the film contains 25 scenes of violence. Some of these scenes are prolonged, extremely graphic and glorified. The opening scene, featuring a man hunted down in the streets of New Orleans, lasts for well over three minutes and includes machine gun fire, an explosion and a man shot in the back and shoulder with arrows. The network's practices and standards department heavily edited the scene to remove the worst moments of violence. However, the nature of the violence remains extremely brutal, especially considering that it occurs in the first few minutes of the film.
In another scene occurring 30 minutes later, Van Damme is assaulted by thugs while investigating a burned-out building. The thugs slip a noose around his neck and beat him with a baseball bat as they attempt to persuade him to leave town. The scene ends with one of the thugs brutally kicking Van Damme in the head. This extremely vicious attack is filmed using slow motion and other violence-emphasizing special effects to accentuate and lengthen the scene. This scene and these techniques are characteristic of much of the violence in the film.
Hard Target is an example of the type of action film, filled with dozens of scenes of
violence, that would be difficult to be made contextually appropriate for broadcast
television, no matter how ambitious the effort to edit the worst moments. The disturbing
and unsettling theme of hunting humans for sport necessitates violence, and the role of
Van Damme as hero ensures that the violence will be non-stop and exercised without
restraint.
Cliffhanger (Fox-11/26/96)
Demolition Man (Fox-9/8/96)
Die Hard 2 (CBS-12/29/96)
The Last Boy Scout (CBS-4/1/97)
Lethal Weapon 2 (NBC-3/3/97)
Lethal Weapon 3 (ABC-5/8/97)
Nowhere to Run (ABC-2/13/97)
Tango & Cash (ABC- 4/20/97)
Timecop (NBC-5/11/97)
These films are grouped together because they raise identical issues. All are big-budget Hollywood action movies featuring marquis celebrities (Arnold Schwarzenegger, Mel Gibson, Bruce Willis, Jean-Claude Van Damme, Sylvester Stallone) in the lead roles. It is also interesting to note that all of them were rated "R" when released theatrically. Each is filled with continuous scenes of protracted, glorified violence. Cliffhanger contained over 30 scenes, Tango & Cash 30, Nowhere to Run 28, The Last Boy Scout over 30 and Timecop 24. Although in most of these cases the networks did their best to omit the worst elements of violence, the task of making these films free of concerns and suitable for network broadcast would be virtually impossible. To edit out the violence would be to remove the driving force of the stories. The violence is everywhere and is the dominant characteristic of the film.
In addition, these films tend to present violence as acceptable simply because it is
committed by the hero. They also tend to downplay the severity of the violence by
interjecting humor into it. For example, in Lethal Weapon 2, after Danny Glover's
character kills an assassin by shooting him in the forehead with a pneumatic nail gun, and
then another by driving a nail into his heart, he dryly quips, "Nailed 'em
both." This sort of wisecrack further augments the already glorified violence and
makes it seem that much more glib and appealing.
Violence is so central to the theme and core of some theatrical films that no matter how much they are altered, they could never be made appropriate for broadcast television. An effective edit of some of the films described earlier would require the skill and precision of a highly trained surgeon. It would also leave them very short and without adequate context or a comprehensible storyline. Many of the films that fall into this category have already been described. The Steven Seagal and Jean-Claude Van Damme films are predicated on violence. This is what their fans pay to see in the theaters. There are dozens of violent scenes in each film and taking them out, even if impossible, would serve no purpose. The films would be unrecognizable to those who know them and incomprehensible to those who do not.
Walker, Texas Ranger is a television series with violence. The violence is central to the theme as in the films above. However, since Walker is made for television, the violence, while still a concern, is far less intense and graphic than that of motion pictures. There is no series currently on television that raises concerns about violence to the same degree that theatrical films do. It is in theatrical films retrofitted for television that we find the most problematic violence.
Some films like Patriot Games simply need to be edited further. But there is nothing that can be done with films such as Hard Target, Cliffhanger and The Last Boy Scout to make them suitable for broadcast network television.
Although some question the effect of editing on the artistic integrity of films, we believe that it reflects a network's attempt to act responsibly. However, many of these films are in need of further editing. Some contain so much violence that they cannot be edited sufficiently to air without concerns. Silence of the Lambs is a film with a very violent theme that was edited and made appropriate for broadcast television. It contains only a few scenes of inappropriate violence that could be excised without seriously detracting from the basic storyline. The fact that a number of violent theatrical films monitored (such as Striking Distance and Kalifornia) did not raise concerns demonstrates that some very violent films can be acceptably modified for broadcast television.
The broadcast television networks recognize that some films can never be shown on their airwaves. That is why films such as A Clockwork Orange, The Wild Bunch and Reservoir Dogs have never appeared and recent films such as Pulp Fiction and Natural Born Killers probably will not appear. They know that violence is so central to these stories and the scenes so graphic and disturbing that no matter how responsibly they edited these films, they still could not be run without raising serious concerns. The violence in A Clockwork Orange is integral to the film's theme and message and is an important part of character development. The rape scene demonstrates Alex's brutal nature and why society needs to stop him. The actual rape follows more than eight minutes of violence and attempted rape. As contextually appropriate as these scenes are to the film's whole, the sheer amount and graphicness of the violence make it impossible for a network to run this film, and none has.
The networks have drawn a line about what does and what does not belong. In our view,
the "what does not belong" side of the line should also include the action films
with approximately 30-50 scenes of non-stop violence. A policy barring the airing of
action films with approximately 30 or more scenes of violence would target only a
relatively small percentage of films available for broadcast. Many action films do contain
fewer than 30 scenes and can be effectively modified for broadcast and run with an
advisory.
As is shown in the statistical breakdown of the television season, 34 of the 114, or 30%, of theatricals broadcast this season raised concerns of violence. Of those 34 that raised concerns, 19 of them were repeat broadcasts from previous seasons. This means that more than half of them were purchased years ago, before the advent of this study. In fact, 52 of the total 114 theatricals that were monitored this season were repeats, indicating that only 62 of the 114 shown were new broadcasts. Thus, when one examines the 62 new films and sees that 15 of them raised issues, the percentage of new problematic theatricals is 24%. It is interesting to note that half of the issue-raising theatricals were indeed repeats.
Many of the problematic repeats are big-budget, high-profile films such as the Lethal
Weapon series and Arnold Schwarzenegger films, the rights to which cost networks millions
of dollars. In order for networks to get their money's worth, these blockbuster films must
air multiple times and are therefore repeated each season. While this does not excuse
networks from being held accountable for their programming choices, it does make it more
clear as to why some overtly problematic films are shown time after time, despite
criticisms.
Advisories are used much more frequently for theatrical films than for
made-for-television movies. Perhaps because theatrical films have MPAA ratings and are
made by others, the networks are more willing to use advisories when airing them. Over the
past three years, we have seen a much greater willingness on the part of the networks to
use advisories.
The three original networks have a prime time lasting three hours Monday through Saturday and four hours on Sunday. They can start a theatrical at 8:00 or 9:00 p.m. Some theatricals are longer than two hours and, unless they can be extended with commercials (or additional footage) to four hours and broken into two parts, they usually run at 8:00 p.m.
Occasionally, the three older networks will extend prime time 15 or 30 minutes beyond 11:00 p.m. so as to avoid starting a film before 9:00 p.m. This raises strong objections from affiliates who want to air their own sponsors' advertising at 11:00 p.m. rather than the network-carried advertising. It is commendable when the networks extend prime time to accommodate more adult-oriented films. They did this seven times this past season. Prime time was extended for the following films:
The most significant time slot issue concerns the Fox network. On the one hand, Fox
does routinely issue advisories. Yet on the other, it must air all of its films at 8:00
p.m. Like the other networks, Fox runs theatrical films filled with violent themes and
scenes. Many are of the type that cannot be sufficiently edited. Airing them at 8:00 p.m.
raises special concerns. If and when Fox becomes a network with a 10:00 p.m. prime time
hour, this concern will diminish. Until it does, Fox is under a special obligation to use
the 8:00 p.m. period appropriately.
At their core, on-air promotions, previews, recaps and teasers are all the same thing: advertisements. Unlike conventional advertisements that sell a product not associated with the show, promos are ads for the shows themselves. Aired between and during shows, these "ads" highlight upcoming shows appearing later that night or week. Although this section deals with on-air promotions, previews, recaps, teasers and advertisements, we will frequently use the term "promos" to refer to any material promoting the network's own programming. Occasionally, it will be necessary to make distinctions between types of promos. Therefore we define them as follows:
* On-air promotions are the networks' television ads for their own programming. These are to be distinguished from other promotions such as a tie-in between a network's fall schedule and a department store or airline.
* Previews are like movie trailers. They are scenes at the end of a show previewing the highlights of next week's episode. Their purpose is to get the viewer to tune in next time.
* Recaps are scenes shown at the beginning of a program from the previous episode or episodes. They remind the viewer of what he or she has seen before or fill in the new viewer on what he or she may have missed. An example of this is: "Previously on Chicago Hope... "
* Teasers are short clips making promises about what is to be seen. They usually appear at the beginning of a show or movie and are designed to entice the undecided viewer to watch. Some shows also use teasers just before a commercial in the middle of the show to ensure that the viewer returns after the commercial.
Promos represent a high priority for the broadcast networks. The mission of the promotion department is to highlight and sell the product of the network. More than reading television guides or anything else, viewers use promotions to determine whether to watch a series and especially a television or theatrical movie. Viewers first learn of the storyline, a guest star appearance on a series or the theme of a television movie from promotions. They are also used to expose viewers to programs they might not normally watch.
During the summer, the networks spend enormous amounts of money to introduce the public to their new shows for the upcoming season. In the new season, viewers will be bombarded with up to 50 new shows on all of the networks, and it is the job of each promotions department to make sure viewers notice its network's shows. Frequently using a slogan or theme song, each network develops a theme to introduce its fall shows. ABC's "We're Still the One" song, slogan and campaign from several years ago is one of the best known of these themes. Similarly, NBC used "NB See Us" and currently is using the extremely successful "Must-See TV" to promote its schedule. This past summer ABC introduced a somewhat controversial "TV is Good" campaign featuring black letters on a yellow background that attracted much attention, some of it negative. Selling the concept of watching television instead of directly highlighting ABC's own programming, the campaign used such attention-getting slogans as "Don't worry, you have billions of brain cells" and "Eight hours, that's all we ask."
Blockbuster events which attract large audiences are especially desirable because promos can be used during their airing to sell the schedule. Traditionally, one of the major advantages of bidding successfully for the Summer Olympics is that such a large audience is watching at just the right time of the year for promotion of the new fall schedule. This is why NBC invested close to $500 million in the 1996 Summer Olympics and over $1 billion for the next several Olympic Games (not including CBS's broadcast of the 1998 Winter Olympics from Japan). NBC's audience ratings were extremely impressive for the Atlanta games, and it appears that those games served as a successful platform to launch their new shows in the fall of 1996. Promotions also tell viewers a great deal about a network's priorities, including what the networks view as special or important.
From the beginning, evaluating promotions was an important part of the monitoring process. Many television writers and producers complain that they carefully craft their shows to deal with violence responsibly and then are dismayed to see a promotion eliminate all of the context and only feature the violence. We examined several thousand promotions. In 1995, we made site visits to three of the four networks to meet with people involved in making promotions so that we might better understand the process.
Promotions can raise serious concerns, particularly because they feature violence out of context. It is almost impossible for promotions to provide sufficient context for any violence that does occur. By their nature, promotions feature only a small highlight of the upcoming program. Violence as well as sex is frequently featured as the highlight.
Violence is used in many ways in promos as a hook to draw viewers into the program. Viewers see violence in the promos encouraging them to watch. They then see violence in the preview at the beginning of the show. During the show, commercials often interrupt violent scenes or occur just as violence is about to erupt to ensure that viewers will continue watching. All of these promotional efforts demonstrate that networks think that, far from alienating viewers, violence attracts them.
There are logical reasons why so many promotions feature scenes of violence. There is not enough time to explain the plot. So viewers are presented with a series of engaging sounds and images that require little explanation. With so little time, the easiest things to feature are those that require little explanation: violence and sex. The promo becomes little more than isolated and disconnected scenes of violence and sex. Viewers may need context to know why the violence is occurring, but they need little or no context to know that a show will contain action, guns or fistfights. Even promotions for situation comedies occasionally feature what little "action" may actually be in the show. Many jokes need a longer set-up or explanation than is possible in a promo, contributing to the tendency for promos to feature a scene of comedic violence or a sexual reference.
Promotions have an obligation to tell the viewer what the show is about. One would expect violent programs or movies to show some violence in their promotions. Many theatrical film promos do this and, on many occasions, the network includes an advisory in the promo.
