• Leading Researchers’ Message to Congress, FCC

    by  • April 28, 2016 • Ratings Reform • 1 Comment

    TvBrokenRatings

    Politico reports on a group of academic researchers calling for Congressional hearings to reform of the TV Content Ratings System.

    Following is the full letter this coalition of researchers sent to FCC and Congress:
    (pdf version)

    April 26, 2016

    Chairman Tom Wheeler
    Commissioner Mignon Clyburn
    Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel
    Commissioner Ajit Pai
    Commissioner Michael O’Rielly

    Federal Communications Commission
    445 12th Street, SW
    Washington, DC 20554

    RE: Television Content Ratings System

    Dear Chairman Wheeler and Commissioners,

    We are writing as independent private citizens who are expert researchers in media ratings, media effects research, and/or child development. We recommend that hearings be held on the effectiveness of the current television ratings system in order to determine how they should be improved. Media ratings are useful only if two conditions are met. First, they are needed only if it can be shown that media have important effects on children. Second, they are useful only if parents believe them to be valid and effective. Scientific research conducted by us and others provides useful information on both of these questions.

    Over the past 60 years, hundreds of studies have demonstrated that television, movies, video games, and other media can have both important benefits and harms for children. Some of these effects, such as effects on decreased school performance (Huston et al., 1992) or increased obesity (Laurson et al., 2008), are related to the amount of time children spend with screen media. A majority of the research, however, has focused on the effects of content (Strasburger, Wilson, & Jordan, 2014).

    Several studies have demonstrated that educational content can have profoundly valuable effects. For example, research has shown that Sesame Street improves children’s school readiness (Fisch & Truglio, 2001), and that this early benefit lasts through high school (D. R. Anderson, Huston, Schmitt, Linebarger, & Wright, 2001).

    Research has also documented harmful effects of violent content; indeed, this is by far the most thoroughly researched area of media effects. Violent media can increase aggressive thoughts, feelings, and behaviors, both in the short and long term (C. A. Anderson et al., 2003
    ; Gentile, 2014; Huesmann, Moise-Titus, Podolski, & Eron, 2003). Sexual media exposure is related to earlier and riskier sexual activity (Brown & Newcomer, 1991; Huston, Wartella, & Donnerstein, 1998; Moore et al., 1995; Strasburger et al., 2014; Zillman, 2000).

    Parents also are concerned about the ethical and moral values to which their children are exposed, although these issues have not been studied empirically in as much detail. Research findings, parental concern, and political pressure on the entertainment industry led to the creation of media rating systems, so parents could be informed about media content before allowing children watch.

    The television rating system has been in place since 1998. The media landscape has changed dramatically since then. Television now has hundreds of channels and is watched on smart phones and other devices. Furthermore, the content of media has changed, including more content that is potentially harmful (Nalkur, Jamieson, & Romer, 2010). Children’s access to these greater media options has also increased (Rideout, Foehr, & Roberts, 2010), highlighting the need for consistent, valid, and informative ratings.

    Unfortunately, the rating systems have many problems. The ratings are often applied in an inconsistent manner. In a study of 2,757 television programs, 79% of shows containing violence failed to include the V (violence) descriptor rating, 91% of shows with offensive language failed to include the L (offensive language) rating, and 92% of shows with sexual content failed to include the S (sexual scenes) rating (Kunkel et al., 2001). Ratings also have recently been criticized for a lack of temporal consistency, becoming more lenient over time (called “ratings creep”) (Gentile, 2008). Ratings creep can also occur for those who assign the ratings — the more violent and sexual videos they see, the more lenient the ratings they assign (Romer et al., 2014).

    Studies have also demonstrated that the current rating systems lack validity, as measured by inaccurately labeling content known to be harmful or by being incongruent with parents’ perceptions (since they are the consumers of ratings) (Kunkel et al., 2001; Thompson & Yokota, 2004; Walsh & Gentile, 2001). In one study of 1332 TV shows, researchers coded dimensions that pose the highest degree of risk for harmful effects on youth and compared these with the assigned TV ratings (Kunkel et al., 2001). The industry ratings did not match the content of the shows. For example, more than two-thirds of children’s shows with high-risk violent content were rated as TV-Y (the youngest rating) and did not include the V (violence) descriptor. In summary, research demonstrates serious problems with each rating system, which must hamper their usefulness for parents.

    National studies of parents demonstrate that fewer than half of parents use the television ratings regularly (Gentile, Maier, Hasson, & de Bonetti, 2011). This is surprising, because studies also demonstrate that parents greatly desire ratings. It is less surprising, however, once we examine how useful they are for parents. Only 15% of parents say they get all of the information they need from the ratings, and only 5% believe that the ratings are always accurate. More importantly, a national study of parents demonstrated that parents generally do not agree what ages different types of content are appropriate for (Gentile et al., 2011). That is, a majority of parents will always disagree with any age chosen for a rating, which means that age-based ratings are invalid. In contrast, parents want to know detailed information about many types of content.

