I would like to comment on an article by Australian chief censor, John Dickie, titled "Criticism of the Port Arthur coverage: Misreporting led to video misconception". There is none so blind! Dickie declared that 65 per cent of the community "wrongly" believes there is a link between violence on television and violence in the community. Unfortunately responsible censorship is politically incorrect and Mr Dickie will continue to enjoy the support of those who ignored the pleas of individuals with first hand experience of the influence of visual media upon children.
To quote directly from the 1988 Federal Parliament Joint Selection Committee on Video Material volume one, page 198: "Ms Amenda Ann Vallance, a primary school teacher appeared before the committee in October, 1985 on behalf of the Tasmanian Teachers Federation, voicing her concern over negative effects violent videos had on some boys, noted that: "Their (the boys in her class with access to videos) playground behaviour became quite vicious and their games suddenly changed from being boisterous and energetic to being quite obsessed with making knives and swords, with which they victimised everyone else in the playground, in particular the girls in my class." (Evidence, p 2469).
"Ms Sonya Ryan, who taught on Tasmania's west coast for six years, became disturbed when she noticed a similar phenomenon occurring amongst boys of her Grade 5 class. Ms Ryan observed that some boys, after watching R rated videos, became 'obsessed with violence, and began to treat girls just as objects.' (Evidence P2471). She concluded her own survey when she was transferred to Bridgewater Primary School and found that '75 per cent of the children watch horror movies regularly' (Evidence, P2478). Ms Ryan observed that some children exposed to video violence had difficulty in separating their dreams from the videos they watch, causing great anxiety and confusion, and that violent videos directly influenced the behaviour patterns of those in her class, who watched them. She concluded that many videos engender anti-social behaviour, manifested in an attitudinal change towards the girls in the class, the teacher and their mothers."
And on the likely effects of video material (pages 187, 188): The Committee first turns to studies (mostly clinical or correctional) and inquiries on violence, mainly conducted in the United States. The bulk of these conclude that the viewing of violent material makes a contribution to aggressive behaviour. The 1982 Report of the US National Institute for Mental Health, entitled 'Television and Behaviour: Ten Years of Scientific Progress and Implications for the Eighties' stated, "After 10 more years of research, the consensus among most of the research community is that violence on television does lead to aggressive behaviour by children and teenagers who watch the programs. This conclusion is based on laboratory experiments and on field studies. Not all children became aggressive, of course, but the correlations between violence and aggression are positive. In magnitude, television violence is as strongly correlated with aggressive behaviour as any other behavioural variable that has been measured. The research question has moved from seeking whether or not there is an effect to seeking explanations for the effect."
Among the most significant of the American research studies is that of Drs Leonard Eron and Rowell Huesmann. They were interested mainly in how aggressive behaviour, in terms of adult criminal convictions, is related to the type of child-rearing practices parents use. Their 22, year longitudinal study began in 1960 by interviewing 875 boys and girls, and 85 per cent of their parents. After a follow up study in 1970 and another in 1982, they concluded that, ". . . there is a significant relation between television viewing at age eight and the seriousness of criminal convictions by the time you are an adult of age thirty." David Scott (ed.), Symposium on Media Violence and Pornography. Proceedings and Resource Book, Media Action Group, Inc, (Magic), Toronto, 1984).
The Eron and Huesman study found that children reared on a heavy diet of television violence had 150 per cent more chance of being convicted for a criminal offence by the time they were thirty than did the children reared with little exposure to television violence. They found that television violence viewing does relate to aggression. It is far from the truth to say there is no causal link between exposure to violence on screen and subsequent violent behaviour. To suggest otherwise flies in the face of the conclusions of scores of reputable scientific studies.