Over the three seasons in which we have been monitoring television, many shows that use
violence minimally and in an appropriate context end up showcasing the violence
decontextualized in the promos. This is a serious concern for several reasons. First,
viewers get a mistaken impression of the show. They may believe there is much action and
then become disappointed when they find only two or three minimal scenes of violence in
the show. Sometimes a promo for a show such as Law & Order, a program which would not
appeal to fans looking for fights, guns and mayhem, features what little violence there is
in an effort to attract these action fans. Furthermore, violent promos are sometimes aired
during programs geared for children or on completely non-violent shows. Even shows that
are virtually free of violence are promoted by utilizing the merest suggestion of violence
that can be gleaned from the program. Clearly, someone is scanning these virtually
non-violent shows for anything that could possibly be construed as "action."
Some of the most compressed and decontextualized violence on television appears in
commercials promoting theatrical films opening in the theater. A trailer seen before a
film in the theater may last up to three minutes and, while it too features many of the
scenes of action and violence, it has sufficient opportunity to give viewers the gist of
the story. A 30-second ad on television for a film, however, has substantially less
opportunity to tell the story and has a tendency to feature only the violence. There are
numerous examples of this which will be detailed below.
The 1995 report speculated that promotions was an easy area for the networks to improve and we were right. In 1996, which was dealt with in last year's report, there was substantial improvement in all areas of on-air promotions produced by the networks. The only area that still demonstrated a lack of improvement was advertisements for movies about to open in theaters. Produced by the motion picture studios, not the networks, these ads are similar to film trailers except that they are considerably shorter. Many of these ads, but especially the ones for action films, highlight little but violence.
The gains of 1996 were maintained in 1997 and are examined in this report. The level of issues and problems between 1996 and 1997 stayed about the same, still representing significant improvement over 1995. The good news this year was that movie studio ads were somewhat better. The bad news is that promotions for the reality "shock-umentary" specials raised new concerns. The programs themselves raised significant concerns and were discussed in the earlier section on specials. The promotions for those specials also raised new concerns and are discussed in this section.
Promotions, although an essential aspect of a network's planning and strategy, are not always consciously noticed by the viewers or even, in many instances, by the network executives. Many network executives view series, specials or movies at home or in their offices on videotape free of promotions or commercials. The consistent purpose of the promotion section in this report has been to shine a light on this important area of network programming. This is one of the most beneficial reasons to have an outside monitor looking at network programming from a different perspective and through a different lens than the networks use to look at themselves.
Just the fact that promotions editors know that someone is examining their work and that the results of that examination will be reported publicly is likely to encourage higher standards in promotions. We felt that this was an easy area to change because the networks directly control promotions. This is an area that they can easily change through their own internal policies.
Conversations with the networks demonstrate that this is exactly what they have done over the past two years. All four networks convened their respective promotions staffs after the publication of the 1995 report. Problems with promotions were discussed in detail and at several networks new positions were added to oversee promotions. Reporting relationships within staff hierarchies were reorganized. The results of those network efforts are evident in the analysis of both the 1996 and 1997 promotions. Once again we feel that this demonstrates the benefit and value of having an outside monitor examine all areas of broadcast television. The focus of our efforts is to identify problems and, in a collaborative way, suggest solutions. This process is exemplified by what occurred in the area of promotions.
It was more difficult both last year and this to find promotions that raised any of the issues discussed in the 1995 report. There simply were far fewer issue-raising promotions. The one exception, as mentioned above, is the promotions for the live-action reality specials. These are identified and discussed in this year's report.
Still, we are impressed at the efforts that have been made over the past two years. In
general, this area of network programming is now under control and being dealt with
effectively. In reviewing this section, the reader should remember that while we examine
all television series, television movies and theatrical films, and can statistically
determine what percentage raise concerns, it is impossible to do this with regard to
promotions. Tens of thousands of promotions appear every year and this report has found
that only a tiny percentage of them raise concerns. This section examines the few specific
promotions that still raise important issues of concern.
As previously stated, it is very difficult to incorporate context into a promotion. The goal of a promo is to attract the potential viewer's attention in a very small amount of time. Revealing the storyline takes a great deal of time and is seldom the most effective means for grabbing the viewer's attention. What attracts immediate interest are scenes of exciting action, many of which are violent: car crashes, chases, fistfights and explosions.
Whenever a promotion does tell the story of a show or movie, it has to be careful not to tell too much or give away the ending. This is difficult to accomplish. To create a promo with just the right amount of the premise and plot takes great time and precision. It is far easier and more reliable just to feature action scenes.
In the past the constant barrage of action sometimes seen in promos raised concerns. A viewer watching for an entire evening could see more problematic scenes of violence in the advertisements and promotions than in the programs he or she is watching. Some promos contained only the violence and none of the important contextual elements such as consequences or punishment of the violence.
While violence out of context is still an issue in promotions, the amount of decontextualized violence was not nearly as high as that found in the 1995 report.
Some advertisements and promotions illustrating lack of context:
Although this promotion for the theatrical film to be shown on ABC lasts only ten
seconds, each second is used to present images of action and violence. The promo opens
with Wesley Snipes firing a gun and then crashing his motorcycle through a chain-link
fence. The next scene is a woman being held at gun point, followed by Snipes struggling
with her assailant. Finally, the promo closes with Snipes performing a karate-style kick
at the camera and ends with a fiery explosion. In a voice-over the announcer stresses that
"ABC's Sunday is the movie event with non-stop adventure." Passenger 57 is an
action film about the takeover of a commercial airliner. The story is full of violence,
but violence with a purpose and a justification, all of which disappear in this very short
promo.
It is not a surprise that promos for Walker feature some of the martial arts stunts for
which both Chuck Norris and the show are famous. It could be argued that to promote Walker
without featuring action could give viewers a false impression of the show. The concern
about this short promo is that it features only karate-style kicks with absolutely no
context. The only message the network wants to send is that there is fighting.
Accompanying the image of the karate kicks, the announcer tells the audience, "It's a
butt-kicking season finale when Chuck Norris teams up with a world championship kickboxer
to crack a killer case." The earlier section on television series acknowledges that
while Walker has tried to establish a moral tone and send an anti-violence message, the
producers are well aware that violence is the most salable aspect of the show. This
promotion confirms that.
As examined in an earlier section, live-action reality specials portray video and film
clips of real-life disasters, accidents and tragedies which are highly graphic. In their
entirety, these specials do provide some context and frequently interviews with survivors
in which the audience learns what really happened. The promos for these specials are
completely lacking in context and only feature a collection of action scenes strung
together in rapid succession. Promos for these programs also air during time periods when
children are likely to be watching.
In this promo for When Disaster Strikes, viewers learn that the program is not only
about disasters such as fires and tornadoes but also about human tragedy. The promo
entices viewers to witness "the most incredible disasters caught on tape" as a
plane plummets to the ground, exploding. Next, a victim is seen falling to his death from
a burning building. Nowhere in the promo does the viewer see any of the physical or
psychological consequences that would contextualize the violence rather than exploit it.
The promo contains an advisory for parental discretion.
In this promotion for several theatricals, ABC uses clips to create a montage for its
Thursday night movie billed as "ABC Action Thursday" on the "Action
Broadcasting Company." The clips feature intense and brutal scenes of punching,
kicking and explosions, all of which are glamorized through the use of exciting music.
Here the major concern seems to be that audiences learn only that the films are full of
action and violence. Viewed out of context, these clips support the network's moniker for
Thursday nights.
This year High Incident aired at 8:00 p.m. and emphasized action and violence such that
it raised occasional concerns. This was evident in the promotions and teasers. In this
teaser, every clip contains violence: a man is thrown through a glass window, an officer
hits a man in the back and throws him on the ground, a man bleeds from a wound on his
abdomen, a young man opens fire on an officer, people fight in a bar, a man is hit
brutally in the head and an officer fires at a man. This teaser is a problem not only
because it is used as a hook to attract viewers and lacks context, but also because it
airs at such an early time in the evening.
In a preview for UPN's Burning Zone, a man on fire is shown three times. Each
subsequent time the viewer gets a closer look. This preview contains no context and
instead only strives to incite terror, challenging the viewer to "enter at your own
risk."
Promotions or advertisements sometimes feature violence during shows or time periods for children, and during programs, particularly situation comedies, that might attract viewers offended by violence. These shows rarely contain any issue-raising scenes of violence. There were few examples this season of violent promos aired during programs appealing to families. Last season there were examples of violent or action promos aired during the Walton Thanksgiving Reunion and a few family comedies. While violent promos during a family show are not a problem this year, there are still several examples of violent promos airing in completely non-violent shows. Viewers might sit together in front of the television watching such non-violent programming as Friends, Beverly Hills 90210 or Wings and, without warning, be confronted with violent promos. These viewers might have carefully screened a television guide or used their own viewing experience to select a program that does not contain violence. But there is no way the viewer can be protected from promotions or advertisements containing intense scenes of violence that may occur during these programs. We are pleased to report that the first problem mentioned, violent promos during shows geared to children, is an area of concern that has almost disappeared.
One might expect to see more graphic or violent promos on shows that contain violence.
A network could reasonably expect that the audience for these shows is more tolerant or
accepting of these kinds of depictions. But a promo portraying violent scenes that is
aired in the middle of a completely non-violent show raises a particular issue of concern.
Some examples follow:
The problem of "shock-umentary" specials yielding promos utterly devoid of
context is discussed in the preceding section. This promo features: a dog viciously biting
a man's leg, a man struggling as a wild bear clutches him in its mouth, an alligator
attacking a man and many similar images. In addition to the issue of a violent promo
without context, this promo airs during a completely non-violent program. Viewers of
Living Single, rightfully expecting 30 minutes of comedy, would be unprepared for this
very disturbing promotion. The caveat, "If you watch action, be prepared for
action," does not apply in this situation.
Although there were several variations of this motion picture advertisement, all
featured only the action. The plot is completely ignored and the promo only features scene
after scene of gunfire and explosions. The only information the ad transmits, other than
this film is filled with violence, is that it stars Geena Davis and Samuel L. Jackson.
Within the several versions, an interesting mix of music and narration makes the violence
appear "cool" and fun. One advertisement begins with a grenade being dropped as
Davis and Jackson flee the explosion, running through a glass window. Davis uses a machine
gun to shoot the ice below, causing it to break for their landing. Suddenly, she is
depicted hanging from a cord while again shooting a machine gun. Jackson is then shown
making a threat with gun in hand. The scene then changes once again to show a car smashing
through a concrete wall. This is followed by a bridge exploding. Not only does the ad lack
any context, it ran during completely non-violent programming.
This promotion is filled with gunfire and explosions. It ran during the credits of the
non-violent Beverly Hills 90210. Even though the program is non-violent, the promo is
filled with non-stop action. Interestingly, the promo for the same film also appeared
during Fox's Pretty Poison on 9/24/96. There it was edited very differently to contain
considerably less violence.
An interesting phenomenon in the realm of promotions occurs when a non-violent show manages to produce a promotion containing violence, or at least action. This area of concern disappeared almost completely this television season. We had to look long and hard before we could find even a few examples, and those that we did find are tame and minor.
Most television series contain little violence and many that do feature violent scenes do so in a contextually appropriate manner. These shows, influenced and approved by the networks' departments of practices and standards, generally make it on the air without any problems or concerns.
Someone in the promotions process reviews these shows, managing to find the one moment or instant that contains some action. In a drama, this may mean a gun that is drawn but never used. In a comedy, it usually means violence played for laughs such as someone getting punched or falling down. Inevitably, this one scene will make its way into the promo. Devoid of context, the scene usually raises issues of concern. Even the most innocent shows on network television occasionally yield promos featuring acts of violence that lack context and have a different feel than the shows themselves.
These promos are of less concern than those for theatrical films or action shows. But it is important to repeat that someone culls through the material of situation comedies and looks for the most violent scene.
Two of the few examples of this phenomenon are:
Though obviously not a serious problem, this promo for Family Matters does exemplify
the point that someone culls through every moment of a non-violent show to find the one
small scene that could be considered "action." This promo features Steve Urkel
hanging from the Eiffel Tower in Paris. He screams as he is dropped off the French
landmark. The promo ends with Steve in mid-air, leaving the viewer to wonder about Urkel's
fate. In the program itself, not surprisingly, Urkel survives the incident unscathed. Once
again, this not a very important problem. It is just interesting that this is the one
moment featured in the promo.
In two different promos for the situation comedy Chicago Sons, NBC uses comedic
violence accompanied by catchy tunes to promote this generally non-violent program. Though
completely good natured and featuring the theme song from the old comedy My Three Sons,
the promo contains four separate slaps to the head. None is designed to injure, but once
again it is significant that, of all the content from a 30-minute sitcom, only this is
chosen to promote the program.
The four broadcast television networks all have promotions departments that prepare an enormous amount of material to advertise their programming. Not all of the promotional material ends up airing during network-controlled time. The network also sends promotions for its programming to its local affiliates. A network is comprised of several local stations that the network owns (in Los Angeles, New York and Chicago, all of the network-affiliated stations are owned by the network) and approximately 195 independent stations that affiliate with the network.