    Many surveys of parents and experts have shown that content-based systems are preferred (Cantor, 1997a, 1998; Cantor, Stutman, & Duran, 1996; Children Now, 1996; Gentile,1996; Gentile et al., 2011). Other studies have documented that age-based ratings are more likely to enhance children’s interest (the “forbidden fruit” effect), whereas content-based ratings are more likely to decrease it (the “tainted fruit” effect) (Bickham & Wright, 2001; Bushman &Cantor, 2003; Cantor, 1997a, 1997b, 2003; Krcmar & Pulaski). Furthermore, several recent studies have documented “ratings creep,” a shift over time for more mature content to get lower age-based ratings (Gentile, 2008; Nalkur et al., 2010; Thompson & Yokota, 2004; Walsh &Gentile, 2001). A content-based system would be less prone to ratings creep because it is designed to simply record the presence or absence of specific content, not to make a judgment about its appropriateness. Furthermore, it becomes clearer and simpler for parents, as they no longer would need to guess what a vague label like “PG-13: Parental guidance suggested” means

    Ratings can be effective only if they (1) indicate content that can be beneficial or harmful and (2) are useful for parents. A great deal of valid scientific research has shown that ratings can indicate such content, but to date such valid content rating systems have not been implemented in a way that is useful for parents. For this reason, we are asking for the FCC and Congress to hold hearings on the ratings and how they could be changed to be valuable for the public.

    We sign below as individual and independent scientific researchers, and the views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of our host institutions or the professional societies to which we belong.

    Sincerely,

    Douglas A. Gentile, Ph.D. Iowa State University

    Brad J. Bushman, Ph.D. The Ohio State University

    Craig A. Anderson, Ph.D. Iowa State University

    Jeanne Brockmyer, Ph.D. University of Toledo

    Melinda C. R. Burgess, Ph.D. Southwestern Oklahoma State University

    Joanne Cantor, Ph.D. University of Wisconsin

    Dimitri A. Christakis, M.D., M.P.H. University of Washington

    Sarah Coyne, Ph.D. Brigham Young University

    Karen Dill-Shackleford Fielding Graduate University

    Ed Donnerstein, Ph.D. University of Arizona

    C. Shawn Green, Ph.D. University of Wisconsin

    Marjorie Hogan, M.D., FAAP University of Minnesota

    L. Rowell Huesmann, Ph.D. University of Michigan

    Tom A. Hummer, Ph.D. Indiana University School of Medicine

    Amy Jordan, Ph.D. Annenberg Public Policy Center, University of Pennsylvania

    Steven Kirsh, Ph.D. State University of New York at Geneseo

    Marina Krcmar, Ph.D. Wake Forest University

    Jennifer Linder, Ph.D. Linfield College

    Amy Nathanson, Ph.D. Ohio State University

    John Murray, Ph.D. Kansas State University

    Courtney Plante, Ph.D. Iowa State University

    W. James Potter, Ph.D. University of California, Santa Barbara

    Michael Rich, M.D., M.P.H. Harvard Medical School

    Jean Rystrom Kaiser Permanente (retired)

    Dorothy G. Singer, Ed.D. Yale University

    Victor Strasburger, M.D. University of New Mexico

    Barbara J. Wilson, Ph.D. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

    Michele Ybarra, M.P.H., Ph.D. Center for Innovative Public Health Research

    ———

    References

    Anderson, C. A., Berkowitz, L., Donnerstein, E., Huesmann, L. R., Johnson, J. D., Linz, D., . . . Wartella, E. (2003). The influence of media violence on youth. Psychological Science in the Public Interest., 4, 81-110.

    Anderson, D. R., Huston, A. C., Schmitt, K. L., Linebarger, D. L., & Wright, J. C. (2001). Early television viewing and adolescent behavior. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 66(1), 158 pages.

    Bickham, D. S., & Wright, J. C. (2001). Television ratings and the viewing preferences of children: A comparison of three systems. Retrieved from Minneapolis, MN

    Brown, J. D., & Newcomer, S. F. (1991). Television viewing and adolescents’ sexual behavior.

    Journal of Homosexuality, 21, 77-91.

    Bushman, B. J., & Cantor, J. (2003). Media ratings for violence and sex: Implications for policymakers and parents. American Psychologist, 58, 130-141.

    Cantor, J. (1997a). Critique of the new rating system for United States television. News on Children and Violence on the Screen: A Newsletter from the UNESCO International Clearinghouse on Children and Violence on the Screen, 1, 26-27.

    Cantor, J. (1997b). The perils of “TV Parental Guidelines. Telemedium: The Journal of Media Literacy, 43(1), 11-12.

    Cantor, J. (1998). Ratings for program content: The role of research findings. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 557, 54-69.

    Cantor, J. (2003). Ratings systems for media. In D. H. Johnston (Ed.), Encyclopedia of International Media and Communications (Vol. Vol. 4, pp. 47-57). San Diego, CA: Elsevier Science.

