Testimony of
JEFF J. MCINTYRE
On behalf of
The American Psychological Association
Before the
House Committee on the Judiciary
Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual Property
On
Derivative Rights, Moral Rights, and Movie Filtering Technology
The Honorable Lamar S. Smith
Chairman
Good morning, Mr. Chairman and Members of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual Property. I am Jeff McIntyre and am honored to be here to represent the American Psychological Association.
I have conducted years of work related to children and the media as a negotiator for the development of a television ratings system, as an advisor to the Federal Communications Commission’s V-Chip Task Force, as a member of an informal White House Task Force on Navigating the New Media, as a member of the steering committee for the Decade of Behavior Conference on Digital Childhood, and most importantly, as a representative of the research and concerns of the over 150,000 members and affiliates of the American Psychological Association.
At
the heart of the issue of children and the media is a matter long addressed by
psychological research – the effects of repeated exposure of children to violence. The
media violence issue made its official debut on Capitol Hill in 1952 with the
first of a series of congressional hearings. That particular hearing was held
in the House of Representatives before the Commerce Committee. The following year, in 1953, the first major
Senate hearing was held before the Senate Subcommittee on Juvenile Delinquency,
then headed by Senator Estes Kefauver, who convened a
panel to inquire into the impact of television violence on juvenile
delinquency.
There have been many hearings since the 1950's, but
there has been only limited change -- until recently. Media violence reduction
is fraught with legal complications. Nevertheless, our knowledge base has
improved over time, with the publication of significant and landmark reviews. Based on these
research findings, several concerns emerge when violent material is aggressively marketed
to children.
Foremost,
the conclusions drawn on the basis of over 30 years of research contributed by
American Psychological Association members - including the Surgeon General’s
report in 1972, the National Institute of Mental Health’s report in 1982, and
the industry funded, three-year National Television Violence Study in the
1990’s – show that the repeated exposure to violence in the mass media places
children at risk for:
-
increases in aggression;
-
desensitization to acts of violence;
-
and unrealistic increases in fear of becoming a victim
of violence, which results in the development of other negative
characteristics, such as mistrust of others.
If
this sounds familiar, it is because this is the foundation upon which
representatives of the public health community – comprised of the American
Psychological Association, the
Certain
psychological facts remain are well established in this debate. As APA member Dr. Rowell Huesmann stated
before the Senate Commerce Committee, just as every cigarette you smoke
increases the chances that someday you will get cancer, every exposure to
violence increases the chances that, some day, a child will behave more
violently than they otherwise would.
Hundreds
of studies have confirmed that exposing our children to a steady diet of
violence in the media makes our children more violence prone. The psychological processes here are not
mysterious. Children learn by observing
others. Mass media and the advertising
world provide a very attractive window for these observations.
The
excellent children’s programming (such as
The
role of ratings systems in this discussion merits attention. There continues to be concern over the
ambiguity and implementation of current ratings systems. It appears that ratings systems are
undermined by the marketing efforts of the very groups responsible for their
implementation and effectiveness. That,
Chairman Smith and members of the Subcommittee, displays a significant lack of
accountability and should be considered when proposals for industry
self-regulation are discussed.
Also
undermined here are parents and American families. As the industry has shown a lack of
accountability in the implementation of the existing ratings system, parents
have struggled to manage their family’s media diet against misleading and
contradictory information. (For instance,
marketing an R rated film to children under 17.) While the industry has made some information
regarding the ratings available, more information regarding content needs to be
made more accessible. As with
nutritional information, the content labeling should be available on the
product and not hidden on websites or in the occasional pamphlet.
Generally
speaking, most adults see advertising as a relatively harmless annoyance. However, advertising directed at children,
especially at young children, that features violence generates concern. The average child is exposed to approximately
20,000 commercials per year. This is only for television and does not include
print or the Internet. Much of this is
during weekend morning or weekday afternoon programming. Most of the concern stems not from the sheer
number of commercial appeals but from the inability of some children to
appreciate and defend against the persuasive intent of marketing, especially
advertising featuring violent product.
A
recent Federal Trade Commission report on the Marketing of Violence to Children
heightens these concerns. As a result of
the “Children’s On-Line Privacy Protection Act” the Federal Trade Commission
has ruled that parents have a right to protect their children’s privacy from
the unwanted solicitation of their children’s personal information. We would argue that, based on the years of
psychological research on violence prevention and clinical practice
in violence intervention, parents also have the right to protect their
children from material that puts them at risk of harm. With the considerations in place for
children’s privacy, the precedent for concern about children’s health and
safety is well established.
Decades
of psychological research bear witness to the potential harmful effects on our
children and our nation if these practices continue. Chairman Smith and
Subcommittee members, thank you for your time. Please regard the American Psychological
Association as a resource to the committee as you consider this and other
issues.