During the time periods they control, the networks set their own practices and standards for what promos can appear at what times and on what shows. The affiliates, however, are given a small amount of prime time by the networks to advertise and promote their own shows and much more time in other parts of the day to do the same. Often it is the affiliate that schedules a violent promo in a non-violent time slot. When this is done it is impossible for the average viewer to discern whether it was the network or the local station that made the decision.
Networks frequently get blamed for the decisions of the affiliates. Few viewers can
tell the difference and, in the larger scheme of things, to most of them it does not make
a difference. It is the affiliates that schedule some of the promos just as it is the
affiliates that schedule adult talk shows during after-school hours. It is much easier to
control something when only four large corporations are responsible. However, when the
responsibility is spread over hundreds of large and small stations, the ability to take
corrective action is much more difficult.
The television networks frequently run spots talking about alternatives to violence. NBC has run its "The More You Know" campaign for several years, and Fox has been running its "Under the Helmet" spots.
These spots feature some of the biggest stars on the networks and are expensive to produce. Furthermore, they displace paid advertising time. For that the networks deserve much credit. It is difficult to measure whether spots change people's behavior or which type of spots are the best to run. There is evidence, however, that they are seen by many people. NBC reports that they have received as many as 3,000 phone calls after some of its "The More You Know" spots. There is absolutely no downside to these public service announcements and the networks should be commended for running them.
One of the problems television faces is that children may watch any program at any hour of the day, including those programs aimed exclusively at adults. There is evidence that far more children than many people realize are watching television at 9:00 p.m. or even 10:00 p.m. Nevertheless, the broadcast networks have some right to consider the later hours primarily the province of adults. All television programming should not be sanitized because the possibility exists that some children may be watching. There are some times of the day, such as 10:00 p.m. or late night, when parents or guardians can reasonably be expected to supervise or prevent children's viewing.
This section deals with the Saturday morning television programming that is created especially for children. In the earliest days of television, a tradition began establishing Saturday morning for kids and Sunday morning for religion. Just as many kids get up early on Sunday morning, but that television time was generally reserved for religious programs.
The earliest hours of Saturday morning television belong to the youngest children. The shows that begin around 7:00 a.m. appeal to 4-to-6-year-olds. Around 9:00 a.m., the schedule changes to accommodate older brothers and sisters, and more action-oriented shows are broadcast. In all three years of the monitoring, NBC devoted its Saturday morning schedule (after news) to live-action programming for teenagers.
Children's television has long been controversial. To combat what she felt was over-commercialized and poor children's programming, Peggy Charren formed Action for Children's Television (ACT). Her approach was never to pressure for the removal of specific programs but rather to encourage the airing of higher quality shows. Heeding the challenge, public television filled what it saw as a vacuum in the area of children's programming, particularly programming for very young children. Sesame Street, The Electric Company and Mister Rogers' Neighborhood became staples of many children's daily morning routines.
In 1990, Congress passed the Children's Television Act, which promised to ensure that there would be quality programming for children. The act's passage prompted Charren to pass her mantle to The Center for Media Education, which continues to advocate for children's television. Unfortunately, many in the television industry defined "educational programming" differently than the sponsors of the legislation, and today children's television is as controversial as ever. During the summer of 1996 the Federal Communications Commission announced that it would require each station to air at least three hours of educational programming geared to children each week and that this requirement would become part of the license renewal process. Several outside organizations, including the University of Pennsylvania's Annenberg Policy Center under its dean, Kathleen Hall Jamieson, announced that they would help determine what qualifies as educational children's television. The new three-hour rule became an official requirement in the fall of 1997.
Saturday morning children's programming on network television is dominated by the new player, the Fox Network. NBC has gone out of the business of creating Saturday morning programming for young children. It airs The Today Show followed by the teen-oriented, live-action programs Saved by the Bell and California Dreams. Last season the new UPN and WB networks made their first foray into the area of children's television.
There has also been much discussion in the 1990s about the effects of Saturday morning programming on children. While the attention focuses on everything from sex and gender roles to commercialization, the most vocal concern has been about the effect of violence. One show in particular, The Mighty Morphin' Power Rangers, has been singled out by some as an example of violent children's programming that kids imitate. Although Fox argues that The Power Rangers is no different than other Saturday morning programs, it has been a lightning rod for much attention and criticism.
As this section details, we have broken children's television into three categories: slapstick, tame combat violence and sinister combat violence. Though a few shows may not perfectly fit these categories, or may straddle two classifications, most children's programming can be adequately classified within these three categories. The press, advocates and others have picked up on the label "sinister combat violence." While there are issues and concerns in the other two categories, the programming in this category raises the most concerns with the most people. Sinister combat violence is where dark, malevolent violence is found. Historically, there has been a difference of opinion on the possible negative effects of cartoons like Bugs Bunny, which contain slapstick violence such as anvils falling on characters' heads. The research community has been divided on this type of content. While it has always been our contention that the sinister programming raises the most concerns, we have also paid considerable attention to the shows in the slapstick category. The most need for improvement is found in the sinister programming.
In the 1995 report, seven programs on Saturday morning were identified in the sinister combat category. In 1996 the number of shows featuring this type of violence dropped to four. This season the number remains at four. It is important to note that three of the four are holdover shows from last year's list and have been on the air for some time. It is not likely that these shows, several of which are very popular, would be radically changed once they are established hits. What is encouraging, however, is that only one new sinister combat show premiered this season. It is our hope that once the "old" sinister shows run their course in a year or so, the problem with this type of programming, the one that raises the most concerns, will disappear.
Because it appears that the popularity of the sinister format may be waning and that the problem's end may be in sight, we now devote more attention to the issues raised in slapstick programming. Again, to some viewers, slapstick violence represents no problem at all. To others, however, it does raise concerns.
Children's television, far more easily than prime time fare, fits into a formula. Many prime time shows are more variable in their content, sometimes interweaving comedy, drama and violence. These shows have to be monitored a large number of times to get a handle on them. Children's programs, on the other hand, tend to repeat the same themes and patterns each week. Children seem to be more comfortable with and desirous of repetition, familiarity and predictability. Indeed many parents report that their children can watch the same animated movie on video tape over and over again. Despite this fact, children's programming was examined with considerable scrutiny.
After examining the networks' Saturday morning schedules, we developed categories for
the various types of violence in the shows. A reminder: NBC does not broadcast for young
children on Saturday morning. Its teenage programming raises no concerns in the area of
violence. Our three classifications of violence for Saturday morning programming are
slapstick, tame combat violence and sinister combat violence. Recognizing the importance
of children's programming and the fact that these are programs that parents are much less
likely to see, we discuss and analyze every Saturday morning children's program aired on
the networks.
Slapstick comedic violence has been watched by children on television and in movies for generations. Typified by the classic Warner Bros. cartoons such as Bugs Bunny and the Roadrunner, this type of violence is lighthearted and hyperbolic with comedy as the main theme and purpose. The slapstick cartoons of 1996-97 are tamer than those of the 1950s and 1960s. The slapstick is never realistic with regard to the violent actions themselves or the consequences of these actions. This genre of violence, while occasionally mean-spirited, is not designed to be taken seriously by viewers, no matter what age.
Little of the "lethal if it were real" type violence which appeared in the 1950s and 1960s is found in today's slapstick cartoons. Instead, tamer fare such as tripping, bumping into things, pinching and the occasional overdone punch are far more the norm. There are no shotguns or pistols as one used to see in the hands of Elmer Fudd or Yosemite Sam. There is very little of characters being hit over the head with umbrellas or anvils as Granny used to do to Sylvester or the Roadrunner to Wile E. Coyote. There are almost no instances of explosives being used. All in all, it is a much gentler cartoon universe. However, the one exception to this trend can be found in the new cartoons produced by Warner Bros. Animaniacs, The Sylvester and Tweety Mysteries and, to a lesser degree, Freakazoid! and Earthworm Jim (which are discussed in the following section on the emerging broadcast networks) all continue to feature the harsher, more destructive types of slapstick violence. However, they too do not feature such realistic and lethal weapons as shotguns or pistols. In large part, those have been eliminated from the cartoon world.
Examples of cartoons that feature slapstick violence are:
An animated rendition of a popular Jim Carrey film, this series chronicles the adventures of the zany pet detective Ace Ventura and his monkey sidekick Spike as they travel the globe tracking down lost animals. With each adventure comes new bungling villains, each one ultimately falling victim to Ace's wacky antics.
The types of violence contained in the show mainly consist of characters running into
things or falling down, many times with the impact occurring off screen. There is
occasional fighting between characters. However, such instances are typically represented
by a whirling cloud of dust with fists and feet emerging from the melee, all of which are
completely slapstick and never serious. Rather than focusing on the conflicts between Ace
and his foes, the program relies more on Ace's unorthodox behavior and large doses of
bodily function-based humor to keep audiences entertained. Seldom does Ace inflict harm on
his enemies. Instead, it is mostly through their own mistakes or Ace arresting them in
some bizarre fashion that the conflicts are resolved. Despite the relatively high number
of violent acts contained in each episode, they are mostly pokes, light pushes and
pratfalls.
Bailey Kipper's P.O.V. is a live-action program about a young boy with a flair for filmmaking and his experiences with his family. By placing "spyballs"--tiny secret cameras--throughout his home, Bailey records the activities of his parents, sister and younger brother. He then takes the footage, adds his own special effects and edits it into a weekly video diary. Each week, Bailey and his family deal with a situation that teaches them a lesson about life.
The program is virtually free of violence. It is only featured in the form of clips
from classic silent films that Bailey edits into his own video to illustrate a point.
These examples are so quick and few in number that they raise no concerns and barely
deserve to be mentioned.
A live-action, educational show, Beakman's World is hosted by the wild and wacky
scientist, Beakman. Part Mr. Wizard, part Seinfeld's Kramer, Beakman, with the help of his
lab assistant Phoebe and an overgrown rat named Lester, answers viewers' questions about
science. With a large array of sound effects (many of which sound suspiciously like bodily
functions) and a smattering of slapstick violence, the program interjects a large degree
of humor into informative programming. As mentioned above, the program does contain some
slapstick violence, most of which is directed toward Lester; however, it is trivial.
A live-action show based on a successful series of children's books by Betsy Haynes and Daniel Weiss, Bone Chillers is a goofy comedy about four freshman at Edgar Allen Poe High School. An appropriately bizarre and spooky academy, Edgar Allen Poe High is run by the fiendish Principal Pussman and is the site of regular ghostly and supernatural activities, ranging from a ghoul infestation to a monster fly posing as a cafeteria worker. In each episode, with the aid of a trollish custodian who lives in the basement, the four friends put a stop to the evil and save the school.
Despite its creepy look, the show is remarkably lighthearted and free of violence.
Comedy is the principal thrust of the show. There is menacing action that occurs in the
form of the youths being chased by the monsters. No one is ever injured and the only
violence that does take place is an occasional trip or poke in the ribs. When the students
are forced to combat the insidious creatures, they use extremely unrealistic and ludicrous
weapons such as a special monster-sucking vacuum or mustard. The program raises no issues
of violence at all. In addition, at the conclusion of each episode, in a pro-educational
segment, Haynes encourages the audience to think up and write their own stories.
Brand Spanking New Doug is the story of Doug Funnie, an average sixth grade boy who
faces the typical adventures and challenges that are part of growing up: an older sister
with whom he often fights, parents who are too overprotective, crushes and school bullies.
The program features much less violence than most programs on Saturday morning. Each
episode contains some sort of life lesson or pro-social message which Doug reflects upon
at the end of the show. These range from the importance of friendship to why children
should listen to their parents. Occasionally, some slapstick violence does occur, such as
a basketball coach being hit in the head by an errant pass, but all of it is so minor that
it raises no issues at all.
An hour-long collection of the classic Warner Bros. cartoons featuring the likes of Bugs Bunny, the Roadrunner and Tweety Bird, this show raises some of the most serious concerns in the slapstick area. Each cartoon within the anthology is roughly five minutes long and is full of violence, all of which is intended to be humorous. The violence typically occurs as one character tries to hunt or eat another, only to then fail due to his or her ineptitude and the prey's superior cleverness.
Although the violence is completely hyperbolic and the characters are typically not human, many of the tools of violence featured in these cartoons are realistic objects that are accessible in many homes. In addition to the ridiculously oversized slingshots, cases of dynamite and falling anvils that are trademarks of these cartoons, the use of knives, shotguns, pistols and hatchets is also frequently featured. Although these weapons do cause harm in the program, the consequences are far from realistic. Characters recover from shotgun blasts immediately, suffering no lasting effect. They also often fall from high places, have large objects fall on their heads, are hit by cars, get doors slammed in their faces and incur a variety of other physical injuries from which they immediately recover. Although the hyperbolic nature of the violence is intended to be humorous, it is conceivable that, for some younger or more impressionable viewers, it could lead to false perceptions of the consequences of violence. When considered in conjunction with the fact that violence is always rewarded and portrayed as funny, this raises the concern of children imitating the violent behaviors they see on screen.
