|
An Alternative to the Impasse:
The Grassroots Approach to Cope with Media Violence Issues
Haoming Denis Wu and Lois A. Boynton
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
School of Journalism and Mass Communication
Contact: Denis Wu
Mail: P.O. Box 162, Chapel Hill, NC 27514
Tel: (919) 403-8407
Fax: (919) 962-0620
E-mail: [log in to unmask]
Submitted to Mass Communication and Society Division
Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication,
Baltimore, MD, August, 1998
Abstract
An Alternative to the Impasse:
The Grassroots Approach to Cope with Media Violence Issues
Haoming Denis Wu and Lois A. Boynton
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
School of Journalism and Mass Communication
Voluminous violence portrayed in mass media has caused concern for decades, but
few executed acts have been effective enough in curbing the violent programming.
Media interests, changeable government policies, and First Amendment protection
of freedom of expression can stymie efforts to improve media content. The
grassroots endeavor to general "trickle-up" impact appears to be an alternative
approach to coping with media violence issues. "Pulling the Plug on Media
Violence," a statewide campaign aiming to escalate people's awareness, has been
implemented by a volunteer group. This study, using the results of a statewide
poll, reports the evaluation of the campaign's effectiveness. Findings suggest
that the grassroots movement has successfully elevated awareness of the
campaign, but did not raise the level of concern. Religiosity, gender and the
respondent's role as parent were found to be the most important factors that
lead to people's concern about media violence.
Grassroots approach -
An Alternative to the Impasse:
The Grassroots Approach to Cope with Media Violence Issues
INTRODUCTION
There has long been concern that television content that is violent in nature
can have adverse effects on viewers, particularly children (see, for example,
Comstock and Strasburger, 1993). Although television has been regulated by
federal laws since its inception, these statutes do little to address content
(Hughes and Hasbrouck, 1996). Most content regulation attempts have been met
with stiff Constitutional resistance. "Issues related to First Amendment rights,
concerns about censorship and the need to establish the 'clear and present
danger' as required by the FCC (Federal Communication Commission) have prevented
the enactment of strong regulatory controls" (p. 137).
Still, citizen concerns from time to time prompted the government to
investigate on its own. The Surgeon General would issue a report in 1972
concluding that television violence may have adverse effects on children;
however, no strong action followed as the report suffered through a bureaucratic
gristmill (Cater and Strickland, 1977). Ten years later, the National Institute
of Mental Health would issue a report drawing similar conclusions about the
relationship of media violence and aggressive behavior. Other reports provided
additional evidence - the Centers for Disease Control in 1991, the National
Academy of Science in 1993 and the American Psychological Association, also in
1993 (Wilson et al., 1997). Most regulatory action remained elusive.
Hence, individuals and groups, both on local and national levels, have
periodically organized grassroots campaigns targeting either those who create
the programming or those who view it. Once a core avenue of political activity,
the grassroots approach is experiencing a resurgence. "Although media, direct
mail and tele-marketing will continue to dominate modern campaigns, grassroots
politics may well provide the margin of victory. . ." (Young, Swirsky and
Myerson, 1995, p. 34).
Very little evaluation has been done of grassroots campaigns, however. Several
researchers (see Alcalay and Taplin, 1989; Hughes and Hasbrouck, 1996;
Swinehart, 1997) have pointed to the lack of evaluative efforts, despite the
potential value of the information collected. This paper provides a case study
evaluation of a grassroots campaign targeting parents that was conducted on a
statewide level by the North Carolina Coalition for Pulling the Plug on Media
Violence, a three-year-old advocacy group comprised of health care and education
individuals and organizations concerned about the effects of media violence.
Annual awareness campaigns served to educate parents about media violence and to
encourage families to organize alternative activities to watching television.
The campaign's effectiveness was assessed using data collected in a 1997
statewide telephone survey.
Background: The North Carolina Coalition for Pulling the Plug on Media
Violence is an advocacy group formed in 1995 by a licensed pediatrician to
address a growing concern about increased violence across the state and how
media violence contributes to the problem. The grassroots, non-profit
organization is formed of more than 35 child advocacy groups including health
department officials, Kiwanis clubs, teachers, Parent Teacher Associations,
health care providers and daycare organizations. Its mission is:
We strive to raise awareness in North Carolina about the impact of
TV and video game violence on children. We support any effort by
the television industry or any other group that promotes active
parental involvement in the viewing choices of children. (Coalition's
History and Mission, 1996, p. 4)
The primary activity of the coalition has been an annual "Pull the Plug on TV
and Video Game Violence Week" campaign, held each October for three consecutive
years beginning in 1995. Objectives of the campaign include both attitude and
behavioral change goals - increasing awareness of the impact of violence and
"offer[ing] suggestions to families and child-care givers on what they can do
about it" (Coalition's History and Mission, 1996, p. 1).
During the first year, materials were provided through public schools with
messages targeting kindergarten children and their parents. A parent flyer,
given to each kindergartner to take home, included brief statistical and
educational information as well as recommendations for reviewing family use of
television and video games. For example, the materials reinforce Strasburger's
(1997) point that children may not be able to delineate between the television
world and reality. A key element of the campaign has been to suggest
alternatives - set limits for children's TV viewing; help children choose
non-violent programs and video games, and then watch and play with them; and,
talk as a family about how violence makes you feel. The flyer includes a
simplistic family viewing diary to permit families to briefly document for one
week time spent watching television, playing video games, doing homework and
participating in family time. This is designed as both a research tool and
strategy planner. The diary reveals how time is spent - a research step to
gauge current behaviors. The expectation of the coalition is that this will
influence parents to alter their family's behaviors regarding consumption
violent television and video games.
In the second year, the coalition stepped up its efforts to reach a larger
audience statewide, with a goal of "encouraging all North Carolina public
elementary schools to participate in a variety of awareness activities about the
impact of media violence" (Coalition, 1996, p. 1). The parent flyer and
bookmark were distributed to 800,000 children in kindergarten through fifth
grade throughout North Carolina's 100 counties. Lending "official" credibility
to the program was a kick-off press conference led by the governor, which helped
draw media coverage by television and radio stations and newspapers. The
coalition also placed billboards and radio public service announcements for
broader reach, and distributed 10,000 posters to libraries, park districts,
schools and daycare centers that included tips on how parents can be active in
their children's TV and video game use at home. A toll-free telephone line was
established for families seeking additional information or assistance in family
viewing activities.
In 1997, the campaign focused primarily on the public schools, with messages
targeting children through fifth grade and their families. The informational
flyer and bookmarks were circulated and media coverage sought during the
one-week awareness campaign.
With three years of activities on its record, the coalition begun to seek
evaluation of its programs, particularly regarding community awareness levels.
As researchers, we saw the need to evaluate this type of grassroots campaign, in
an effort to contribute data to the evolving body of knowledge about coping with
media violence issues.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Media effects. Violence continues to be a major public health crisis in the
United States, and some researchers assert that a portion of what occurs on the
streets is spawned at least in part by what is viewed on the television screen.
Television is a pervasive medium, producing a seemingly endless stream of
messages that reach millions of people. As such, it can have a strong societal
influence, particularly on children. Comstock and Strasburger (1993) explain the
impact violent content can have, as a result of TV's pervasiveness:
Television is by far the predominant medium by virtue of
children's early and continuous exposure. Compared with
other media, television and film can graphically and vividly
portray complex events so that they are not only more likely
to be recalled but also more available for emulation. (p. 502)
With these concerns raised since television's infancy, literally thousands of
studies (see Comstock and Strasburger, 1993; Hughes and Hasbrouck, 1996; Wilson
et al., 1997, 1998) have evaluated effects and influences of media violence.
Researchers generally conclude that violent content may be a "significant
factor," contributing to aggressive behaviors and serving as a desensitizer to
future violence (Comstock & Strasburger, 1993, p. 495). Hughes and Hasbrouck
(1996) take a more conservative approach, stating, "Although debate exists
regarding the magnitude of the effect of television violence viewing on
children's level of aggression, there is little disagreement that such an effect
is real" (p. 147). Strasburger (1995, 1997), however, proclaims media
influences between 15 and 20 percent of societal violence.
As a result, efforts have been made through the years to mitigate television's
potential negative effects. Two primary pathways have been taken - government
regulation and grassroots efforts.
Government regulation. The television industry has faced some type of
regulation since its inception, beginning with the Communications Act of 1934.
However, early regulation had few teeth. "Although providing for governmental
overview and supervision of broadcasts, this legislation clearly banned
censorship of content," (Hughes and Hasbrouck, 1996, p. 136), a precedent that
essentially has lasted throughout the 20th century. Efforts put in place in the
1970s were essentially wiped out during Reagan's deregulation era of the 1980s,
however.
Eventually, public outcry led Congress to reconsider content regulations. The
Television Program Improvement Act was passed in 1990, placing pressure on the
television industry to assess its programming and reduce violent content.
Senate and House hearings followed to monitor the progress and compliance. The
1995 Children's Media Protection Act was passed in 1995 and served to beef up
the standards set five years earlier. FCC requirements called for three hours a
week of educational children's programming ("Efforts Continue," 1996; Hughes and
Hasbrouck, 1996; Jessell, 1996).
The threat of regulation has motivated the television industry to monitor
itself. Self-regulation attempts surface to counter public pressure and to avoid
government restrictions. Through the years these have included family viewing
hour, viewer discretion warnings before and during programs, the V-chip
electronic screening device and ratings systems. In 1997, a much-maligned
television ratings system was voluntarily implemented to gauge violence levels
by age groups. Cantor, Harrison and Nathanson (1998), found, however, that
ratings and advisories may actually increase a child's interest in inappropriate
programs.
Because of the time-consuming nature of and the limited successes in creating
regulations that effectively control content, advocates have sought other
avenues to affect change. The primary method is through the use of grassroots
strategies, which are designed to influence the attitudes and behvaviors of
parent and children viewers instead of government regulators. Changes in media
use patterns may have a more lasting effect on media content, strictly based on
economics. If the demand for violent programs shrinks, the rationale for
producing them may be reduced as well.
The grassroots route. Grassroots efforts used to be at the core of American
political activity, but waned through the years, replaced by 'wholesale,'
generic strategies of national parties and candidates. In recent years,
however, there has been a resurgence in the use of grassroots approaches that
have been highly effective. The greatest value of the grassroots approach is
its emphasis on motivation and empowerment on the local level to overcome a
pattern of apathy. "[V]oters have become more removed from and alienated by
established parties and processes" (Young, Swirsky and Myerson, 1995, p. 34).
