In the 1930s the Payne Foundation funded studies attributing juvenile crime to movie violence, complete with testimonials of youthful offenders that they had gotten larcenous ideas from the silver screen. Legions of censors from the Hays Office monitored Hollywood output to make sure that, at the least, crime didn‘t pay. In the 1950s, Dr. Frederic Wertham made a name for himself by attributing all manner of delinquencies to the mayhem depicted in comic books. If today‘s censorious forces smell smoke, it is not in the absence of fire.
In recent years, market forces have driven screen violence to an amazing pitch. As the movies lost much of their audience—especially adults—to television, the studios learned that the way to make their killing, so to speak, was to offer on big screens what the networks would not permit on the small. Thus, decades ago the “action movie”—a euphemism for, among other things, grisly violence—aimed to attract the teenagers who were the demographic category most eager to flee the family room. Aiming to recoup losses and better compete with cable, television programmers struck back; the networks lowered their censorship standards and pruned their “standards and practices” staffs; the 20 deregulatory Federal Communications Commission clammed up; and the local news fell all over itself cramming snippets of gore between commercials.
There are indeed reasons to attribute violence to the media, but the links are weaker than recent headlines would have one believe. The 25 attempt to demonize the media distracts attention from the real causes of—and the serious remedies for—the epidemic of violence. The question the liberal crusaders fail to address is not whether these images are wholesome but just how much real-world violence can be blamed on the media. Assume, for the sake of argument, that every 30 copycat crime reported in the media can plausibly be traced to television and movies. Let us make an exceedingly high estimate that the resulting carnage results in 100 deaths per year that would otherwise not have taken place. These would amount to 0.28 percent of the total of 36,000 murders accidents, and suicides committed by 35 gunshot in the United States in 1992.
That media violence contributes to a climate in which violence is legitimate—and there can be no doubt of this—does not make it an urgent social problem. Violence on the screens, however loathsome, does not make a significant contribution to violence on the streets. 40 Images don‘t spill blood. Rage, equipped with guns, does. Desperation does. Revenge does. As liberals say, the drug trade does; poverty does; unemployment does. It seems likely that a given percent increase in decently paying jobs will save thousands of times more lives than the same percent decrease in media bang-bang. And once in a while— meaning far too often—some grotesque images inspire emulation.
1. The passage suggests that having more stringent controls on media violence would NOT have a great effect on the death rate because:
A. the numbers of deaths resulting from so-called "copycat" acts of violence composes only a small portion of violent deaths each year.
B. the number of deaths resulting from so-called "copycat" acts of violence would remain unchanged nonetheless.
C. networks and film studios lack the personnel to enforce any new regulation.
D. there exists no definite link between media violence and actual violence.
E. very few people watch television these days.
2. If delivered in a paper that sought to undermine the points of this passage, which of the following statements, if true, would most seriously weaken the passage‘s central argument?
A. The number of violent acts depicted in the media has remained more or less constant for the past decade.
B. A Canadian study reported a sixteen-percent increase in violent crimes after exposure to television and film episodes in which violent acts were depicted.
C. Politicians and celebrities are assisting effectively in diminishing violence.
D. Films belonging to the "action" genre have found little acceptance at the box office
E. Children become more violent after playing violent video games
3. The broadcast networks have recently proposed a system of rating program content, similar to those ratings in the film industry. Which of the following best characterizes the relevance of this statement?
A. The statement acknowledges that the networks have taken little responsibility in patrolling the content of their programming.
B. The statement implies that those who speak out against media violence have had significant success in convincing the networks to enforce stricter content standards.
C. The statement suggests that some convincing evidence supporting a stronger link between media violence and violent acts has been found.
D. The statement suggests that networks will decrease the amount of shows that contain violent content.
E. The statement has no relevance to the argument in the passage