Interestingly, of all the slapstick cartoons, many of these older ones contain the most
questionable violence. In a couple of instances, there also seems to have been a modicum
of editing done by the networks, perhaps to eliminate some of the more gratuitous
violence. In any case, of all the slapstick violence featured on Saturday morning, this
program contained the most issues.
This cartoon follows the life and times of a ten-year-old African American boy named Jamal and his magical, hipster teddy bear, C-Bear. Living in South Central Los Angeles with his grandparents and widower father, Jamal faces the issues and struggles inherent in growing up, ranging from the acceptance of his father's return to dating, to learning that telling the truth is important but so are people's feelings. With C-Bear as his companion and conscience, Jamal learns lessons about life and growing up.
There is very little violence in C-Bear and Jamal. What violence does exist is clearly
slapstick and minor, such as C-Bear being knocked over by a door or taking a small tumble.
There is never an intent to harm and the violence is always accidental. The comedy in the
show centers not on the slapstick violence but rather on the antics of the characters. The
show does a good job of dealing with real issues in an entertaining way without relying on
violence.
This new incarnation of the classic cartoon is very much like the original with regard to violence. It contains only minor instances of slapstick violence such as pokes, pinches, grabs and pushes. Such acts are typically reserved for Casper's three rowdy uncles who abuse but never injure one another. The most extreme cases involve acts such as one of the uncles turning into a hammer and hitting another uncle on the head. Because they are ghosts, they immediately return to their shape and are uninjured.
The violence, in addition to being slapstick and minor, is used to contrast how sweet
and friendly Casper is in comparison to his uncles. Their incessant bickering and brawling
only serve to illustrate their oafishness and cast them in a negative light. Like the
original, Casper does not raise any issues of problematic violence.
This live-action series originally aired briefly several seasons ago in another network's prime time lineup but resurfaced this season as part of Fox's Saturday morning schedule. The show is about a young boy named Marshall who moves from the big city to Eerie, Indiana, a small town that he describes as the "center of weirdness for the country." In each episode, Marshall encounters some supernatural or peculiar phenomenon, such as Bigfoot eating out of trash cans, a mummy coming out of the television into Marshall's living room and possessed ATM machines, that are part of everyday life in Eerie.
Primarily a comedic show with vaguely spooky overtones, Eerie, Indiana contains very little violence. The small amount it does contain is mild slapstick or standard roughhousing among young boys. The only instance of potentially harmful violence that was depicted in the program occurs in the episode in which a mummy escapes from the television and stalks Marshall and his friend Simon on Halloween. Marshall subdues the mummy by whacking him over the head with a shovel.
Most episodes of Eerie, Indiana contain elements of the paranormal, but never in a
serious or threatening manner that might frighten viewers. Despite the supernatural
overtones, there is almost no violence and that which it does contain raises few issues of
concern.
Featuring younger incarnations of the animal characters from Disney's animated film The
Jungle Book, Jungle Cubs is a comedic cartoon that contains some very mild slapstick
violence. In each episode, the cubs find themselves in some adventure or sticky situation
that they must resolve by the show's end. Since the animals are all very young, their
hunting skills are undeveloped, thereby eliminating the threat of serious violence.
Instead, most of the violence occurs in the form of accidents or pranks the cubs play on
one another. Consequences of violence typically go unexamined and no one is ever seriously
hurt. Occasionally, the cubs must face the dangers of the jungle, avoiding predators or
hostile creatures. But even these encounters are very tame and are typically resolved with
very little violence. Although Sher Khan, the tiger cub, does have a propensity for
violence, it is simply accepted as an inherent character trait in tigers. Each episode
contains very few scenes of violence and those it does contain are of little consequence.
Based on the adventures of stand-up comedian and author Louie Anderson, Life With Louie
is an animated depiction of the trials and tribulations of Anderson's middle class
suburban childhood. Typically focusing on the interactions between Louie and his father, a
U.S. Army veteran with a propensity for hair-brained ideas, the program examines life with
a dry, comedic perspective that always concludes with some moral or life lesson. There is
almost no violence in the show, as it relies more on the dialogue and eccentricities of
the characters as its comic inspiration than on the modicum of slapstick violence it
occasionally contains.
This new version of the classic Felix the Cat cartoon is much more surreal than its predecessor. A series of short segments, the program features the assorted adventures of the title character as he regularly finds himself in sticky situations armed only with his mysterious and magical bag of tricks. Although there is some conflict between characters in the program, the small amount of violence contained in the show is slapstick and usually is not borne of the conflict itself. Rather, the violence is typically the result of accidents such as characters running into or having objects fall on them. When such incidents do occur, they are extremely hyperbolic. For example, in one segment, heavy objects such as a safe, a bus, a piano, a refrigerator and an enormous peach repeatedly fall on the head of a down-on-his-luck gambler. Emphasizing just how down on his luck he is, the repetitious blows do him no harm at all. Felix is also sometimes the victim of such mild violence as stumbles and falls; however, it is never very serious. Overall, the program contains only a small amount of violence. Instead, the program's source of humor is the peculiarity of its characters and the situations in which they find themselves.
Based on two of the most popular characters from Disney's motion picture The Lion King, Timon and Pumbaa is a comedic cartoon that lacks the action elements that are typical of Disney's animated films. The show chronicles the adventures of the two title characters as they wander through the African savannah, typically looking for grubs and other sustenance. Timon, the meerkat, is the wild and crazy, scatterbrained leader of the duo, while Pumbaa, the warthog, is his more considerate, albeit dim-witted, compatriot. Together, the two find themselves in a variety of predicaments, ranging from competing in the "Mr. Pig Contest" to hunting a wily bookworm throughout the bookshelves of a library.
Entirely comedic, the program relies heavily on bathroom humor and slapstick violence
to entertain its viewers. The violence is very typical of that found in many slapstick
cartoons, featuring characters who are hit over the head with oversized mallets and clubs,
run into things and have heavy objects fall on them. Although some of these assaults are
slightly malicious, they are treated cheerfully and the show's tone is always upbeat and
lighthearted. With only one exception, characters always emerge from violent incidents
uninjured and, at most, momentarily fazed. Only after a cruise ship and its anchor fall
from the sky and land on them are the characters shown in traction at a hospital. Even
then, Timon and Pumbaa are only slightly hindered as their frenetic pursuit of the
bookworm continues throughout the hospital.
This is a live-action, children's game show featuring the Crypt Keeper, the ghoulish
host of the gruesome HBO series Tales From the Crypt. Set in the Crypt Keeper's haunted
house, the contest combines quiz show elements with physical challenges as two teams of
pre-teenage boys and girls compete against each other to win prizes such as computers or
sets of encyclopedias. Although the physical challenges all have a mildly sinister and
violent undertone --for example dodging "fireballs" (actually just foam balls)
fired from the mouth a large computer- generated skull, doing battle with a virtual
reality skeleton and solving word puzzles in a room with shrinking walls--the show
contains no actual violence and simply seeks to play upon many children's natural
fascination with the macabre. The only issue that the program may raise is that the
fiendish and grotesque Crypt Keeper may be a little frightening to very young viewers.
This is a necessarily broad category that contains the types of violence that are typical of adventure-comedy cartoons, in which the violence usually stems from a battle between the forces of good and evil. It is generally used to establish the conflict in the story and then again in the climax. Examples of tame combat violence include somewhat threatening chase scenes that result in little, if no harm; fight scenes in which the emphasis is placed on evading attacks and any other relatively innocuous conflict in which good battles evil. Though some scenes may be prolonged in order to achieve a degree of excitement, the action or comedic aspect, not the violence, is the crux of the program. Unlike in sinister combat violence, characters in this category do not fight eagerly without considering alternatives, and the shows do not have a dark, malevolent look or feel.
Examples of these shows are:
In this live-action show from the makers of The Mighty Morphin' Power Rangers, three children possess the ability to transform into the comic book superheroes, the Big Bad Beetleborgs. Using a haunted house as their headquarters, the Beetleborgs are befriended by a wild and wacky ghost named Flabber and several dim-witted, comedic versions of classic horror movie monsters. As the Beetleborgs, the children protect humanity from the evil ambitions of the Magnavorgs, a group of bumbling creatures who wish to destroy the Beetleborgs and take over the world. In each episode, in an effort to demolish the heroes, the Magnavorgs magically summon monsters from the Big Bad Beetleborg comic books to do battle with them.
Although the Beetleborgs do engage in battle in every episode, there is surprisingly little violence in this program. Unlike in Power Rangers, violent conflict is neither glorified nor the thrust of the show. Big Bad Beetleborgs is a much more comedic show, emphasizing the bumbling antics that go on in the haunted mansion more than the fight scenes. The entire feeling of the show is more comedic and less action-oriented than other live-action shows of this genre.
When the Beetleborgs do fight Magnavorg monsters, the scenes are surprisingly short and harmless, typically lasting only 10-15 seconds. The impacts of blows are generally obscured by words that appear on screen such as "POW," "Oops!" or "BAM" in a manner very similar to that of the old Batman TV series. Also, the Beetleborgs occasionally resort to non-violent methods when fighting off monsters. For example, in one episode, the Beetleborgs tickle a Magnavorg into submission. Also of note is that rather than killing or injuring their foes, the Beetleborgs use a special ray gun that sends monsters back into the comic books from which they came.
Despite the show's premise, there is surprisingly little violence in Big Bad
Beetleborgs. That which does exist is brief and mitigated by the words that appear on
screen. The overall tone of the program is extremely light and comedic and further
distracts viewers from the violence that occurs.
This cartoon chronicles the lives of a clan of gargoyles living in an American metropolis. Though fierce-looking and capable of tremendous destruction, the gargoyles are a noble and intelligent lot who come to life at night, but turn into stone at sunrise. Despite their virtuous nature and constant good deeds, the gargoyles are feared and hated by most of humanity and are forced to seek refuge with their wealthy industrialist friend Xanatos. With his help, and the aid of their other human friend, police detective Elisa Maza, the gargoyles fight crime and evade persecution, hoping someday they will be accepted by mankind and welcomed into society.
Due to the crime-fighting aspect of the show, as well as the persecution of the
gargoyles by a hate-mongering vigilante group known as the Quarrymen, Gargoyles
necessarily contains violence. Combined with its dark and ominous tone, it would seem that
this program is obviously a sinister combat violence show. However, largely due to the
characterization of the gargoyles, and in particular their leader Goliath, the show does
not raise issues of violence.
The program is surprisingly sophisticated for Saturday morning and the gargoyles are well drawn characters with a deep appreciation for peace and justice. They regularly deal intelligently and thoughtfully with the very human problems of social acceptance, scapegoating and wishing to be someone else. The gargoyles never initiate violence and only resort to it in self-defense or to protect others. Instead, human characters are typically responsible for the violence in the program, using guns, lasers and electrically charged hammers to try and kill Goliath and his band. With few exceptions, the only weapon the gargoyles rely upon is their extreme strength.
The use of violence in Gargoyles is never glorified and instead casts a negative light
on those responsible for it. The show's protagonists are rational, sensitive creatures who
are put in violent situations by those who seek to destroy them. Although there is a
darker feel to the program and it contains a slightly higher level of violence than most
tame combat violence shows, the violence is used to deliver a pro-social, anti-violence
message in a manner that children will not regard as patronizing.
A live-action anthology series based on the popular children's books by author R.L. Stine, Goosebumps is best described as "The X-Files for kids." Combining creepy stories with high production values, the program creates a very menacing and foreboding sentiment without relying heavily on violence. Each episode tells a different story of two or three young teens in some sort of bizarre, paranormal predicament. Preceded by an advisory that warns of material that may be too "spooky" for younger viewers, the program delivers the promised goosebumps with an assortment of creepy crawlies and sundry fiendish characters. Similar to shows such as The Twilight Zone and Alfred Hitchcock Presents, episodes frequently end on an ominous note with some twist that implies that the danger may not in fact be over.
Despite its dark and scary tone, Goosebumps contains less violence than almost any
other show on Saturday morning. Well done, it is both thrilling and slightly disturbing
with nothing more violent than someone grabbing another character. Rather, it is the grave
and intense tone of the program that portends violence, giving viewers the impression of
danger or pending violence without any violence actually occurring.
In its second season, this animated version of the hugely popular Jim Carrey film remained unchanged from its first season in its treatment of violence. The program, like the movie, follows the adventures of mild-mannered Stanley Ipkus who, when wearing a magical mask, is transformed into a green, mischievous and loud-mouthed cartoon character called The Mask. As The Mask, Stanley uses his ridiculous and humorous super powers to fight crime and do battle with villains.
