Making a Killing

The classic rationale for TV violence is, that's what viewers want. Wrong, insists America's dean of media studies.

Violence travels cheaply, says George Gerbner, Ph.D.

Gerbner, former head of the Annenberg School of Communications at the University of Pennsylvania and director of its ongoing media violence research unit, compared the Nielson ratings of over 100 violent and non-violent network prime-time programs from 1988 to 1993. Not only did the violent programs earn lower scores than nonviolent shows every season, their ratings slipped each year of the study.

Why then is violence the main theme of roughly 100 out of every 250 American programs? As it turns out, most of these so-called "action" series are not created with Americans in mind. Indeed, Americans increasingly tire of them.

Sydicators export these programs, like any other commodity, to foreign cable and video companies The shows, in fact, turn a profit--and a huge one--only by traveling on the international market. Producers need shows that will sell in foreign languages, and violence, like sex, needs no translation.

Ultimately, citizens around the world are exposed to the same violence that has been shown to stimulate aggressive behavior, helplessness, dependency, and even a bunker mentality--what Gerbner appropriately calls the "mean-world syndrome"--here in America. Nor does this help the image of United States in the international community, as Americans are portrayed as bloodthirsty, ruthless thugs.

While networks pour billions of dollars into violent programming, genuinely creative and valuable ideas often never make it to the screen. "This:' Gerbner asserts, "is the real censorship on television."

PHOTO: People watching television.