|
Prévention de la violence en milieu scolaire «
Empathie + sens critique + liberté d'expression |
|
EDUPAX |
Schools can
prevent bullying by helping students resist the influence of violence
in entertainment.
How teachers and parents can stimulate kids and teens
awareness about violence in entertainment ? Why and how can children wean themselves from the tube ? by Jacques Brodeur Over the last quarter-century, violence in television
programs, video games and other entertainment products has gradually polluted
our children’s cultural environment as effectively as some industries
have poisoned our air, water and food. Of course, not all TV and other
entertainment programs are toxic to children; many informative and even
inspiring programs provide positive stimulation and help children and
teens to understand the world. The majority, however, do not. As a result,
parents and teachers need ways to protect children against mental manipulation
and emotional desensitization. Fortunately, much can be done to reduce
the impact of this type of pollution on young citizens. This article discusses
the use of violence in media, the high cost of that use to young people,
and some strategies to combat it. Studies since the landmark 1977 LaMarsh Commission Report1
— where the analogy to environmental contamination was first drawn — routinely
confirm that violent entertainment influences children. In 1995, University
of Winnipeg researcher Wendy Josephson, author of Television Violence: A Review of the Effects
on Children of Different Ages, found more than 650 studies linking real-life violence by children
to violence that they have watched on TV.2 The American Academy
of Pediatrics reported in 2000 that “violence in entertainment and aggressive
behavior in children have a closer correlation than second-hand smoke
and lung cancer.”3 In a 2001 study, the Media Awareness Network
found that “only 4% of violent programs have a strong anti-violence theme
[and] only 13% of reality programs that depict violence present any alternatives
to violence or show how it can be avoided.”4 And University
of Washington epidemiologist Brandon Centerwall estimates that TV violence
could account for 50 percent of real-life violence.5 Violence in entertainment seems to have three kinds of
influence on children, depending on their age, whether they watch with
adults or peers, and how much they watch. Research suggests that children
mimic TV violence and that some perceive it as approval for hitting, bullying
and humiliating their peers. It also encourages between five and
ten percent of victims to accept the treatment they suffer without seeking
help. Finally, it reduces empathy in the witnesses, who then prefer ganging
with the aggressor instead of helping the victim.6 With increasing
exposure to violence in entertainment, children become mentally altered
and physically inclined to commit, accept, or enjoy watching real-life
violence. Manipulating
children In recent years, children have been increasingly exposed
to violence through toy manufacturers’ television programs and by video
games. In the early 1980s, the toy
industry began to use violence as a marketing ingredient. In addition
to advertising through commercials, companies such as Hasbro began producing
their own TV programs and paid to have them broadcast on weekdays and
Saturday mornings. In 1984, it was estimated that Hasbro’s “GI Joe” included,
on average, 84 acts of violence per hour and “Transformers” contained
81.7 This marketing strategy was so profitable that Hasbro
reused it in 1989 with “Ninja Turtles,” in 1993 with “Power Rangers,”
and in 1999 with “Pokemon.” Their primary purpose was to persuade children
to ask parents and Santa to give them Hasbro toys. Most of these programs,
like many video games for children, include fantasies and stereotypes
that support an aggressive culture of violence, sexism and war. Stereotypical “real” men are
strong and insensitive, and solve conflicts by exterminating their opponents,
while women are docile victims or decorative trophies incapable of solving
problems. Gary Ruskin, executive director of Commercial Alert, explained
at a 2002 World Health Organization conference: Advertisers use many techniques to sell to youth. Mostly
these involve manipulating their needs during the stages of their growth
into adulthood. Some of the more common needs that advertisers take advantage
of to sell products include youth needs for peer acceptance, love, safety,
desire to feel powerful or independent, aspirations to be and to act older
than they actually are, and the need to have an identity. Much of the
child-targeted advertising is painstakingly researched and prepared, at
times by some of the most talented and creative minds on the planet. Ad
agencies retain people with doctorates in marketing, psychology and even
child psychology for the purposes of marketing to youth. Advertisers are
so successful at marketing to youth that they sometimes discuss it in
terms of the battle over what they chillingly call “mind share.” Some
advertisers even openly discuss “owning” children’s minds. ... In sum,
corporations and their advertising agencies have succeeded in setting
up their own authority structures to deliver commercial messages almost
everywhere that children go.8 Other aspects of this entertainment-induced social engineering
project have also come under scrutiny. Apart from the tendency of video
games to arouse aggression, researchers note that these games provide
little mental stimulation. Professor Ryuta Kawashima and his research
team measured the brain activity of hundreds of teenagers while they played
a Nintendo® game
and compared the results with those of another group who did a math exercise
and read aloud. The researchers concluded that the thought processes required
in playing computer games are too simple to stimulate crucial areas of
the brain, leading to underdevelopment and such behavioural problems as
violence.9 In particular, the video game did not stimulate
the brain’s frontal lobe, an area that plays an important role in the
repression of anti-social impulses and is associated with memory, learning
and emotion. Researchers believe that a lack of stimulation in this area
before the age of 20 prevents the neurons from thickening and connecting,
thereby impairing the brain’s ability to control such impulses as violence
and aggression. According to Tonmoy Sharma of the Institute of Psychiatry
in the UK, Kawashima’s findings are supported by other studies: “Computer
games do not lead to brain development because they require the repetition
of simple actions and have more to do with developing quick reflexes than
carrying out more mentally challenging activities.”10 Growing public awareness of the dangers of media violence
aimed at young people has put pressure on governments to regulate it.
To try to prevent such intervention, Canadian broadcasters declared in
1994 that they would regulate the industry themselves. Five years after
self-regulation was implemented, professors Jacques deGuise and Guy Paquette
of Laval University noted not only that it had failed to reduce violence,
but that violence carried by private broadcasters had increased by 432 percent.11 Two developments during this period helped
to ease public concern about the growth of television violence. First,
many broadcasters provided funding for media literacy programs, on the
assumption that, by studying media in class, students would discover that
TV violence is not “real” violence. While such programs seem progressive
and useful, many media educators worry that they have become a smokescreen
to allow broadcasters to project an ethical image while continuing to
intoxicate children and teenagers. A second development intended to ease
parental concern about violent programming was the V-Chip. Many parents
work full-time and cannot always monitor what their children are watching.
Devices such as V-Chips allow them to block reception of certain programs.
While better than nothing, the V-Chip system depends on ratings that are
made by the broadcasters themselves. As the amount of television violence
has grown, the V-Chip has helped industry and government to shift responsibility
for regulating TV violence onto parents. Those who believe that government
regulation of media is an attack on freedom of expression tend not to
see that manipulating children with sophisticated marketing strategies
is closer to being a form of child abuse than a constitutional right. Notes 1 The Report
of the Ontario Royal Commission on Violence in the Communications Industry
(LaMarsh Commission, 1977) brought forward a plethora of research on the
potential harm to society of violence in the media. The prevalence of
violence in the North American intellectual community is compared to chemical
food additives and air or water pollutants such as lead, mercury and asbestos. 2 Wendy Josephson, “Television Violence: A Review of
the Effects on Children of Different Ages,” Department of Canadian Heritage,
1995, available free of charge from National Clearinghouse on Family Violence,
Health Canada, (800) 267–1291. 3 Media Resource Team of American Association of Pediatrics,
“Media Violence,” Archives of Pediatric
Adolescent Medicine 108:5 (2001), pp. 17–23; report online at time
of publication at http://www.aap.org/policy/re0109.html. 4 Media Awareness Network, accessed online September
30, 2001, at http://www.mediaawarenessnetwork.com (URL at time of publication
http://www.media-awareness.ca/). 5 Brandon Centerwall, "Exposure to Television as
a Risk Factor for Violence," American
Journal of Epidemiology, 129:4 (1989), p. 645. 6 Fred Molitor, “The effect of Media Violence on Children’s
Toleration of Real-Life Aggression,” Southampton Institute of Higher Education,
UK, Presentation at the International Conference on Violence in the Media,
New York City, October 3-4, 1994. 7
ICAVE, International Coalition Against Violent Entertainment, quoted in
“Cessez-le-feu,” Fides, 1987. 8 Gary Ruskin, at World Health Organization Conference
on Health Marketing and Youth held April 2002 at Treviso, Italy; presentation
online at time of publication at: 9 “Computer Games Can Stunt Kids’ Brains,” Daily Telegraph, August 20, 2001. 10
ibid 11
DeGuise, Jacques and Guy Paquette, Centre d’études sur les médias, Laval
University, “Principaux indicateurs de la violence sur les réseaux de
télévision au Canada,” April 19, 2002, p. 35. |
(c) Copyright EDUPAX et Créations JBS
- 2005 | Commentaires ou questions? Webmestre |