Viewers' views on violence

Press, 14 October 1976, Page 19

Viewers' views on violence

More viewers’ letters on TV. violence:

Sir. — I am pleased to see a group of Christchurch people making a well overdue move on TV programmes. Several mothers of young children and also of teen-agers would be delighted to have a clean-up of programmes. Violence, crime and sex have been more pronounced and portrayed than anything. Can any good possibly come out of the trash shown as a natural way of life to young children? Why are so many children being in gang robberies, converting cars, etc? Perhaps their parents have also been influenced by watching the terrible sadistic films on TV they have been showing for years. I know of a family in Hamilton who had left their home .to travel 'to. Auckland. They left at 2 p.m. and were recalled at 5.30 p.m, by the police. Their home was a shambles, every piece of china was smashed against walls, carpets cut into strips, wallpapers torn etc. The beds were used as toilets and the only thing intact was a TV. The intruders had been caught by police watching a crime show. They had already cut the tyres of the car in the garage and pulled every wire they could to put the car out of action. They were surrounded by empty bottles also stolen from the owners’ cabinet. One boy was 13 and the other 14 and the owners were told they were minors so could not be convicted. The people to blame for all this and also drug problems, are the irresponsible ones who tend to make heroes of the convicted criminals and give them precedence on TV. As for the commercials they are an insult to the intelligence, and tend to cheapen women. Why do pantyhose have to be paraded in sexy adds half the night along with stupid boy friends and bad breath etc? Suely there could be a time limit to all the messy interruptions we suffer in way of netertainment? Goodness knews we pay enough for our colour sets and licenses to be allowed to enjoy the rare good films in peace. So if by any good fortune this group of protesters can do something by way of improving the films shown in future iit will be a move in the right direction at last. Here’s hoping.— M. C. HANHAM.

Sir, — There are several areas of violence on TV which we could well do without. The American gangster films, cheap shoddy rubbish when produced 30-odd years ago are not improved with time. They pop up with persistent regularity with their monotonous rounds of shoot-ups. Advertisements depict cars roaring round bends at high speeds, on the wrong side of the road, and motorbikes ridden with one wheel in the air, also at high speeds. We have had young folk in our district doing just that, obviously copying what they have seen on TV. Since we have a problem, and a grave one at that, with bottles broken in public places and also used as

weapons, it is time those in extremely high places outmoded the stupid habit of launching ships by smashing bottles across the bows. They are just as much vandals as anyone else. May be the Queen could set an example by placing flowers instead.—O. HUGHES.

Sir, —“The Press” and the group who organised viewer’s views on violence are serving up a large slice of sanity to counter the ever-increasing doses of violence appearing on the TV screens. Even the seemingly harmless “On the Mat” has the teenagers screaming at the goodies to “put the boot” into the baddies. When one has a respite from household chores, it is sometimes hopeless to find a programme on either channel which is restful entertainment. If we had more of the calibre of such as “Sutherlands Law,” even young people would become attracted to drama rather than violence. “The Generation Game” is the type of comedy which all the family can enjoy together, and it is a “must” in our household — long may it remain. If in Sweden, the sex given free rein is clean and educational, then it is less harmful than the violence seen on our screens and may even solve some problems.—L. E. REID.

Sir, —I also strongly object to the type of television programmes we are being given. Violence, crime and sex are in the majority of programmes. Most people of all ages enjoy “Sutherland’s Law,” with excellent acting, “Dr Finlay’s Casebook,” pr a good comedy or travel film. We pay a high fee and expect better quality pictures, a good orchestra or singer or light vocalist, but not the extremely noisy pop groups. Viewers do not expect to have to keep turning off their sets because of objectionable programes. Hoping to have an improvement in the quality of programmes.—M. M. McALOON

Sir, —I wholeheartedly agree with the Christchurch group having strong views on crime and violence series now prominent on prime time viewing. “Starsky and Hutch” (just ended), “Policewoman,” “The Sweeney,” and “Kojak,” are all stupid. The programmes, “Coronation Street,” “Close to Home,” “The Cuckoo Waltz,” and “Bless this House” are all filmed inside. The actors sit around talking, drinking coffee, beer or tea, and eating. These are normal activities of every day life, and are necessary to all living, but who wants to sit and watch all this on television. Programmes I have liked are: “The Fall of Eagles,” “Hunter’s Gold,” “Atta Girl Kelly,”, “The Private Life of the Wild Duck,” “The Melancholy Hussar,” “Survivors,” “The Practice,” “Mission Impossible,” and “Last Grave at Dimbaza.” Mr Neville Rush is quite right when he says New Zealanders should question the qualification of those who select programmes. On Australian television a notice is flashed on the screen if a particular pro-

gramme is unsuitable for children. In my opinion “Close to Home” does not depict New Zealanders at their best. We are an outdoor people, but the cameras hardly, if ever, move outside — a complete waste of taxpayers’ money.—PETER ’ J. RUSSELL.

Sir, — Having read the article about so much violence on television, I would like to say it is perfectly true. The standard of films must have a very detrimental effect on our youth of today, and this is the cause of so much violence spreading daily throughout our once lovely country. Daily we hear of shooting and murder among the youth: in fact, it is not safe to be on the streets or even in our homes where breaking and entering is a common thing, and the elderly are attacked and assaulted, even in the afternoon. Television has been the major cause of mounting crime. Surely those responsible for choosing these horrible films have a lot to answer for. Something should be done, and soon, to raise the standard, instead of feeding to young, impressionable minds a range of violence, sex and drink shown in the crudest manner. Give

them something that will uplift their minds, and give them respect for

themselves and others. Time is running out as our gaols fill with young, violent youth who commit horrible violence just as they see it on television. I am an elderly woman, and I grieve to see what is happening to New Zealand. 1 hope many people with an abler pen than mine will write to express the same feelings for the sake of a better choice of decent films that do not corrupt young minds. I would have liked to sign my name, but as I live alone I am afraid, so must leave it to other decent citizens to fight the cause against films of crime and violence. — F.J.

Sir, — I too object to television programmes showing too much crime and violence and overemphasising sex. Even cartoon characters are depicted resorting to violence rather than dialogue to get their own way. And in adult plays bedroom talk between husband and wife is often dragged in with no point as to the storyline, but just to titillate. I have often looked for character studies in the programmes. Perhaps they are shown late in the

evening, when working mothers are in bed getting necessary sleep. Or have television producers forgotten that people have minds as well as bodies? I would not for a moment suggest this is a Christian country, but the Christian way of love and consideration for others’ viewpoint is still the best, and judging by many of the people I know, this too is a way of life, and should be presented more honestlv than it is. — (MRS) W. M. PARRY.