Although the program's theme is totally comedic, relying heavily on slapstick violence,
because of its premise there is some violent conflict between The Mask and his foes. The
hero himself is in no way malicious, resorting to rather tame, comedic forms of violence
such as "atomic wedgies." He seldom, if ever, attempts to inflict physical harm
on anyone, preferring instead to utilize outrageous and humorous tactics to quell
wrongdoings. However, he is often the victim of tremendous amounts of abuse such as being
blown up or punched across the city. Even in the face of such attacks, The Mask's attitude
remains consistently irreverent and unfazed by the violence. In the few episodes in which
The Mask does not clash with a villain, the level of violence remains fairly low and
inconsequential. Although the bulk of the violence featured in The Mask is slapstick, much
of it typically occurs in the context of a fight and is thus best classified as tame
combat violence.
A Disney cartoon founded on the popularity of the Mighty Ducks professional hockey team (owned by Disney), this program is about a team of alien duck freedom fighters who pursue an intergalactic criminal, Lord Dragonus, through a cross-dimensional gateway into our universe. On Earth, the ducks become a successful professional hockey team and valiantly protect the planet from being taken over by Dragonus and his reptilian crew.
Although the program infuses a great deal of humor into the action, Mighty Ducks is first and foremost an action/adventure show. The ducks are muscle-bound soldiers with specializations in weapons and hand-to-hand combat. They are virtuous and intelligent, but are constantly drawn into violent confrontations by Dragonus. Though they show no particular zeal for combat, they certainly do not try to avoid it and never treat it with much gravity.
Battle scenes are typically set to exciting music and consist of the ducks exchanging
laser fire with and shooting exploding hockey pucks at Dragonus' henchmen. When they
engage in fistfights, much of the fighting is brief and done off screen. No one is ever
seriously hurt except in one episode in which the ducks' leader sacrifices himself to save
the others. Although this cartoon certainly pushes the boundaries of tame combat violence,
and occasionally crosses them, it is lacking the darkness and malevolent edge that
characterize sinister combat violence programs. It does, however, contain more violence
than is typical of tame combat violence and frequently raises issues of glorification.
An animated series based on one of Marvel Comics' oldest and most popular superheroes, Spiderman joined the Fox Saturday morning lineup two seasons ago and quickly became one of its most popular shows. Chronicling the adventures of the wall-crawling superhero, the show features intricate storylines, derived from the actual comic books, which span several episodes. Serving as a guardian of the city, Spiderman swings through the skyscrapers of New York City thwarting the evil plans of villains such as Venom, the Kingpin and the Green Goblin.
As is typical for this genre, action is the driving force of the show. While the level of action is typically achieved and maintained through the use of violence, Spiderman walks a fine line between tame combat violence and sinister combat violence. What distinguishes the program from sinister combat violence shows is the nature of its protagonist. Unlike other superheroes featured in action-oriented shows, Spidey shows no zeal for combat and prefers to work from a distance, dodging attacks and using his webbing to subdue villains. Occasionally he is drawn into hand-to-hand combat and punches are exchanged, but only rarely and in self-defense or to protect others. Although there are a number of violent scenes in each episode of Spiderman, most of them consist of Spidey evading explosions, laser blasts and the sundry attacks of supervillains instead of traditional hand-to-hand combat. Throughout these assaults he always maintains his characteristic good nature, which is evidenced by the fact that he never tries to kill or seriously hurt his opponents, only web them up and leave them for the proper authorities.
Another difference in the portrayal of Spiderman is the attention paid to his non-superhero identity, Peter Parker. Parker is a college student who is faced with real problems of looking after his elderly Aunt May, doing well in school, paying the bills and finding love, all of which are complicated by his secret identity. This gives the cartoon a more human dimension that places a higher value on the positive qualities of Peter Parker than on Spiderman's ability to fight.
Typically, when other Marvel superheroes, such as Wolverine or the Punisher, make
occasional "guest appearances" on the show, the program takes a darker, more
violent turn and begins to resemble sinister combat violence shows. However, these
instances are exceptions rather than the rule and Spiderman often opposes these
characters' more violent tactics.
A sophisticated spoof of the superhero cartoon genre, The Tick chronicles the absurd and comedic exploits of a seven-foot-tall, 400 pound, pea-brained crime fighter with a flair for the dramatic, named the Tick. With the aid of his moth-suit-wearing, accountant-turned-sidekick, Arthur, the Tick saves the world from such laughable supervillains as The American Mustache and Chairface. Although there is some fighting in the show involving punches and laser guns, it is always exaggerated for the purposes of comedy rather than action and is never lethal. No one is ever seriously hurt and altercations frequently occur off-screen.
The violence in the program is typically as ridiculous as the Tick's attempts at profundity and only serves to escalate the show's comic value. For example, as The American Mustache wreaks havoc on the community by attaching itself to innocent bystanders' upper lips in an effort to find its long lost love, The Russian Beard, the Tick saves its victims by spraying them with shaving cream and attempting to shave The Mustache. In another episode that takes place in a nightclub exclusively for superheroes, the Tick is forced to battle Barry, a "wannabe" superhero who gets into the club because his brother owns it. Barry picks a fight with the Tick because Barry also has chosen "the Tick" as his superhero moniker. The humor of the situation is augmented by the presence of a former gun-toting super-vigilante turned pacifist, who tries to mediate the conflict with his therapist's advice while suppressing his own ultra-violent impulses.
Everything from his blowhard musings to the over the top violent confrontations the
Tick gets himself into indicate The Tick's satiric intent. The violence is not glorified
or emphasized unless it adds to the parody. It raises no issues of concern.
These are the programs that raise the greatest concerns about the treatment of violence. This form of cartoon violence is characteristic of action-oriented programs that are combat driven. Fighting is the main attraction or purpose of these programs and the plots only provide justification for the combat. While this is not a new genre in Saturday morning programming, the dark overtones and unrelenting combat in these shows constitute a fairly recent trend. In these shows mean, vindictive violence occurs with little to counter the message that violence is an appropriate solution to a problem. The warriors are often portrayed heroically and their actions glorified.
Sinister combat violence shows are similar to tame combat violence shows in that they always contain a battle scene between the forces of good and evil. Nevertheless, sinister combat violence shows are far more mean-spirited and typically have a considerably more exciting feel to them provided by, among other things, a driving, rock music background. The heroes or "good guys" in these programs are valued for their toughness rather than their virtues, such as sense of humor or kindness, and are made "cool" by their warrior status and ability to destroy enemies. Violent behavior is always the defining element of these characters. These shows also draw out the violent scenes much longer and feature much more hand-to-hand combat and lethal forms of violence than the tame combat shows. In these programs, the focus is on the battle scenes which make up a large portion of the show.
While concerns may be raised in the other two categories of cartoon violence, depending on the particular program and the age of the child, it is our contention that sinister combat violence raises the most serious and immediate concerns. It is violence for the sake of violence. It rarely couches the violent acts in any suitable context. The message is: fight.
Four Saturday morning programs fall into the category of sinister combat violence. They
are as follows:
Set in an apocalyptic future world, Project G.e.e.K.e.R. revolves around the exploits of three friends, a streetwise thief named Lady MacBeth, a talking dinosaur named Noah and a super- powered, amorphous being called Geeker. The focus of the program is on the protection of Geeker, whose creation was commissioned by an evil industrialist named Mr. Moloch who sought to use him as a weapon. However, before Geeker's warrior mentality could be programmed, Lady MacBeth and Noah stole him away from Moloch's lab, rendering Geeker a super-powered, but sweet-hearted goofball. In each episode, Noah and Lady MacBeth try to stop Moloch's efforts to recapture Geeker and turn him into a weapon of mass destruction.
Project G.e.e.K.e.R. is a difficult program to classify because of its unique combination of themes and styles. Although much of the program features Geeker's wacky antics, they stand in stark contrast to the rest of the program's dark feeling. Lady MacBeth's character is extremely violent and has to be frequently restrained from initiating conflict by the more rational Noah. Possessing a robotic arm that is equipped with a variety of weapons, Lady MacBeth is the type of person who shoots first and asks questions later. Although Noah is more pragmatic and looks for peaceful solutions to problems, he too is often driven to fight as their group is continually assaulted by Moloch's mutant henchmen. Ironically, the least violent character in the show is Geeker, who in fact is capable of the most destruction but only resorts to using his powers in defense of his friends or innocent bystanders.
Although the show contains a substantial number of violent conflicts, they are
typically interspersed with instances of Geeker's lighthearted frivolity, thereby
undermining the sinister element of the program. Despite this, the fact remains that much
of this show revolves around glorified, action-packed violence such as laser gun fights
and hand-to-hand combat. The comedic influence of the program's title character does
soften the menacing tone of the program, but is not enough to dismiss some of the issues
it raises.
Although the overall level of violence in this animated program seems to have diminished slightly this season compared to last, the focus of the program continues to be on the Turtles fighting. In an effort to keep viewers' interest, the show introduced several new elements this season. These included a new, more menacing villain, special mutating powers for the Turtles, and a new human sidekick named Carter. The ability to mutate is of particular interest because of its impact on the show's level of violence. When the Turtles and Carter mutate, they are turned into stronger, less intelligent, more violent versions of themselves. Thus, not surprisingly, when the characters mutate the amount of violence in the show rises sharply.
Although the tone of this program is not very sinister due to its heavy infusion of
comedy, the driving force of the show is violence. Music, wisecracks made by the Turtles
and multiple fight scenes in every episode convey the message that fighting is exciting
and trivial. A wide variety of weapons are used by characters, ranging from laser guns to
poles, swords, and fists. The heroes of the program, though intelligent and funny, are
most highly prized for their ability to fight and they appear to enjoy beating up their
enemies. Thus, although it is much less ominous than other sinister combat violence
programs, it still raises issues of glorification and centers around a violent theme.
Midway through last season, Power Rangers Zeo replaced The Mighty Morphin' Power Rangers. In a similar fashion, this season, on the coattails of the feature film of the same name, Power Rangers Turbo replaced Zeo. Although all but one of the characters stayed the same, the Rangers were given new powers, vehicles and costumes to assist them as they face a new, more insidious villain, Divatox, and her hordes of "Piranhatrons." Despite these changes, the show's look, concept and formula remained virtually the same. With her nasty minions, Divatox, like those enemies that came before her, is bent on the destruction of the Power Rangers, and is perpetually sending her troops and monsters to demolish them and torment their hometown, Angel Grove. Each episode follows a remarkably similar blueprint, as the Rangers initially fight Piranhatrons and one of Divatox's monsters and barely beat them, thereby causing them to retreat and regroup. Just when all seems well in Angel Grove, the monster returns for one last climactic battle. Inevitably, just as the Rangers have the monster on the ropes, Divatox magically "super sizes" it to mammoth proportions. Overwhelmed, the Rangers are forced to "shift into turbo," calling upon futuristic, all-terrain vehicles that piece together to form a super fighting robot. Piloting the robot, the Rangers vanquish the monster, leaving Divatox to come up with a new monster in the next episode. Within this model are ample opportunities for violent confrontations between the Rangers and Divatox's hordes.
Although there are some minor differences between Zeo and Turbo, the two incarnations of the Power Ranger series raise exactly the same issues of concern. Neither program is at all menacing or even particularly sinister, featuring bright colors, good natured heroes, some comedic relief and bumbling villains. However, the amount, glorification and realistic forms of violence featured in every episode of the program have made it a frequent, central focus of the debate over violence in children's programs.
Featuring drawn out scenes full of martial arts-style punches and kicks, Power Rangers is, at its core, a show about fighting. Although most episodes contain some moral or life lesson the characters learn through their encounter with Divatox, the driving force of the program is the multiple scenes of hand-to-hand combat between the Power Rangers and their foes. This is evidenced by the length of the fight scenes (many of which are as long as five minutes), the very stylized manner in which they are presented and the exciting, fast-paced music that plays in the background. It is not uncommon for there to be as many as three or four such scenes in one episode, amounting to at least two-thirds of the program.
Although the Power Rangers themselves are all upstanding, good natured, moral characters with a healthy respect for justice, they are principally valued for their ability to fight. Despite the staggering number of times they are punched and kicked in the legs and torso, and sometimes even the head, not to mention the punishment they regularly dole out, the Rangers never suffer any kind of physical consequence from all their fighting. They often seem to enjoy it, challenging their enemies and never exhibiting any reluctance to enter into battle.
One noteworthy difference between Turbo and Zeo is that in Turbo there seems to be more
instances in which the Rangers fight out of costume. Although this may be minor point, for
some viewers this may make the violence seem more realistic because it is committed by
humans rather than costumed superheroes. It is unlikely that Power Rangers deserves all of
the blame and negative press it has received for supposedly causing children to imitate
the violence it showcases. But because it is live action and thus easily imitated and the
heroes are so admired by so many viewers, the messages it sends about violence do raise
some serious issues of concern.