    Cantor, J., Stutman, S., & Duran, V. (1996). What parents want in a television rating system: Results of a national survey. Retrieved from http://yourmindonmedia.com/wp- content/uploads/parent_survey.pdf

    Children Now. (1996). Making television ratings work for children and families: The perspective of children’s experts. Retrieved from Oakland, CA:

    Fisch, S. M., & Truglio, R. T. (2001). “G” is for growing: Thirty years of research on children and Sesame Street. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Gentile, D. A. (1996). National survey of parent media attitudes, behaviors, and opinions.

    Minneapolis, MN: National Institute on Media and the Family.

    Gentile, D. A. (2008). The rating systems for media products. In S. Calvert & B. Wilson (Eds.), Handbook of children, media, and development (pp. 527-551). Oxford, England: Blackwell Publishing.

    Gentile, D. A. (2014). Media violence and children : A complete guide for parents and professionals (2nd ed.). Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger.

    Gentile, D. A., Maier, J. A., Hasson, M. R., & de Bonetti, B. L. (2011). Parents’ evaluation of media ratings a decade after the television ratings were introduced. Pediatrics, 128, 36- 44.

    Huesmann, L. R., Moise-Titus, J., Podolski, C.-L., & Eron, L. D. (2003). Longitudinal Relations Between Children’s Exposure to Tv Violence and Their Aggressive and Violent Behavior in Young Adulthood: 1977-1992. Developmental psychology. Special issue: violent children. Vol 39(2), Pp. 201-221.

    Huston, A. C., Donnerstein, E., Fairchild, H., Feshbach, N. D., Katz, P. A., Murray, J. P., . . . Zuckerman, D. M. (1992). Big world, small screen: The role of television in American society. Lincoln, Nebraska: University of Nebraska Press.

    Huston, A. C., Wartella, E., & Donnerstein, E. (1998). Measuring the effects of sexual content in the Media: A report to the Kaiser Family Foundation. Retrieved from Menlo Park, CA:

    Krcmar, M., & Pulaski, M. Tracking the television rating system: The effect of television ratings on children’s program liking.

    Kunkel, D., Farinola, W. J. M., Cope, K. M., Donnerstein, E., Biely, E., Zwarun, L., & Rollin, E. (2001). Assessing the validity of V-chip rating judgments: The labeling of high-risk programs. In B. Greenberg (Ed.), The alphabet soup of television program ratings (pp.

    51-68). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.

    Laurson, K. R., Eisenmann, J. C., Welk, G. J., Wickel, E. E., Gentile, D. A., & Walsh, D. A. (2008). Combined influence of physical activity and screen time recommendations on childhood overweight. Journal of Pediatrics, 153(2), 209-214. doi:S0022- 3476(08)00176-5 [pii]

    10.1016/j.jpeds.2008.02.042

    Moore, K. A., Miller, B. C., Sugland, B. W., Morrison, D. R., Glei, D. A., & Blumenthal, C. (1995). Beginning too soon: Adolescent sexual behavior, pregnancy and parenthood. Retrieved from Washington, DC:

    Nalkur, P. G., Jamieson, P. E., & Romer, D. (2010). The effectiveness of the motion picture association of America’s rating system in screening explicit violence and sex in top- ranked movies from 1950 to 2006. Journal of Adolescent Health, 47, TBD.

    Rideout, V., Foehr, U. G., & Roberts, D. F. (2010). Generation M2: Media in the lives of 8- to 18-year-olds. Menlo Park, CA: Kaiser Family Foundation.

    Romer, D., Jamieson, P. E., Bushman, B. J., Bleakley, A., Wang, A., Langleben, D., & Jamieson,

    K. H. (2014). Parental desensitization to violence and sex in movies. Pediatrics, 134(5). DOI: 10.1542/peds.2014-1167Strasburger, V.C., Wilson, B.J., & Jordan, A.B. (2014). Children, adolescents, and the media, 3rd ed. Los Angeles: Sage.

    Thompson, K. M., & Yokota, F. (2004). Violence, sex, and profanity in films: Correlation of movie ratings with content. Medscape General Medicine, 6(3), 1-19.

    Walsh, D. A., & Gentile, D. A. (2001). A Validity Test of Movie, Television, and Video-Game Ratings. Pediatrics, 107, 1302-1308.

    Zillman, D. (2000). Influence of unrestrained access to erotica on adolescents’ and young adults’ dispositions toward sexuality. Journal of Adolescent Health, 27S, 41-44.

    cc: Sen. John Thune, Chairman

    Sen. Bill Nelson, Ranking Member

    Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation

    Rep. Fred Upton, Chairman

    Rep. Frank Pallone, Ranking Member House Committee on Energy & Commerce

    Share

    About

    One Response to Leading Researchers’ Message to Congress, FCC

    1. D
      April 29, 2016 at 7:21 am

      “A content-based system would be less prone to ratings creep because it is designed to simply record the presence or absence of specific content, not to make a judgment about its appropriateness. ”

      I couldn’t agree more.

      While you’re at it, you should advocate that TV owners be given the option of securing the parental control settings with a biometric lock (fingerprint reader, face scanner, iris scanner, vein scanner) instead of a 4-digit numerical passcode that can be broken in just a few hours.

      Thank you for what you do.

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *