article

Effects theory is the sociological or media studies theory that exposure to representations of violence in any of various media causes (or tends to cause) increased aggression or violence in the audience / consumer. It appears in 'folk wisdom' and newspaper editorials as the claim that x or y media product must be banned in order to avoid the violence it depicts being acted out in society, notably by young people.

Some argue that it is not really a theory, as it lacks a meaningful theoretical grounding; instead it is more like a hypothesis.

Landmark studies

The most influential studies on the debate around media studies have usually been headline-grabbing 'proofs' of Effects theory. Subsequent attempts to replicate, modify, refine or reject these headline studies have proven of less interest to the mass media.

Bobo Doll

This classic study, in 1961, exposed two groups of nursery children to a new play area, containing a selection of toys with which they were unfamiliar. One of the toys was a three-foot inflatable Bobo Clown with a weighted base, designed as a self-righting 'punchbag' toy. As they played, the non-aggression (control) set observed an adult playing quietly with certain toys and ignoring Bobo. In the aggression set, the adult 'model' performed a distinctive set of violent moves on Bobo, such as sitting on its head and punching its nose, striking it with a toy mallet, and kicking it into the air, while uttering aggressive phrases such as Punch him in the nose!. Independent observers later scored children's behaviour for aggression when left alone to play with these toys. Those exposed to the 'aggressive' adult demonstrably imitated many of the adult's moves. (See Bandura et al)

The Jamie Bulger Case

There has been a long running argument as to if films have influenced people to head out commit acts of violence and murder. One of the major front runners in this issue is the Jamie Bulger story, where on February 12 1993 in Merseyside, Robert Thompson and Jon Venables both aged 10 kidnapped, abused and murdered the young toddler Jamie Bulger. The two boys were arrested and instantly the story had mass of coverage, soon after, it was discovered that the two boys had recently seen the film "Child's Play 3", the media instantly took hold of this and film was seen as the cause of the murder of Jamie Bulger. During the trial, the judge suggested that the film was to blame for the two boys actions. The media scare at this time was use by the Primeminister John Major as propaganda for children to try to steer them away from glue sniffing and mischief.

The BBC called it a "Landmark Case" as it a was moral panic about children with the threat of other people's and the defencelessness of our own. After the image of a small figure been taken away by two slightly larger figures was all over the tabloids, Sales of toddler reins shot up, and in a survey of parents by the children's organisation, Kidscape, 97% of respondents put abduction as their biggest worry, ahead of traffic accidents, glue-sniffing and Aids.

Once the Jamie Bulger case had hit the news anything which remotely resembled ten year olds committing crime gained great priority:-

Ten-year-old boy abducts 10-month-old baby. Boys aged 10 and 11 charged with rape. Boy of 13 accused of murdering 85-year-old woman. Boy, eight, attempts armed robbery. Boy, 13, denies rape in sandpit. Boys aged 10 and 11 drop five-year-old 14 stories to death after he refuses them sweets. Boy burglar, six, batters baby to death.

The media avoided to look into the boys' backgrounds, even with them living in one of the most deprived areas in Britain. The tabloids twisted it the way they wanted it. The two boys were tried as adults, the dock was raised 3 inches so they could see over the rail and the court was shortened to school hours. Without a doubt if this had not been such a media frenzy the outcome would have definitely had a much lesser impact on Thompson and Venables lives.

The on running Impact of "Super size Me"

In "Super Size Me", a documentary from talented debut filmmaker Morgan Spurlock that manages to be both entertaining and horrifying, he attempts to draw a parallel between the fast food culture we live in and the rampant (and ever-increasing) rate of obesity in America. To do this, he launched into a little science experiment. A 33 year-old New Yorker in excellent health, he would eat nothing but McDonald's for an entire month, to gauge the effects on his body. Breakfast, lunch, and dinner at McDonald's and whenever they asked him to supersize, he would have to accept. Before starting, he consulted three doctors, a cardiologist, a gastroenterologist, and a general practitioner, all of whom said this experiment obviously wouldn't be good for him, but that the damages would be minimal.

Instead, the results were pretty shocking. Spurlock gained almost 30 pounds (over 10 in the first week), saw his cholesterol skyrocket, and experienced frequent nausea, chest pains, mood swings and loss of sex drive. During this month he also drove around the country, interviewing several different people on the topic (including a "Big Mac enthusiast" who has eaten over 19,000 Big Macs). His research on our fast food culture definitely yields some interesting information, especially when he interviews a group of 1st-graders, and more of them can identify Ronald McDonald than Jesus or George Washington.

This film had a massive effect on McDonald's. McDonald's took out full page ads in The Guardian, The Times, The Herald, The Independent and The Scotsman, the adverts read: "The film is slick, well made and yes, somewhat annoyingly, doesn't portray McDonald's in the most favourable light. and yet what we do agree with is its core argument - that if you eat too much and do too little, it's bad for you. What we don't agree with is the idea that eating at McDonald's is bad for you." The ad went on to give details of healthy options such as salads and fruit bags, which McDonald's says is responsible for a 10% global sales increase.

In the United Kingdom, McDonald's placed a brief ad in the trailers of showings of the film, pointing to the website www.supersizeme-thedebate.co.uk. The ads simply stated, "See what we disagree with. See what we agree with".

The website is aimed to get back McDonald's reputation, and to do this, they lie, one of the biggest false statements made is on the last question of the true of false quiz. It clearly states that "Supersize Me" isn't seen as a threat to McDonald's, and that they are not in a big panic about it, but yet, stating this on a website which is completely separate from the corporations main website somewhat suggests that there is a large concern within McDonald's about this film.

McDonald's said it did not expect "Supersize Me" have an impact in the UK because "there's nothing new here", but yet, the advertising campaign for McDonald's on the back of the Metro has been running for some time.

Congressional Hearings, 1981

These hearings were called in response to rising awareness of crime, and the widespread belief that television was at least partly responsible. The National Institute of Mental Health argued forcefully that a broad review of the then-existing literature confirmed Effects theory. Other organizations, eg CBS, submitted contrary position papers - CBS's was entitled "Research on Television Violence: The Fact of Dissent"

Criticism

Criticism of Effects theory takes three broad strands. Methodological criticisms focus on hidden assumptions, flawed experimental design, and prejudicial interpretation of results of studies claimed to support Effects theory. Historical criticisms situate the 'meta-narrative' of Effects theory within a long history of distrust of new forms of media, dating as far back as Socrates's objections to the deleterious effects due to the written alphabet. Political criticisms pose an alternative conception of humans as rational, critical subjects, who are alert to genre norms and adept at interpreting and critiquing media representations, not passively absorbing them.

Historical

Political

Sources

  • Bandura et al, 1961, Transmission of Aggression Through Imitation of Aggressive Models, in Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 63, 575-582 *

See also

External links

 

This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the "Media effects theory".

Home Page • arts • business • computers • games • health • hospitals • home • kids & teens • news • physicians • recreation• reference • regional • science • shopping • society • sports • world