Viewers’ views on television violence

Press, 19 October 1976, Page 19

Viewers’ views on television violence

Sir,—l should like to add my voice to the appeal for less violence and more responsible advertising on TV. To the best of my knowledge the last four murders in the South Island have been committed by youths aged about seventeen years. In other words boys who could have been influenced by TV violence from an early age. The motives for these murders I understand was to obtain money — money. 1 presume, to buy all the unnecessary luxuries which advertisers today ram down the throats of young people as being essential to their social and economic success in life. Alistair Cooke in his book "America” said something to the effect that large numbers of Americans got rich quick by the unscrupulous use of advertising to brain-wash the masses into believing that luxuries were necessities. Can we not learn from the

mistakes of other countries and aim . for a less materialistic society?—ANNA ATKINSON.

Sir, —Hear, hear, Mrs Couling. I agree with you when you say children must know the world doesn’t smell of roses: they can be amazingly perceptive in any situation, especially where make-believe is at work. It can be downright embarrassing when I’m really stuck into a programme and one of my younger nephews or niec- walks in and asks, “What ’cha getting so excited about? It’s only a load ’ah rubbish anyway.” Impressionable? Somehow I don’t think so, not six to 12-year-olds. They can be more down to earth and realistic about TV than we “adults.” The idea Hr Russell put forward should be enforced, and it may give anti-violence people some peace of mind. But I think it should primarily be the parents responsibility to make sure their children don’t see programmes that may affect them, and get them in bed by a decent hour. I wasn’t allowet' to stay up past 8.30 p.m. until I turned 12. This lengthened to 9 p.m. when I turned 15. Now at 16, I can stay up as long as I like. I might add, very rarely, except for Saturdays does this apply. I feel the people we should be worr i e d about being “affected” by .iolent programmes such as "Starsky and Hutch,” (my whole family’s favourite), “Kojak,” "The Sweeney,” “Policewoman,” etcetera,, are teen-agers whose parents couldn’t give a damn about them. They only do it to get the attention their "responsible” elders

never gave them. Come on you anti-violence on TV people, it's only entertainment. Focus your weight and opinion on the people who really cause the trouble from the start, and see if you don’t have the population of New Zealand behind you. It is worth a try isn’t it?—J. L. BYRON.

Sir,—Alas, I must agree with Mrs Sharon Couling: she certainly is perverted if she enjoys violent entertainment. And it is because so many people like her accept such evils “as all part ,f today’s society” that we have so much ugliness and misery in society. I can’t help wondering if people like her would enjoy being victims of violence in real life?—HUGH BENNETT.

Sir,—M.C. Harham has written everything I want to say. Of course we can turn off the TV when all this trash is on, I do, but why should we? Why do we not have more Canadian films? The very few shown were excellent. If this slush being served up is not bought then the producers will have to improve their films.—J. W. KNOWLES.

Sir, —Why do we have to be subjected to so much violence on TV? One trembles to contemplate what effect this must be having quite unconsciously in many cases on our children and young people. One knows that there is a knob to turn on the set. But do we use it? Is there any way in which this sort of thing can be controlled by the media itself or do they not wish to do so. One recognises the fact that violence, sex, corruption and loose morals is characteristic of

the world. At the same time does the intelligent person want to be bombarded with this night after night. I would suggest that we take a good look at this problem.—J. E. PRESCOTT.

Sir,—l write to endorse and express appreciation to those readers who have taken the trouble to say what they think is wrong with our TV, programmes. Far too marty scenes depict intimate bedroom behaviour, a display of women’s bosoms, men’s revolting hairy chests, this in addition to sexual advances and loose talk, should not be deemed as suitable material for general exhibition. I do not regard myself as a prude, but such scenes I find revolting, and these must have a very bad effect, particularly on those of weak intellect, who would seek to copy such actions in their everyday life. Surely the Minister of Broadcasting, or the TV directors should take steps to ‘clean up’ on the TV programmes and exrcesie more control. It is their responsibility, for which they are paid.—R. V. SHAW.

Sir, — I have read with interest the various comments to violence on television but would suggest the remedy lies in our own hands. No-one is forced to have a television set in their own home and a little consumer resistance would work wonders. Television programme planners would be

forced to raise their standards to attract viewers. While those who manufacture and sell the sets would also be forced to market them at a more honest price. But the most worthwhile and lasting effect of such action would be on individual families. As the parent of five children (three of them teen-agers) who have tried life with and without television, I am convinced life is fuller, richer and happier for all concerned without it. As parents we must accept our responsibilities — it is so easy to blame television for our own shortcomings. — E. M. MOOR.

Sir, —The old argument that we should show the children violence and perversion because they are going to meet up with it as a part of life rather denies the foreseeing of a time when it will not be so. I feel sure that children at times, and some children very often, believe, and soak up and emulate whatever it is that is presented to them — normal, abnormal, true or false; and responsible adults in the field of TV writing, buying and production should be leading them towards the happy, wholesome, lovely areas of life, rather than the un real opposites. Children usually have far greater awareness of beauty than adults, and to encourage this, and drop away from the ugliness of the adult view of exciting programmes for young people would surely be the greatest service TV could

render them. Having seen one episode of “The Young and the Restless,” with the love emphasised rather than sex, the selfdiscipline, warmth, and wanting the best for each other protrayed in the two leading characters, I was horrified to realise the utter rarity of such attitudes in Tv fiction. I look forward, for the sake of the young, who have not yet been presented with the happy, wholesome realities, to the time when the usual harsh mixture of violence, hatred, sex-love; and indeed, al) the forms of violence, disappear forever. —N.W. MILANOVICH.

[This correspondence is now closed,]