Another animated series based on a popular Marvel comic book, X-Men has been one of the cornerstones of the successful Fox Kids lineup on Saturday mornings. Chronicling the exploits and adventures of a team of super powered mutants, the show features extremely complicated storylines, many of which span several episodes and are taken from the pages of the actual comic book. Perhaps the darkest children's show on Saturday morning, X-Men deals with complex themes of social rejection and intolerance. Despite the fact that the X-Men and other mutants like them are persecuted and hated by mankind, they choose not to retaliate, instead using their powers to battle the evil forces that wish to perpetuate human fear of mutants. In this respect, the X-Men exhibit a strong sense of morality. However, in other ways, they are more suspect.
Although some episodes of X-Men contain few scenes of violence, most rely upon them heavily. The show emphasizes numerous fight scenes in which the mutants use their powers as weapons of destruction and maintain a high level of violence. Scenes of violence are extremely prolonged and are replete with vivid depictions of hand-to-hand combat and exchanges of laser fire. In addition to the use of more fantastic mutant abilities, more realistic weaponry, such as swords, knives and daggers, are also regularly featured in battle. The majority of the violence is characterized by a malicious and malevolent undertone, particularly that which is committed by one of the show's most poplar characters, Wolverine, whose razor sharp claws and belligerent personality make for an extremely brutal and violent antihero. Unlike the other Fox-Marvel collaboration, Spiderman, the X-Men typically try to kill their foes rather than simply subdue them. Though possessing a strong sense of justice, some of the characters are morally ambiguous and have very mean-spirited dispositions. Scenes of violence are frequently unnecessary and their inclusion is indicative of the show's core appeal to its audience. The physical consequences of the numerous violent confrontations are seldom examined, although the fantastic nature of the heroes and their powers provide a default explanation as to why this is the case. Some psychological effects of violence are explored in greater depth than is typical of cartoons. However, they seldom, if ever, result in the consideration of non-violent resolutions to problems. Ultimately, extreme violence appears to be as commonplace and acceptable as conversation to these characters.
Although most of the violence in X-Men is completely unrealistic and impossible to
imitate, the sentiment and attitude behind it is not. The manner in which the heroes
embrace violence as the only means to resolving problems potentially sends the message
that violence is not only justified, but enjoyable. The celebration of brutal characters
such as Wolverine and the focus on violent encounters belie the occasional pro-social
messages of non-violence proffered by other characters in the show. For these reasons,
X-Men raises some of the most serious issues of concern in all of children's programming.
For many years television was dominated by the three television networks, ABC, CBS and NBC. Although there was talk of a fourth network for many years, it remained just talk until the emergence of the Fox network in the mid 1980s. Rupert Murdoch's purchase of half, and then all of Twentieth Century Fox, and then Metromedia (which had stations in New York, Chicago and Los Angeles, as well as other markets) gave the Australian businessman the production and distribution platforms to launch a new network.
Although there was a fear that the new Fox network might only purchase programs produced by its own Twentieth Century Fox production arm, the new network sought out the best programs it could find, regardless of where they originated, even if they came from rival studios. With a much smaller network of affiliates, at first Fox was unable to compete head-to-head with the more established television networks. However, Fox distinguished itself in at least two ways. First, it used a higher concentration of "reality" programs which were filmed in video and much cheaper to produce than most of the scripted comedy or drama found on its competitors. Some of the early Fox shows such as America's Most Wanted and Totally Hidden Video could use the same sets each week. Others such as COPS did not require a large staff of writers. The second way that Fox distinguished itself was with an irreverent attitude and with programming that was much more "on the edge" than that of ABC, CBS or NBC. Fox was doing what had proved successful for the motion picture business, i.e., focusing on a young audience. While the traditional networks tried to create programming that appealed to all age groups, Fox concentrated on young audiences, and particularly urban and, in many cases, African American audiences.
Fox knew that comedies such as Married With Children were unlikely to appeal to older audiences. The new network was willing to create programming that appealed almost exclusively to younger audiences. Fox also created more programs featuring African Americans than any of the other networks. Shows such as In Living Color, Martin and Living Single became important elements of the Fox lineup and were partially responsible for its success. Fox also benefitted from the disastrous 1988 writers' strike. The strike lasted so long that the other networks were forced to air reruns as many as three times. While Fox was also airing reruns, the initial audience numbers for those shows were so low that, as the strike continued, the audience turned to the Fox reruns in order to view what was for them original entertainment. Many of the people who sampled Fox programming for the first time in 1988 liked the attitude and style of the Fox network.
In the 1990s Fox programming such as The Simpsons, Beverly Hills 90210 and Melrose Place continued to attract the young, urban audiences that advertisers value. Fox was already a viable competitor with the other networks by the time it added NFL football and secured the stations owned by New World as affiliates (causing chaos for the other networks as they scrambled to find new affiliate homes for their programming and ended up, in several cases, on UHF). In 1997 the Fox network is able to charge advertisers a premium for its young audiences. Even though it still runs only 15 hours of programming a week (unlike the 22 hours a week on the other networks), Fox proved its critics wrong and established a successful fourth network.
As Fox became successful with its network, other important events unfolded, causing concern in the entertainment industry. Fox's network was already owned by one of the most prominent motion picture and television studios, Twentieth Century Fox. In the summer of 1995 another large studio, Walt Disney, purchased Capital Cities, which owned the ABC television network. At the time CBS was also apparently for sale (it was eventually purchased by Westinghouse) and many large companies were looking at NBC. There was concern at Warner Bros., MCA/Universal, Sony and Paramount that their competitors were acquiring television networks, one of the best forms of television program distribution, while they were not. There was also concern that ABC and Fox, which bought their networks' programs from any production source, might begin to favor programming from the production arms owned by the parent company. This would represent a substantial problem by leaving the studios with fewer places to sell their products. Moreover, after a ban of about 20 years, repeal of the financial interest and syndication rules meant that networks could begin to own their own programming and share in the enormous profits of those shows that stay on long enough to enter the syndication system. Networks had clear financial reasons to favor their own programming over that of their production competitors. The studios that did not own networks began to realize that they needed a guaranteed distribution system or they might find themselves in real trouble.
These studios also saw, through the example of Fox, that it was possible to build small networks that primarily appealed to niche markets. It took the Fox network several years to be able to program all seven days of the week and, as mentioned above, it still does not program as many hours as the older networks.
Recognizing the important changes in the market, Paramount (owned by Viacom) and Warner Bros. (owned by Time Warner) felt the need to create their own television networks. This represented potential problems for the established networks. Theoretically, Warner Bros. could argue that two of its biggest hits, Friends and ER, would be better placed on the WB network than on NBC. Though those programs would forego the enormous exposure found on the larger, better known NBC, undoubtedly some, if not much, of those show's audiences would follow them to Warner's WB and help establish the new network. So far this has not happened, probably because Warner does not want to forsake the immense syndication profits those shows will receive by becoming hits on a traditional network. Nevertheless, the fact that it could happen causes concern for those established networks.
In January of 1995 Viacom and Chris-Craft Television (a large multiple station owner) established UPN (the United-Paramount Network) and Warner Bros. created the WB (Warner Bros.) network. Ironically, Viacom had initially been created when, because of the financial interest and syndication rules, CBS was required to spin off its successful syndication arm. UPN began broadcasting on two nights a week. While most of its original programming was canceled, UPN's network was anchored around Paramount's extraordinarily successful Star Trek franchise. Star Trek Voyager immediately attracted great interest and attention to the UPN network and viewers learned where it was on the dial. WB began with one night of programming, mostly comedies.
The original lineups for the two networks were largely unsuccessful. Last season WB
expanded to three nights per week (Sunday, Monday, and Wednesday) and UPN to three nights
as well (Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday). This year both networks continued to program
three nights a week. Next year both will further expand to four nights a week. Like the
Fox network in its early days, both networks are trying to attract younger audiences. In
its first season UPN created some action programming that was somewhat more intense than
what is found on the other networks. This season both UPN and WB focused more on comedy
and, as Fox did in its early days, produced more programming starring and created for
African Americans. In 1997 it still is not clear whether the two newest networks will
survive and become successful. What is clear is that, with the enormous clout and
financial resources of Viacom and Time Warner behind them, the two networks will have
every opportunity to establish themselves. Viacom already owns MTV, Nickelodeon, TV Land
and Showtime, while Warner, which already owned HBO and Cinemax before its new merger with
Turner, now owns CNN, TBS, The Cartoon Network and TNT.
Last season there were four series on UPN that raised frequent concerns about violence and none on WB. The four on UPN came from a total of six hours of programming while the four broadcast networks air 81 hours of programming and produced only five series raising frequent concerns. This season the number of series on UPN in the frequent category has been reduced by half to two while WB contributed its first series raising frequent concerns. Even with UPN's improvement, it still has as many series with frequent problems as the other four networks combined. Coupled with the one series from WB, these two new networks have more series (three) with frequent violence issues than ABC, CBS, Fox and NBC combined. On a more positive note, these two networks have no series raising occasional concerns while there are still six such series on the other networks.
In its first full year of programming last year, UPN aired mostly dramatic series. WB
filled its schedule with situation comedies and only one drama. This season there is a
greater mix of both formats on each network. Some of these series did raise concerns. It
is not surprising that in efforts to get noticed, UPN's and WB's dramas have a harder edge
than those found on the other broadcast networks. Last season UPN even exploited this edge
by labeling its back-to-back Wednesday night programming of The Sentinel and Swift Justice
"Lethal Wednesday." Using the same methodology that was applied to the broadcast
networks, two UPN programs and one WB program raised frequent concerns. They are:
Inspired by the campy feature film of the same name, Buffy the Vampire Slayer debuted midway through the season on the WB. Airing at 9:00 p.m. and preceded by an advisory warning of "action scenes which may be too intense for younger viewers," the show revolves around a high school sophomore named Buffy and her two best friends Willow and Xander. As the program's opening credits explain, Buffy is the "chosen Slayer" for her generation, a birthright which charges her with the duty of fighting off the hordes of vampires that migrate to her hometown. Assisted by her trainer and the school librarian, Mr. Giles, Buffy faces a host of demons, monsters and vampires, dispensing with them using an impressive array of punches, high-flying kicks and wooden stakes.
True to its inspiration, Buffy the Vampire Slayer combines comedy, action and horror to produce a program that is fun but oftentimes scary. The juxtaposition of Buffy's warrior character and a high school setting provides ample opportunity for humor as she struggles to balance her life as a teenager with her responsibilities as the Vampire Slayer. This sense of humor often detracts from the otherwise serious violence that occurs regularly in the program, mitigating it in some respects, but also trivializing it to a degree. A prime example of this can be found in the episode on 3/31/97, in which Buffy fights a muscle-bound vampire at a funeral home. Just as the vampire appears to have cornered Buffy, the boy she had been on a date with earlier in the evening shows up and hits the vampire with a metal tray. Angered by the interference, the vampire slams the boy's head against a piece of metal, apparently killing him. Buffy becomes infuriated, and begins beating the vampire senseless with an array of kicks and punches, all the while yelling at him, "You killed my date!"
The program occasionally contains graphic violence as well. In an episode on 4/14/97, Buffy shoots a female vampire in the torso with a crossbow. The bolt is shown protruding from the chest of the vampire who laughs it off and wrenches it out. In an episode aired on 5/5/97, an animated ventriloquist's dummy repeatedly plunges a kitchen knife into the back of a demon, finally killing it when he drives the knife through its heart. In the episode on 4/28/97, a demon named Moloch the Corrupter is depicted nonchalantly snapping the necks of two teenage boys. In that same episode, a teenage boy is shown carving the letter "M" into his forearm with an Exacto knife.
The show's lighthearted sense of humor oftentimes belies the dark and malevolent theme of some episodes. For example, the episode on 5/5/97 revolved around the capture and destruction of a demon who was killing students and cutting out their hearts and brains with a butcher knife. Although the audience never sees any of the organs being removed, the very idea is quite dismal and disturbing, particularly for a program that has a large appeal to young audiences.
The length of some scenes of violence also raises issues of concern. Fights involving hand-to- hand combat frequently last up to three minutes and feature graphic punches and kicks. Although exaggerated in number, each blow is presented realistically. The violence is also extremely glorified and is shown without any consequences. Because Buffy is fighting against purely evil creatures she should be afforded some degree of glorification. But, the program occasionally goes too far in this regard. In sum, her principal function in the program is to fight, something she often does with a casual indifference.
Despite the program's advisory and 9:00 p.m. time slot, Buffy the Vampire Slayer is
very likely to attract young viewers. For this reason, the glorification, graphic nature
and multitude of scenes raise concerns. Of the ten times this program aired, it raised
issues four times.
A psychological thriller, The Burning Zone is a program that revolves around a government agency similar to the Centers for Disease Control that investigates and controls bizarre viruses and other disease-related phenomena. Each week, a crack team of doctors, headed by Dr. Daniel Cassian, tackles a new life-threatening plague that has sprung up somewhere in America. These scourges range from violence-inducing chemicals to meteors that transform people into zombies. Airing at 9:00 p.m. without an advisory, the program combines elements of Fox's The X-Files with the feature film Outbreak in an attempt to frighten and entertain viewers. The illnesses often occur due to clandestine experiments or plans to destroy humanity, opening the door for violent conflict between the team of doctors and a variety of insidious forces.