One group that has been particularly effective in using grassroots efforts is
the Christian Coalition movement, which continually keeps its agenda in the
public eye. "They engage voters not just every two or four years when there is a
statewide or national election, but daily when there is a controversy involving
local issues" (Young, Swirsky and Myerson, 1995, p. 34).
Likewise, grassroots approaches have been used to address concerns about
effects of media violence. Action for Children's Television (ACT), for example,
was formed in 1968 as a grassroots advocacy organization. ACT leader Peggy
Charren called for regulatory changes as well as parent and child education
about media and its effects, to affect change. (Charren, Gelber and Arnold,
1994). "All we can do is provide enough choices and educate the public to where
[the choices] are and educate children as to how they might enjoy them," Charren
told Jessell (1996, p. 20). Her educational campaign included writing columns
and speaking to the media about ways to advocate for change (See, for example,
Charren, 1994; Szulc and Tchaicha, 1995).
Grassroots endeavors have taken a variety of approaches. In addition to
efforts to affect regulation, organizations have sought change via preventive
and inoculation strategies.
Prevention and inoculation. Grassroots leaders have taken their messages to
communities, schools and parents in an effort to enlighten the public on
negative effects that media violence may have on children. The strategy has
been two-fold: Prevention techniques designed to help reduce the incidences of
violence, and inoculation efforts to minimize the effects that viewing violence
may have on children. According to Comstock and Strasburger (1993), "the primary
goals must be education, training and guidance" (p. 505).
Some groups have been effective in "creating public awareness of issues related
to the role of television on children," (Hughes and Hasbrouck, 1996, p. 145)
through media literacy, program monitoring and research. These groups include
ACT, Center for Media Literacy, Center for Media Education, Mediascope, National
Telemedia Council, National Alliance for Nonviolent Programming, National Parent
Teacher Association and Media Action Research Group, as well as smaller
grassroots organizations on state and local levels. Huston, Watkins and Kunkel
(1989) also identified options grassroots groups can take for motivating
regulation, including funding research, holding legislative hearings and
distributing reports to citizenry.
In addition to community action, mediation can occur in the home and in schools
to educate children about how the media works and what effects it can have.
Strasburger (1997) reinforces the need for this education, stating, "Many
children cannot discriminate between what they see on television and what is
real" (p. 353). Murray (1995) notes that parents' mediation of their children's
viewing habits has been shown to reduce negative effects.
Manley-Casimir (1987) calls for a foundation of media education to prepare
children:
The challenge is nothing less than engaging children and youth
in a process of radical criticism, a process that requires as a
precondition a comprehensive program of media education, a
process to cause students to understand the assumptions and
world views purveyed by television, a process to lead each
individual to full personal agency and to effective collective
action. (p. 245)
A variety of inoculation and mediation efforts can be employed. For example,
parents can explain that violence shown in fictional dramas is faked. They
should have children discuss options other than violence to solve a problem, as
well as the consequences of violence (often excluded in television programs) for
both the victim and perpetrator. (Heath, Bresolin and Rinaldi, 1989; Hughes and
Hasbrouck, 1996; Huesmann et al., 1996). Wilson and colleagues (1997) recommend
that parents understand the potential hazards of violent viewing on children,
consider the age and development of their children and the context of the
violence. Most importantly, they recommend viewing television with children.
The only way to ensure that a child appreciates the contextual
aspects of violence is to teach a child while viewing. Parents
can help a child to understand that violence in the real world
may result in more serious injury and may have more long-
term repercussions than that is shown on television. Parents
also can help children to recognize that non-violent strategies
exist for solving problems in society. (p. 159)
Involving school teachers can enhance the inoculation process as well,
particularly through media literacy efforts (Heath et al., 1989). Likewise,
physicians have been called upon to guide and advise parents about media effects
(Strasburger, 1995).
Grassroots strategies persist on many levels. A common element used in many
grassroots movements is the communication campaign, designed to alter or
reinforce attitudes and behaviors.
Communication campaigns. Whether trying to influence a mass audience or small
groups, grassroots organizations have long advocated the use of communication
campaigns to "inform, persuade, or motivate behavior changes" (Rice and Atkin,
1989, p.7). According to Rogers and colleagues (1979), a communication campaign
is defined as:
[A] preplanned set of communication activities designed to
reach and motivate people using a particular type of message.
Campaigns are conducted for a short period (usually from
one week to three months) with specific attitudinal and
behavioral objectives. [They] almost always use a multi-
media approach. (p. 60)
Most campaigns are linear in nature. According to Rogers and Storey (1987),
"information flows primarily in one direction from people who originate a
message to those who receive it" (p. 830). Aspects for consideration in this
linear model include audience, message, source, channel, and results.
Audience: Campaign developers should have a keen understanding of who their
audiences are and how best to reach them. Atkin and Freimuth (1989) explain
that, "[S]ensitivity to the background attributes, abilities and predispositions
of individuals enhances the effectiveness of campaign stimuli" (p. 133).
Characteristics of the audience that may help in message and channel definition
can include age, education, intelligence, gender, ethnicity, personality,
lifestyle and psychographic variables (See, for example, Eagle, 1981; McGuire,
1985; and Wells, 1975).
Building an audience profile can help define what is important to the target
group(s) and what communication channel(s) can be most effective (Swinehart,
1997). Each member of the audience must see the personal validity of the issue
and its consequence for maximum effect (Dervin, 1989; Rice and Atkin, 1989).
Message: Audiences tend to respond to messages that are relevant to their
situations and adequately reflect their concept of reality. Dervin (1989)
notes,
[C]ampaign messages will be attended to only if the dangers and/or
benefits associated with those actions have taken on some kind of
personal reality or usefulness for that individual. . . . [A] connection
between the individual and the campaign will be made only if the
campaign messages are around to be attended to or have in some
way become part of the individual's stored understandings of the
world. (p. 68)
The message's relevance is both individualistic and societal, according to
Paisley (1989). "The success of a campaign . . . depends upon public perception
that the campaign's issue is an important one, as reflected by its position on
the public agenda of issues, and that the group supporting or opposing the issue
has an entitlement to advocate that view" (p. 19). At the heart of the
communication campaign is the assumption that "information has truth value, that
it is objective, and that when one acts on information the resulting actions
must lead to better ends" (Dervin, 1989, p. 69).
Atkin and Freimuth (1989) propose that message receivers can move through five
stages in the process of accepting and processing a campaign communication.
These are (1) exposure to the message, (2) information processing, (3) cognitive
learning (e.g., knowledge and skills), (4) yielding, in which an attitude and/or
behavior is deemed acceptable, and (5) utilization, in which the behavior
changes are assimilated and practiced.
Communication campaign message goals can vary based on the ultimate objective
of an organization. Swinehart (1997) notes that "Campaign functions differ
greatly - e.g., giving people new information, reminding them of something they
already know, persuading them to act, providing skills training, increasing
public concern about a particular problem, and promoting new laws" (p. 352).
Information-based campaigns tend to focus on knowledge and awareness, whereas
action-based campaigns seek to create or change attitudes or "mobilize people
toward a behavioral change" (Rogers and Storey, 1987, p. 822). Ultimately, the
ability to modify behavior can be related to the issue itself. Specifically,
this can include, according to DeJong and Winsten (1998), "its [the issue's]
complexity; the level of public concern about it; at what stage in the behavior
change process the target audience can be found; . . . and the personal,
interpersonal, social, institutional, and societal barriers to change" (p. 6;
see also Wallack, 1990).
A key element of message construction is the use of persuasion. According to
Miller (1980), persuasion "refers to situations where attempts are made to
modify behavior by symbolic transactions (messages) that are sometimes, but not
always, linked with coercive forces (indirectly coercive) and that appeal to the
reason and emotions of the intended persuadee(s)" (p. 15).
A number of factors can affect message success. These can include the style in
which the message is delivered, type of appeals used, perceived image of the
sponsoring organization, what is included or excluded from the content, as well
as length and how often the message is repeated (McGuire, 1989).
Channel: Messages must be accessible to the audience. Although this may
appear to be very elementary, it can be overlooked in an effort to gain
widespread exposure. According to McGuire (1989), "Too often public persuaders
choose the channel solely on the basis of the number of people it reaches . . .
without consideration of differences in perceived credibility, likability and
comprehensibility" of both the verbal and nonverbal cues (p. 47). However,
Rogers and Storey (1987) argue that broad exposure can be crucial. "Although
exposure to campaign messages of a relatively high proportion of the audience
certainly does not guarantee a campaign's success, a campaign will usually fail
without it" (p. 836).
Although mass media are considered one of the primary means of disseminating
messages (Atkin, 1981), credence is also given to interpersonal communication
(Rice and Atkin, 1989). Ultimately, selection should be based on the
organization's objectives. According to Rogers and Storey (1987), "While mass
media may be effective in disseminating information, interpersonal channels are
more influential in motivating people to act on that information" (p. 837).
Source: The perceived credibility of the source also plays an important role
in the communication campaign (McGuire, 1989; Slater and Rouner, 1996). Rogers
and Storey (1987) define source credibility as, "the degree to which a source or
a channel of communication is considered knowledgeable or trustworthy" (p. 837).
Traditionally, peers are considered the most trustworthy sources. Professional
experts also possess credence as possessing knowledge.
Miller (1987) argues, "That certain perceived characteristics of sources exert
a market impact on the effectiveness of persuasive messages is one of the most
well-documented and widely accepted generalizations of persuasion research" (p.
464). Hovland and Weiss (1951) found that the acceptability of content was
directly related to how credible the source was perceived to be.
Results: The ultimate success - or failure - of communication campaigns can be
affected by numerous factors. According to Swinehart (1997), effectiveness can
be affected at various points of a campaign:
Many people will not even be exposed to it; many who are exposed
will pay no attention; some of those who pay attention will not
understand the message, or not believe it, or not feel that it applies
to them; some of those who understand and accept it will not be
motivated to act or will soon forget the message; some who intend
to act will not have the opportunity to do so. (p. 352)
Rogers and Storey (1987) note that unrealistic objectives, incorrect targeting
of an audience or inappropriate media channels can adversely affect a campaign.
McGuire (1989) cautions, "[O]ne should guard against exaggerated expectations
regarding the likely size of one's persuasive impact" (p. 49). Swinehart
(1997), however, notes that, although an ultimate goal may be missed,
incremental successes - such as increased public awareness and improved
relationships with key audiences - may help justify a communication campaign.
Many authors (e.g., McGuire, 1989; Rogers and Storey, 1987; Swinehart, 1997;
Witte, 1997) stress the value of research and evaluation as keys to producing
successful communication campaigns. Rice and Atkin (1989) explain that research
includes "assessing needs, identifying relevant audiences, identifying program
failures, and evaluating messages and effects continuously" (p. 8). Social
scientists can contribute greatly to the research process, based on their
understanding of what can influence or change behaviors (DeJong and Winsten,
1998).
Further, Alcalay and Taplin (1989) argue that not enough campaigns follow
through with evaluations, despite the value of "find[ing] out which of the
communication strategies worked." Swinehart (1997) notes that without assessing
a campaign's effects, "no conclusions can be drawn concerning their impact" (p.
351).
Strategic planning can also play an important role in a campaign's success or
failure. The plan should include identifying message strategies, audiences,
social factors, and an appropriate mix of communication channels (Rice and
Atkin, 1989). Likewise, the preferred behavioral outcome should be defined, as
well as incremental stages leading to the change (Swinehart, 1997). Atkin and
Freimuth (1989) argue, "As a means of attaining the behavioral objectives,
campaign messages must first have an impact on preliminary or intermediate
target variables along the response chain, ranging from exposure and processing
to learning and yielding to actual utilization" (p. 137). Swinehart (1997) also
notes the importance of defining potential barriers as part of the planning
process, including, "psychological and situational factors that inhibit the
taking of recommended actions, such as cost, fear, lack of social support,
inability to visualize benefits, negative side effects, and lack of facilities"
(p. 368).
Hughes and Hasbrouck (1996) note specifically that there is inadequate
evaluation of grassroots efforts. This research paper begins the process of
filling that void by assessing the "Pulling the Plug on Media Violence" campaign
conducted in North Carolina schools. The research will help establish a
foundation for long-term evaluations to enable tracking of progress of one
specific public communication campaign over time.
METHODOLOGY
In order to assess the effectiveness of the grassroots, statewide campaign,
"Pull the Plug on TV and Video Game Violence Week," some questions related to
the awareness about the campaign and attitude toward media violence were
incorporated into a Fall 1997 university-sponsored telephone survey.[1] The poll
is conducted twice annually by a public southeastern university to capture the
public's opinion on various issues. Undergraduate and graduate students at the
university receive two hours of preliminary training in telephone survey
techniques prior to working as interviewers. The Computer Assisted Telephone
Instrument (CATI) was used to record responses within a database for analysis.
The interview sample was drawn from across the state of North Carolina with a
random digit dialing technique. A total of 1,374 residences were reached and
771 residential respondents from across the state completed the survey, for a
completion rate of 54 percent. The sampling error rate was calculated at 3.5
percent, and the confidence level was 95 percent.
In the following analyses, we utilized the results generated from the survey to
examine what demographic factors might lead to awareness of the campaign and
might influence the level of concern toward violence portrayed on television.
As suggested in most statistical guides, we first looked at the univariate
output to detect whether the data represent the population. Secondly,
correlation analysis was implemented to see the initial relationship between
demographic factors and the two key variables - awareness of the campaign and
concern about media violence.
Independent variables that were found significantly related to dependent
variables, based on the correlation matrix, were selected for the next
statistical testing, multiple regression. Due to the exploratory nature of this
testing, a "step-wise" method was used to sift through and sort out the
predicting variables. All of the statistical procedures were conducted with
SPSS for Windows, a statistical software for the personal computer.
Hypotheses: The following hypotheses have been posed for this study -
H1a. Certain demographic attributes of survey respondents -- gender,
education level, age, income level and whether the respondent is a parent --
will influence awareness of the "Pull the Plug on Media Violence" campaign.
H1b. Certain demographic attributes of survey respondents -- gender,
education level, age, income level and whether the respondent is a parent --
will influence general concern about media violence.
H2. Respondents who are most aware of the campaign will be more concerned
about media violence.
FINDINGS
Analysis of the distribution of gender, race and age confirmed that the poll
sample generally reflects the structure of the North Carolina population.
Regarding gender, however, there were slightly more female subjects (57.5
percent) than males in the sample. Among the people who were interviewed in
this statewide survey, 19.3 percent were minorities. People of all ages
appeared evenly distributed. The largest age group represented was 25-44 year
olds, constituting 41.1 percent of the sample, followed by 45-64 year old group,
representing 31.4 percent.
According to the statistical output, about half of the people interviewed had
at least a high school diploma, and about 30 percent of the respondents had some
college or graduate/ professional education. Because the "Pull the Plug" flyers
were distributed primarily to elementary school students, knowing which
respondents had children attending elementary school was important information.
The statistics indicate that 21.4 percent of those interviewed have children in
their households who are currently enrolled in elementary schools. Nearly 30
percent of the respondents reported that they had heard of the "Pull the Plug"
campaign. It seems that this grassroots endeavor may have achieved a certain
level of success by effectively propagating the campaign's slogan.
In order to detect the effectiveness of the campaign, it is important to
identify who was reached and what kind of demographic characteristics they have.
Based on the results of a correlation test, it was found that education level,
gender, and whether the respondent had children attending elementary school were
crucial to awareness of the campaign. This result was further confirmed by
multiple regression (See
Table 1).