Although the bulk of the violence that occurs in the show is unrealistic and usually the effect of an affliction, there is some "traditional" violence in each episode, typically in the form of gunfights. The more traditional violence is generally prolonged and antiseptic, often resulting in little bloodshed but many deaths.
Again, most of the violence in The Burning Zone consists of the graphic side effects of disease. The most repulsive example of this can be found in the episode aired on 2/4/97, in which recipients of illegal and unorthodox cancer treatments suffer rapid bone degeneration, causing a condition akin to exaggerated osteoporosis. Thus, victims' bones shatter under minimal pressure. In the opening scene of the episode a woman is shown swimming in her pool. As she attempts to climb out, her forearm snaps with a loud crack under the weight of her body. The audience sees her fall back in the pool screaming in pain as the camera closes in on a bone protruding from her broken flesh. Her shin subsequently splinters in a similar fashion and again the camera shows a close-up view. She sinks below the surface and drowns as viewers hear multiple other breaks. Later in the episode, an unsuspecting jogger suffers a similar fate, his leg breaking off just below the knee. Both instances are extremely graphic and are obviously designed to make viewers squirm in their seats. The graphicness of the incidents was far more than was necessary for the plot. These are among the most unpleasant scenes of violence monitored this season on network television.
Other excessively vivid images of violence can be found in episodes that aired on 9/3/96, 9/24/96 and 1/28/97. These featured, respectively, a prolonged image of a man ignited with flame throwers and burning to death, multiple victims combusting internally and exploding into flames and men burned alive with acid. Each of these incidents could have been filmed differently so that the violence was not so horrifically graphic.
The Burning Zone also contains examples of exceedingly brutal violence. In the episode that aired on 5/20/97, a corrupt prison warden and doctor use inmates as guinea pigs to test a pacifying drug. However, the results of the experiment go terribly awry when prisoners become more aggressive and go berserk. In a scene that occurs early in the program, a test subject attacks his cell mate and beats him brutally. While this does indicate the degree of dementia victims suffer under the chemical's influence, the length of the scene and the sheer viciousness of the assault are much more than was necessary to make the point. The scene culminates with the prisoner's eyes rolling back in his head and his scalp splitting in two, the ultimate and unnecessarily graphic side effect of the experiment.
Although the intent of these vivid and violent images is to disturb viewers, they are
portrayed far more graphically than the stories dictate. Of the 17 times it was aired, The
Burning Zone raised issues of concern five times.
Returning for its second season, The Sentinel continued to air at 8:00 p.m. on Wednesday nights and also continued to make the list of UPN programs raising frequent concerns about violence. Of UPN's four series on the list last year, The Sentinel was the only one to be renewed this season. Although last season it was the first half of UPN's self-described "Lethal Wednesday," its lineup partner, Swift Justice, was canceled this season. Instead, Star Trek Voyager was aired in the 9:00 p.m. slot. An action-oriented cop show, The Sentinel chronicles the exploits of police detective Jim Ellison, a former Army Ranger whose sensory perceptions have been honed to superhuman levels while living in isolation in the Peruvian jungles. Back in civilization, with the assistance of an anthropology graduate student-sidekick, Detective Ellison uses his abilities to fight crime and uphold the law.
The principal issue raised by The Sentinel is that of time slot. Characteristic of its genre, the program regularly contains six to ten scenes of prolonged, intense and lethal violence. Although the characters and storylines of the program are more developed than others in this genre, much of the show consists of heavy gunplay and fistfights between Ellison and criminals. While most of these scenes are relatively quick and some of the violence occurs off screen, each episode typically concludes with a prolonged scene of conflict in which Detective Ellison violently dispenses with the villains. These scenes are often set to exciting music which has the effect of glorifying the violence and making it appear appealing.
The Sentinel frequently raises issues of tonnage. Episodes sometimes contain a dozen or more scenes of violence in an hour. While some of these scenes contain quick and insignificant types of violence, many of them are surprisingly brutal and prolonged for the time slot, lasting as long as five minutes. Multiple fistfights, explosions and exchanges of gunfire maintain the fast pace and feeling of peril.
As mentioned above, some of the violence is surprisingly brutal and graphic. An example of this is in the episode that aired on 9/25/96, in which a police captain is viciously pistol-whipped across the face by a rogue sheriff. He is then punched repeatedly and shot in the leg. Similarly, in the episode that aired on 4/30/97, a teenage boy who witnesses a crime is brutally smacked across the face with a pistol, splitting open his forehead and causing blood to run down his face. On 2/26/97, Ellison subdues his opponent by smashing him over the head with a fire extinguisher. In the opening scene of the same episode, a man walks into a café and opens fire on its patrons with an Uzi. As glass shatters and bullets fly in slow motion, the violence of the encounter is emphasized.
Violence is often accentuated in The Sentinel. In an episode that aired on 4/30/97, a man falls from the roof of a building onto a car below. He falls in slow motion and the impact of his body onto the car's roof is shown from five different angles, prolonging the violence and ensuring that the audience sees the bad guy "get it good." Explosions are frequently filmed in a similar manner, exploiting and highlighting the violence.
In the episode that aired on 11/20/96, Ellison squares off with a ruthless drug dealer. The two exchange several punches and kicks to the face and torso until the criminal brandishes a knife. When the criminal charges him, Ellison clotheslines him so hard that the man flips in the air and lands unconscious.
Although some violence is crucial to action programs such as The Sentinel, much of what
is featured in this program is too intense and prolonged for 8:00 p.m. Gunshots and
punches are frequently more graphic than is necessary and much of the violence is
excessive. At a later time slot The Sentinel would not raise as much concern. Of the 22
times it was monitored, The Sentinel raised issues 14 times.
There were no movies shown on the WB network. UPN ran three movies of various origin
and all raised concerns about violence. They are:
This made-for-television movie centers around a firm of private detectives with
colorful pasts who investigate the seedy side of Hollywood. The film raises concerns
primarily because of the glorification in its most violent scenes. For example, an attack
in an alley upon one of the female investigators is made more intense through the use of
slow motion and especially fast-paced music. Violent flashback scenes are glamorized by
being presented in slow motion as well as in black and white. Although the number of
violent scenes is not unusually excessive, almost every act of violence occurs just before
a commercial break, presumably as a way to lure the audience into staying tuned.
In this made-for-television movie, aliens have invaded Earth in order to isolate a protein possessed by humans which the aliens need for their survival. They open a water filtration plant in the Pacific Northwest that serves as their headquarters and subdue their many victims by implanting worms in their ears.
Graphic violence is prevalent throughout this film. Less than 15 minutes into the
broadcast a woman is hunted by one of the aliens who appears in human form. She hits him
with a lamp and flees, then tries to shoot him with a pistol. The bullets go right through
him. Finally, he grabs her head, zaps her with lightning and sends her flying into a neon
motel sign, electrocuting her. This type of intense violence, coupled with other
frightening images such as translucent, electrified alien bodies, may be too severe for a
film airing at 8:00 p.m. without an advisory.
This theatrical film tells the story of an ex-gangster released from prison, intent on giving up his former life of crime and pursuing his dream of retiring to the Bahamas. Despite his plans, he is pulled back into the gangster scene and ultimately murdered.
Given the subject matter of this film and the lawless subculture in which it takes
place, a certain amount of violent content is to be expected. Credit should be given to
the network for airing and repeating an advisory. However, the magnitude of the brutality
in Carlito's Way far exceeds that which is typical of broadcast television. The very first
scene depicts a fatal shooting at point blank range. The ruthlessness only escalates from
there. By the end of the movie, the viewer has witnessed countless shootings, a savage
stabbing and the slitting of a man's throat. The film is certainly a compelling one and
may arguably depict the gangster lifestyle realistically, but its violence is extremely
graphic and intense.
While UPN does not schedule children's television on Saturday morning, it has become
the first network to air children's programs on Sunday morning. WB, like the other
networks, runs children's programming on Saturday morning. We applied the same system of
classification as was described in the preceding section on Saturday morning programming
to the UPN and WB cartoons. Of the 13 programs monitored, six featured slapstick violence,
five contained tame combat violence and two featured sinister combat violence. Last year,
the first in which the new networks programmed for children, there were only seven series
aired. Of those seven, three fell into the slapstick area, three were considered tame
combat violence and one was classified as sinister combat violence. Like last year, the
following is a discussion and analysis of all of the Saturday morning children's shows
that aired on UPN and WB.
One of the first and still most popular of the new breed of Warner Bros. cartoons, Animaniacs is the cornerstone of the "Kids' WB" lineup. The program consists of vignettes featuring a wide array of odd and amusing characters. The central figures are the Warner brothers, Yacko and Wacko, and their sister Dot, all of whom live in the water tower on the Warner Bros. studio lot. In each episode, the threesome escape the confines of the tower to wreak comedic havoc and goof around on the lot. Other recurring characters include Skippy and Slappy (a cranky squirrel with a bad attitude and her sweet-natured nephew) and Mindy and Buttons (a darling but danger-prone little girl and the dog that watches over her).
In the tradition of the classic Warner Bros. cartoons, slapstick violence abounds throughout the program. It is also coupled with intelligence, satire and a sophisticated sense of humor, parodying a wide variety of subjects including Disney's Pocahontas, Hollywood awards shows and famous works of literature. The show's wit and humor work on multiple levels and appeal to a wider range of ages than most other cartoons on Saturday morning.
As appears to be the case with most Warner Bros. animated programs, the slapstick
violence is more severe than that found in other slapstick cartoons. In a Slappy the
Squirrel segment that aired on 10/5/96, after receiving a bad review from caricatures of
film pundits Siskel and Ebert, Slappy and Skippy seek revenge, repeatedly blowing up the
duo with an assortment of explosives. Their vengeance also includes kicking and punching
them, liposuctioning Ebert's gut and sending the two out the window of a skyscraper.
Despite the fact that the victims always return battered and bruised, but not seriously
harmed, the maliciousness and vehemence with which the two squirrels terrorize the men is
extreme. Another example of excessive violence that occurs regularly in the program is
characters being hit over the head with huge mallets or other heavy objects. Although this
sort of violence is obviously hyperbolic and overdone for the purposes of comedy, it is
more brutal and severe than most other slapstick cartoons.
This is a new anthology program that features classic Warner Bros. cartoons, many of which star the title character, Daffy Duck. Each episode contains three full-length cartoons and one animated short, all of which feature the sophisticated sense of humor and slapstick violence that are Looney Toons trademarks. Although much of the violence is committed with malicious intent, it is always treated lightheartedly and comedically. Most of the violence in these classic cartoons is more severe and brutal than that found in modern fare and raises the most issues of concern with regard to slapstick violence. Fights, punches, falling objects and explosions are all portrayed humorously and with little consequence. In addition, the cartoons also tend to feature more realistic weapons such as shotguns and hatchets. In a cartoon that aired on 12/7/96, Porky Pig's pet dog chases Daffy around the house with a hatchet, repeatedly swinging it at him. When the ruckus wakes Porky up from a nap, he grabs the hatchet and chases the dog with it.
Usually Daffy is the victim of the violence, typically as a result of his ill-fated
schemes and narcissism. Although some consequences are shown, they are fleeting,
unrealistic and only included for comedic purposes. For example, when a large bulldog
pounds Daffy on the head with his fist, a large lump rises on Daffy's head and he speaks
incoherently. Unlike ABC's Bugs Bunny & Tweety Show, the cartoons shown in The Daffy
Duck Show exhibit no signs of editing.
The Mouse and the Monster is a slapstick comedy cartoon about a mouse named Chester and his best friend, a monster named Mo. Mo was created by a mad scientist, Wackerstein, who wanted to implant the brain of a famous classical pianist in his head so that the pianist's music would live on forever. Chester saves Mo and they run away. The program revolves around the duo's efforts to stay out of the clutches of Wackerstein and his creepy wife Olga.
The Mouse and the Monster is a wholly comedic program with very little conflict in it.
Most of the violence is the result of Wackerstein's ill-fated, bumbling plans or Olga
venting her frustrations on her husband. No attention is ever paid to physical
consequences of violence. However, the entire program is so lighthearted and ludicrous
that such efforts would seem out of place. There are some acts of violence that, in real
life, would prove very serious and potentially could raise issues, such as Olga hitting
Wackerstein on the head with a golf club. However, such examples are not frequent and do
not have a very malicious feel to them. Since the show is so unrealistic and does not
contain much violence, it is unlikely that anyone would feel it raises issues of concern.
Pinky and the Brain, similar to other Warner Bros. cartoons, features a combination of slapstick comedy and a sophisticated wit, creating a show that appeals to audiences both young and old. The show is about a duo of lab mice who have each been subjected to gene splicing experiments. While this has turned Pinky into an idiotic lunatic, it has made Brain into a power-hungry genius bent on world domination. Each episode revolves around the pair's attempts to execute one of Brain's new and ridiculous plans for taking over the world.
Two types of violence typically occur in Pinky and the Brain. Accidental violence
occurs when part of Brain's plan inevitably goes awry or Pinky makes a mistake. Typically,
this results in objects falling on Brain which only add to his mounting frustrations over
Pinky's incompetence. The other form of violence occurs when Brain physically punishes
Pinky for his stupidity by hitting him or shoving him. Although this sort of mistreatment
seems to belie their friendship, in an episode that aired on 11/30/96, Pinky explicitly
says he actually enjoys the abuse, furthering his character as a half-wit. Both types of
violence are slapstick and played for comedic purposes and never result in any injury.
Altogether, the violence featured in Pinky and the Brain is less severe and less frequent
than that found in Animaniacs.
This program features the classic Warner Bros. characters Sylvester the cat and Tweety Bird, along with Hector the bulldog, as both pets and members of Granny's world-class team of private investigators. The group of super sleuths travel the globe solving crimes and recovering stolen artifacts. Less about the mysteries and more about the hijinks the characters get themselves into, the program features a large amount of slapstick comedy, almost always at Sylvester's expense. These unfortunate and injurious events typically befall Sylvester as a consequence of his perennial attempts to eat Tweety. Many times, the violence is perpetrated by Hector who is charged with the duty of protecting Tweety and who frequently punishes Sylvester for his wrongdoings. Abuses such as being hit over the head with objects like umbrellas, oversized mallets and boulders regularly befall Sylvester. He is also frequently blown up, run over by vehicles, punched by Hector and, in general, pummeled, never suffering any sort of realistic consequence.
In the episode that aired on 10/5/96, the team goes to Pamplona, Spain to search for a
stolen periscope. When they arrive, the town is preparing for the annual running of the
bulls. For much of the episode, Sylvester is chased and tormented by a pack of bulls that
repeatedly jab and poke him in the backside with their horns. Although this would not be
humorous in real life, the violence here is clearly played for laughs as audiences chuckle
at Sylvester's perpetual bad luck. As seems to be the case in many Warner Bros. cartoons,
especially those which feature classic characters such as these, there is more exaggerated
and potentially dangerous slapstick violence than in most other modern day slapstick
cartoons. However, the violent acts are never particularly mean-spirited and are often
portrayed as accidental.
This is an animated account of TV and film star Damon Wayans' story of what it was like to grow up as an African American in Harlem. It revolves around a fourth grade boy named Damey Waynehead, who struggles with insecurity and the taunts of others because he must wear a large, unsightly orthopedic shoe and leg brace. A comedic show, the program contains minimal amounts of violence, deriving most of its humor from the neighborhood children's favorite pastime of "doing the dozens," an organized game of insulting each other.
The little slapstick violence Waynehead does contain consists of typically minor
shoves, trips and falls. One recurring slapstick joke centers around a neighborhood dog
that has only three legs. Waynehead and his friends frequently bump into the unfortunate
pooch, Tripod, and accidentally knock him down. In the episode that aired on 12/7/96,
Waynehead is tormented by a bully who challenges him to a fight. Not standing a chance
against the much larger bully, Waynehead talks him in to a war of words, daring him to a
dozens contest instead of a physical confrontation. When the bully breaks his word and
attacks Waynehead, he accidentally runs headfirst into Waynehead's heavy shoe and knocks
himself unconscious, thereby demonstrating that violence can result in embarrassment. In
each episode, through his experiences Waynehead learns a moral or life lesson such as
this. These also include messages about peer pressure, being sensitive to other peoples'
feelings and self-acceptance.
Based on a popular video game of the same name, Earthworm Jim chronicles the adventures of its title character, an earthworm. One day he has the good fortune of having a super spacesuit fall on him, thereby giving him super strength and a "really big gun," not to mention arms and legs. With his new abilities and limbs, and the help of his sidekick Peter the Puppy, Jim defends the universe from a number of bizarre archenemies including Bob the Fish, Professor Monkey-for-a-head, Evil the Cat and Queen Slug-for-a-butt.
Although there are a number of battles in each episode between Jim and his foes, they
are always deliberately hyperbolic and humorous rather than action-packed. Scenes of
violence are seldom prolonged and, though slightly glorified, not problematic. The
overblown and dramatic nature of Jim, in conjunction with his oddball enemies, indicate
the show's tongue-in-cheek design. Jim never tries to kill his enemies, only to thwart
their evil plans. In the episode that aired on 10/5/96, he even sits down to a friendly
game of poker with Bob the Fish. Ultimately, the show contains mostly slapstick violence
with some elements of action-adventure, thereby making tame combat violence the most
appropriate classification.
This spoof of the superhero genre revolves around the adventures of its lead character Dexter, a scrawny, teenage computer geek. One day, while surfing the Internet, Dexter was sucked into cyberspace and turned into Freakazoid, a wacky, wild goofball of a superhero. The catch is, Freakazoid does not seem to possess any real super powers. Whenever any of Freakazoid's not-so-menacing archenemies threatens to wreak havoc on society, Dexter transforms into the superhero and saves the day.
Although Freakazoid! is classified as a tame combat violence show, its primary emphasis is on comedy rather than action. Extremely lighthearted and strangely offbeat, the show possesses a sophisticated and self-conscious sense of humor that jibes with its satiric purpose. An example of this can be found on 9/28/96, when Freakazoid sneaks into a foreign prison to rescue his family. Just as he is winding up to punch a guard, the camera very conspicuously pans up. The audience hears several blows and the camera pans back down to reveal Freakazoid standing over the unconscious guard. Across the bottom of the screen a caption appears which reads, "Guards knocked unconscious thus far... 3." Both the camera movement and the caption demonstrate the show's awareness of itself and the debate surrounding violence on television.
Though much of the violence featured in Freakazoid! is slapstick, there is some
fighting between the forces of good and evil. No one is ever injured and the emphasis of
the program is more on Freakazoid's peculiar antics than on the show's violence. For these
reasons, Freakazoid! is best classified as tame combat violence.
The children's book by Chris Van Allsburg is the basis of this new animated adventure series popularized in the feature film starring Robin Williams. The title refers to a magical board game that two children, Peter and Judy, stumble across while exploring their attic. Upon rolling the dice, they are transported to the fantastic and perilous jungles of Jumanji. There they are befriended by Alan, a man who has been trapped in Jumanji since he played the game 23 years before. With Alan's help, Judy and Peter survive the dangers of the jungle and solve the riddles that allow them to return home. However, Alan remains trapped in Jumanji, unable to solve his riddle. Each day, Judy and Peter return to Jumanji to try to help Alan find his way back to our world.
Because Jumanji is an extremely hostile environment, full of bloodthirsty natives, man-eating plants, wild animals and the vicious hunter Van Pelt, the three protagonists are constantly in jeopardy. This naturally leads to a higher number of violent scenes per episode than is typical for tame combat violence shows. However, the nature of the violence provides the rationale for the show's classification.
Most of the violence in Jumanji shows the heroes being chased by animals and attacked by carnivorous plants. The heroes never initiate any of the violence, only using it in self-defense or to give themselves more time to solve the riddle. Although there are many close calls, Alan, Peter and Judy are never injured in these attacks. Because Jumanji is a magical land, its inhabitants never seem to suffer injury either. The most menacing recurring villain is Van Pelt. A ruthless hunter, Van Pelt is determined to add Alan's head to his trophy collection. Toting a large elephant gun and a nasty attitude, he is in constant pursuit of Alan, Peter and Judy, blasting away whenever he sees them. Although no one is ever hit, the use of such a realistic gun (rather than some sort of ray gun) is unusual in children's programming.
Although there are some examples of comedic slapstick violence in the show, it is
primarily an action-adventure program. As such, the violence is crucial to maintaining the
pace and action of the program. However, Jumanji falls within the tame rather than the
sinister category because of the types of violence that are featured and the fact that the
heroes typically try to avoid violence.
Slightly more violent than Earthworm Jim, Road Rovers is a new cartoon about a scientist who discovers a way to turn dogs into "Canine Sapiens," super dogs that can talk and walk upright. With this technology, he forms a team of six such creatures called the Road Rovers, who are regularly called upon to save the world.
Like the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, Road Rovers is an action-oriented, superhero
show that is not meanspirited. However, the difference is that Road Rovers does not rely
on violence as much as the Turtles and its heroes are not warriors. Infused with many
comedic elements, Road Rovers is a relatively lighthearted show that relies on a small
amount of violence to maintain its action. Although there are several scenes of violence
in each episode, the attacks are blatantly humorous and benign. For example, one of the
Rovers' tactics for defeating enemies is to bite them on their backsides. Only the Rover
named Colleen is a fighter, possessing martial arts skills. However, even these abilities
have a comedic aspect to them. As she kicks, she always yells something random and
bizarre, such as "Macarena!" or "Sharon Stone." All in all, the
emphasis of Road Rovers is on comedy rather than action and thus the violence, though
always present, is minimal.
A new cartoon this season, Superman debuted on the "Kids' WB" network amidst much anticipation and fanfare. Chronicling the life and adventures of DC Comics' archetypal superhero, Superman is a very stylized, dramatic cartoon, featuring storylines that sometimes span several episodes. Although the first several episodes deal with the story of Superman's birth, how he came to this planet and the discovery of his super powers, later episodes recount his exploits thwarting various evils that threaten the city of Metropolis.
Featuring a style of animation similar to Fox's Batman, Superman is decidedly brighter and less menacing. The stylized animation and sophisticated storylines of both cartoons are obviously designed to appeal to older audiences as well as young viewers. This may in part explain the slightly harder violent edge and darker villains both shows feature. However, a factor differentiating Superman from Batman, and one of the reasons Superman is typically only a tame combat violence show, is each show's characterization of its hero. Whereas Batman is presented as a dark and brooding vigilante who seems to enjoy thrashing villains, Superman is a much less tormented individual who never acts in anger, but only in the name of justice. Also, Superman never uses his powers to injure human beings, only super-powered villains or machines. Batman regularly beats up people.
However, Superman is a show that features large amounts of prolonged and glorified
violence. Each episode revolves around the hero fighting some insidious force and
ultimately prevailing. In addition, although the violence is obviously exaggerated because
of the hero's powers, it consists of realistic types of violence such as punches, kicks
and gunfire. Some might say that the violence is also antiseptic since Superman is never
seriously injured. Ultimately, Superman varies from tame combat violence to sinister
combat violence depending upon the amount and character of the violence in a particular
episode. Sometimes the sheer quantity and intensity of the violence raise issues of
concern.
B.A.D., an acronym which stands for Bureau of Alien Detectors, is about a crack team of soldiers assigned to the secret detail of containing and destroying hostile aliens on Earth. Led by Sergeant Ben Parker, the team consists of five agents, each one possessing a special skill that helps in the battle against the aliens.
An action-oriented show, B.A.D. revolves around violent conflicts between its heroes
and menacing aliens. The show's protagonists are a humorless lot who are principally
characterized by their brooding natures and desire to "kick alien butt." This is
consistent with the menacing and intense tone that permeates the program. Consisting
principally of heavy amounts of laser gunfire and alien attacks, scenes of violence are
almost non-stop throughout the show and occasionally result in characters being killed.
This latter point is especially surprising since characters are virtually never killed in
children's cartoons. Although none of the violence is especially graphic, the emphasis on
it, as well as the sentiment behind it, raises issues of concern.
Another children's show based on a Marvel Comics superhero, The Incredible Hulk is a violent program with a very dark look and feel. Dr. Bruce Banner was mutated by gamma rays in a lab explosion. Whenever he gets angry, he is turned into the Incredible Hulk, a primitive, green-skinned monster with infinite strength and a propensity for "smashing" things. Hunted by a military who seeks to destroy him and a nefarious evil genius called The Leader who wishes to steal his super strength, Banner is constantly on the run, trying to find a cure for his condition.
Similar to most superhero action shows, The Incredible Hulk contains a large quantity of violence. Numerous fight scenes occur throughout each episode. They mainly consist of prolonged laser blasts, explosions and exchanges of punches. Although Hulk is characterized as a misunderstood victim of others' fear, his primal nature lends itself to excessive amounts of conflict. The program's dark look and feel contribute to an intensity that pervades each scene of violence.
Although Hulk possesses no weapons other than his incredible strength, the military
typically attacks him with guns, laser beams and other weapons designed especially to
combat him. In the instances in which Hulk battles other super beings such as The Mighty
Thor, Ghost Rider and The Abomination, most of the violence consists of throwing powerful
punches and large objects at each other. In both cases, no one is ever hurt seriously and
no physical consequences are shown. However, more attention is paid to the psychological
consequences than is the case in most other sinister combat violence shows. Bruce Banner
feels tremendous remorse for the Hulk's destructive ways. Despite this fact, violence is
the central theme of the program and each episode is little more than a showcase for
fighting and destruction.