Education obviously plays an indispensable role in obtaining the message of
this campaign. Various literature (e.g., Gaziano, 1997) indicate that education
filters the processes of accessing, under- standing and accumulating
information. The results yielded from this study support an education-filter
hypothesis. As shown in Table 1, respondents' having children attending
elementary school is decisive
________________________________________________________________________________
___
Table 1: Prediction Model of Campaign Awareness
b Beta t sig
Education 0.022 0.145 4.086 <0.001
Gender -0.114 -0.124 -3.477
0.001
Elementary Children 0.128 0.115 3.223 0.001
Constant 0.014
df = 3 F = 13.021 p < 0.001
R2 = 0.049 Adjusted R2 = 0.045
________________________________________________________________________________
____
to awareness of the campaign. Two possible explanations exist. First, the
campaign may have successfully elevated the awareness of the campaign among
parents. Dervin (1989), for example, notes the value going through the schools
because children not only receive the message, but take the message home to
their parents. On the other hand, people who have children in elementary school
might be more likely to remember the campaign from its other tactical sources,
such as outdoor billboards, publicized press conferences and public service
announcements spanning from 1995 through 1997. Therefore, the net contribution
of the 1997 campaign efforts toward escalating parental awareness is not
entirely clear on its own; however, a cumulative effect could be possible.
Swinehart (1997) explains the value of campaigns that are repeated year to year,
reinforcing the message. "It is unrealistic . . . to expect very brief or
limited campaigns to markedly increase public awareness of a particular problem
or exert a sustained influence" (p. 367).
Additional findings show that gender determines who gets the information -
females are far more likely than males to learn of the campaign and obtain the
message. McGuire (1985, 1989) cites gender as one audience characteristic that
should be considered when designing communication campaigns. Perhaps mothers
are still the primary child care giver in the respondent families and more apt
to be responsive and/or responsible for the actions that the campaign addresses
- that is, reviewing or altering family use of television. Per Paisley (1989),
"The more that values and perceptions of self-interest are shared in a
population, the more effective an education campaign can be" (p. 17).
Portions of Hypothesis 1a were supported for awareness of the "Pull the Plug"
campaign -- specifically, gender, education level and whether the respondent is
a parent. Income level and age of respondent did not reveal significance in
this study.
As communication effects literature suggests, there exists a vital distinction
between awareness of a given issue and attitude shift. In this case we were
particularly interested in investigating whether this campaign generated any
impact on people's attitudes toward violence portrayed on television.
Anticipated effects were not generated; however, and Hypothesis 2 -- that
respondents who are aware of the campaign will be more concerned about media
violence -- was not supported. People's awareness of the campaign did not
necessarily elevate their level of concern about TV violence. According to the
output of Pearson's correlation test, the association of campaign awareness with
the concern toward TV violence is not statistically significant.
The next inquiry, then, was to identify what factors might influence people's
level of concern toward TV violence. Five factors were found to correlate with
concern about TV violence. First, as age increases, respondents were more
concerned about ample acts of violence that fill TV programming. Second, the
more respondents thought that their vote makes a difference politically, the
more likely they were to be concerned about the volume of violence portrayed on
the TV screen. It is interesting to discover that people's sense of locus of
control had something to do with their concern about TV programming. Third, as
found in examining campaign awareness, gender is a significant factor in concern
about TV violence. Women were significantly more likely than men to be
concerned about the issue.
Fourth, it is not surprising to note that parenthood played a role in molding
respondent opinion about TV violence. This may be explained because parents,
concerned with their children's welfare and psychological development, cannot
help paying attention to TV content that their children may watch for hours each
day.
The factor most related to TV violence concern, however, is the level of
respondents' religiosity. That is, the more religious a person is, the more
concerned he/she is about TV violence. The value system that most religions
advocate is apparently at odds with the messages that violence programs convey.
This is an area not greatly explored in research and deserves future attention.
From Table 2, it is apparent that religiosity is the leading predictor of
concern about TV violence, followed by gender and parental factors. Note that
the amount of variance explained by this model is rather impressive (R-squared
is 0.142).
________________________________________________________________________________
____
Table 2: Prediction Model of Concern About TV Violence
b Beta t sig
Religiosity 0.108 0.234 4.570 <0.001
Gender -0.345 -0.185 -3.684 <0.001
Parent 0.320 0.145 2.852 0.005
Constant 0.014
df = 3 F = 19.322 p < 0.001
R2 = 0.142 Adjusted R2 = 0.135
________________________________________________________________________________
____
Portions of Hypothesis 1b were supported by this study; specifically, age,
gender and parenthood. Education and income levels did not appear significant.
Two other characteristics not anticipated also emerged -- locus of control and,
most importantly, religiosity.
Even though it is not clear whether this model has included all of the
important predictors, we have a good reason to believe that future campaign
efforts should broaden concentration on these three characteristics -
religiosity, gender and respondent's role as parent. Of particular importance
is addressing the apparent role that religion plays in escalating people's level
of concern toward TV violence. Perhaps consideration should be given to
including churches as an additional message channel in the future. Furthermore,
future waves of the campaign should aim at increasing the public's level of
concern about TV violence, and then advocating a change of TV viewing behavior,
so the campaign's fundamental goal may be achieved. The materials developed by
the North Carolina Coalition for Pulling the Plug on Media Violence is
activity-related and hence may, over time, be more effective in promoting
behavior changes.
DISCUSSION
The findings of this evaluation study indicate that the grassroots approach by
the North Carolina Coalition for Pulling the Plug on Media Violence of
advocating for the elimination of violent media use has received some levels of
success. A considerable percentage of people responding to this survey reported
that they have heard of the campaign. With limited budget and human resources,
the group's volunteer endeavor is impressive enough for communication
researchers to ponder a possible direction shift to coping with the media
violence issue.
This study also found that awareness of the problems about media violence does
not necessarily lead to attitude change. In addition, certain demographic
attributes -- gender, parenthood, education level and religiosity -- are crucial
in determining whether the advocated message is received and the level of
concern people have toward the problem. In light of these findings, future
campaign efforts might need to target the people with certain demographic
attributes and aim to alter their attitudes toward the problem with thoughtfully
tailored information. Since gender was a contributing factor, campaign
developers might consider using a tone that appeals to women, for example.
Because religiosity also appears to influence awareness and concern, it may also
be of value to target religious groups and organizations. The current campaign
design already taps into parents through the state's school systems, which
should be continuously maintained.
Future efforts also need to focus on attitude shift toward the issue of media
violence and change in people's viewing behavior - after all, extensive
penetration of a campaign slogan is not equal to genuine success. In order to
change people's views and behaviors toward media violence, opportunities to
advance personal persuasion might be added to the campaign project. For
example, special talks, guest presentations and theme workshops about media
violence could be arranged and incorporated into various activities of existing
organizations. The current close nexus between the local grassroots group and
the state's education system should be maintained to continue reaching parents
who are most involved in monitoring and changing children's media use behavior.
If people's television viewing behavior and program preference can eventually
be shifted by those grassroots efforts, then the impact of violence portrayed on
the silver screen will be expected to diminish. This large-scale behavior change
of media use may ultimately influence the media industries and force them to
transform their current programming strategies. Since commercial media firms
need to reach the audience in order to lure advertisers' endorsements, loss of
audience share could result in modified programming to target new tastes or
preferences. In other words, changing audience media use patterns can generate
a "trickle up" impact on media content, such as curtailing the dose of violence
in programming, a long-standing goal of child advocates.
As part of the literature review vividly indicates, government regulations and
industry self-regulation have not been highly effective - politics, media
interests and cooperation and First Amendment protection all play a strong role.
For example, the effectiveness of the V-chip technology is a function of media
industry cooperation in upholding a ratings system. Therefore, a trickle-up
endeavor through grassroots participation may be an effective alternative for
the future.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Alcalay, R. & Taplin, S. (1989). Community Health Campaigns: From Theory to
Action. In R.E. Rice & C.K. Atkin (Eds.), Public Communication Campaigns 2ed.
(pp. 105-129). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Atkin, C.K. (1981). Mass Media Information Campaign Effectiveness. In R.E.
Rice & W.J. Paisley (Eds.), Public Communication Campaigns (pp. 265-280).
Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
Atkin, C. K. & Freimuth, V. (1989). Formative Evaluation Research in Campaign
Design. In R.E. Rice & C.K. Atkin (Eds.), Public Communication Campaigns 2ed.
(pp. 131-150). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Cantor, J., Harrison, K. & Nathanson, A. (1998). Ratings and Advisories for
Television Programming. In National Television Violence Study, vol. 2 (pp.
267-322). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Cater, D. & Strickland, S. (1977). TV Violence and the Child: The Evolution and
Fate of the Surgeon General's Report. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Charren, P. (1994). Improve Children's TV Choices without Censorship. The Brown
University Child and Adolescent Behavior Letter, 10(3), 1-3.
Charren, P., Gelber, A. & Arnold, M. (1994). Media, Children, and Violence: A
Public Policy Perspective. Pediatrics, 94(4), 631-637.
Coalition's History and Mission (1996). Raleigh, NC: The NC Coalition for
Pulling the Plug on Media Violence.
Comstock, G. (1991). Television and the American Child. San Diego: Academic
Press.
Comstock, G. & Strasburger, V.C. (1993). Media Violence: Q&A. Adolescent
Medicine: State of the Art Reviews, 4(3), 495-509.
DeJong, W. & Winsten, J.A. (1998). The Media and the Message: Lessons Learned
from Past Public Service Campaigns. Washington, DC: The National Campaign to
Prevent Teen Pregnancy.
Dervin, B. (1989). Audience as Listener and Learner, Teacher and Confidante:
The Sense-Making Approach. In R.E. Rice and C.K. Atkin (Eds.), Public
Communication Campaigns 2ed. (pp. 67- 86). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Eagly, A. (1981). Recipient Characteristics as Determinants of Response to
Persuasion. In R. Petty, T. Ostrom & T. Brock (Eds.), Cognitive Responses in
Persuasion. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Efforts Continue in the Quest for Quality Children's Television. (1996). Media
Report to Women, 24(4), 4-5.
Flay, B.R. & Cook, T.D. (1981). Evaluation of Mass Media Prevention Campaigns.
In R.E. Rice & W.J. Paisley (Eds.), Public Communication Campaigns. Beverly
Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
Gaziano, C. (1997). "Forecast 2000: Widening Knowledge Gaps." Journalism &
Mass Communication, 74(2), 237-264.
Gerbner, G. (1992). Society's Storyteller: How Television Creates the Myths by
which We Live. Media & Values, 59/60, 8-9.
Heath, L., Bresolin, L.B. & Rinaldi, R.C. (1989). Effects of Media Violence on
Children. Archives of General Psychiatry, 46, 376-379.
Hovland, C.I. & Weiss, W. (1951). The Influence of Source Credibility on
Communication Effectiveness. Public Opinion Quarterly, 15, 635-650.
Huesmann, L.R., Eron, L.D., Klein, R., Brice, P. & Fisher, P. (1983).
Mitigating the Imitation of Aggressive Behavior by Changing Children's
Attitudes about Media Violence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
44, 899-910.
Hughes, J.N. & Hasbrouck, J.E. (1996). Television Violence: Implications for
Violence Prevention. School Psychology Review, 25(2), 134-151.
Huston, A.C., Watkins, B.A. & Kunkel, D. (1989). Public Policy and Children's
Television. American Psychologist, 44, 424-433.
Jessell, H.A. (1996). Peggy Charren: Victory at Long Last. Broadcasting & Cable,
126(34), 20-22.
Manley-Casimir, M.E. (1987). Children, Culture, and the Curriculum of
Television: The Challenge for Education. In M.E. Manley-Casimir & C. Luke
(Eds.), Children and Television: A Challenge for Education. (pp. 236-245). New
York: Praeger Publishers.
McGuire, W.J. (1984). Public Communication as a Strategy for Inducing
Health-Promoting Behavior Change. Preventive Medicine, 13, 299-319.
___________. (1985). Attitudes and Attitude Change. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson
(Eds.), Handbook of Social Psychology 3ed. New York: Random House.
____________. (1989). Theoretical Foundations of Campaigns. In R.E. Rice &
C.K. Atkin (Eds.), Public Communication Campaigns 2ed. (pp. 43-65). Newbury
Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Miller, G.R. (1980). On Being Persuaded: Some Basic Distinctions. In. M.E.
Roloff & G.R. Miller (Eds.), Persuasion: New Directions in Theory and Research
(pp. 11-29). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
_________. (1987). Persuasion. In C.R. Berger & S.H. Chaffee (Eds.), Handbook
of Communication Science (pp. 446-483). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Murray, J.P. (1995). Children and Television Violence. Kansas Journal of Law and
Public Policy, 21(2), 256-264.
Paisley, W. (1989). Public Communication Campaigns: The American Experience.
In R.E. Rice & C.K. Atkin (Eds.), Public Communication Campaigns 2ed. (pp.
15-38). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Rice, R.E. & Atkin, C.A. (1989). Public Communication Campaigns 2ed. Newbury
Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Rogers, E.M., Solomon, D.S. & Adhikarya, R. (1979). Further Directions for
USAID's Communication Policies in Population. Stanford: Stanford University
Institute for Communication Research.
Rogers, E.M. & Storey, J.D. (1987). Communications Campaigns. In C.R. Berger &
S.H. Chaffee (Eds.), Handbook of Communication Science. (pp. 817-846). Newbury
Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Slater, M.D. & Rouner, D. (1996, Winter). How Message Evaluation and Source
Attributes May Influence Credibility Assessment and Belief Change. Journalism
and Mass Communication Quarterly, 73(4), 974-991.
Strasburger, V.C. (1995). Adolescents and the Media: Medical and Psychological
Impact. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
______________. (1997, May). Children, Adolescents, and Television: A Call for
Physician Action. The Western Journal of Medicine, 166(5), 353-354.
Swinehart, J.W. (1997). Health Behavior Research and Communication Campaigns. In
D.S. Dochman (Ed.), Handbook of Health Behavior IV: Relevance for
Professionals and Issues for the Future. (pp. 351-373). New York: Plenum
Press.
Szulc, P. & Tchaicha, J. (1995). A Public Policy Perspective on Televised
Violence and Youth: From a Conversation with Peggy Charren. Harvard Educational
Review , 65(2), 282-291.
Wallack, L. (1990). Mass Media and Health Promotion: Promise, Problem,
Challenge. In C. Atkin & L. Wallack (Eds.), Mass Communication and Public
Health: Complexities and Conflicts. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Wells, W. (1975). Psychographics: A Critical Review. Journal of Marketing
Research, 12, 196-213.
Why Character Development Counts. (1990). Instructor, 105(1), 79.
Wicklund, R. and Brehm, J. (1976). Perspectives on Cognitive Dissonance.
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Wilson, B.J., Kunkel, D., Linz, D., Potter, J., Donnerstein, E., Smith, S.L.,
Blumenthal, E., & Gray, T. (1997). Television Violence and its Context. In
National Television Violence Study, vol. 1 (pp. 3- 268). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage Publications.
Wilson, B.J., Kunkel, D., Linz, D., Potter, J., Donnerstein, E., Smith, S.L.,
Blumenthal, E., & Berry, M. (1998). Violence in Television Programming Overall.
In National Television Violence Study, vol. 2 (pp. 3-204). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage Publications.
Witte, K. (1997). Preventing Teen Pregnancy Through Persuasive Communication.
Journal of Community Health, 22(2), 137-154.
Young, J.H., Swirsky, S.A. & Myerson, J.B. (1995). Going to the Grassroots: How
The Christian Coalition is Filling the Void. Campaigns & Elections, 16(7), 34.
[1] The following campaign-related questions were posed: "How concerned are
you about the amount of violence depicted on TV shows?" and "Have you ever
heard of a campaign called 'Pull the Plug on Media Violence'?"
|
