Reviews the findings of communication research on the effects of televison on violent behaviour, and the history of the use of this information in policy-making. To what political use has violence research been put? What impact has it had on politics? The interactions of federal communication policy, the broadcasting industry, public or citizens' interest groups, and the communication research community are described. The rise of TV violence as an issue is documented, in the context of the rise of social science as a policy-making resource. Rowland uses hearings, records, and reports of congressional committees and national commissions to reveal the patterns of argument and shared assumptions, and the structure of interactions among groups and institutions. These records are also part of our rituals of social self-examination. Rowland's approach rises out of the tradition of critical cultural studies, with its emphasis on history and symbolic analysis. His book, finally, is about the symbolic uses to which communication research -- indeed, social science -- is put to alleviate contemporary tensions and unease.

Discusses why and how we should rate the content of television programs for violence

In 1969, Senator John Pastore requested that the Surgeon General appoint a committee to conduct an inquiry into television violence and its effect on children. When the Surgeon General's report was finally released in 1972—after a three-year inquiry and a cost of over $1.8 million—it angered and confused a number of critics, including politicians, the broadcast industry, many of the social scientists who had helped carry out the research, and the public. While the final consequences of the Report may not be played out for years to come, TV Violence and the Child presents a fascinating study of the Surgeon General's quest and, in effect, the process by which social science is recruited and its findings made relevant to public policy. In addition to dealing with television as an object of concern, the authors also consider the government's effectiveness when dealing with social objectives and the influence of citizen action on our communication systems. Their overwhelming conclusion is that the nation's institutions are ill-equipped for recruiting expert talent, providing clear findings, and carrying out objectives in this area of delicate human concern.

Congressional scrutiny and public criticism of violent television have spanned nearly four decades with little change in the emphasis of those protests. Despite the intensive spotlight cast on broadcasters, few in Congress have really tried to affect any real changes in the amount and nature of violence in television programming. Although there have been many studies conducted on the effects of television, few authors have explored the political, cultural and societal influences in the battles over television violence. This book explores the complexities of Congressional and public scrutiny and the dynamics of communications policy-making in the United States.

Are there any commonalities between such phenomena as soccer hooliganism, sabotage by peasants of landlords' property, incidents of road rage, and even the events of September 11? With striking historical scope and command of the literature of many disciplines, this book, first published in 2003, seeks the common causes of these events in collective violence. In collective violence, social interaction immediately inflicts physical damage, involves at least two perpetrators of damage, and results in part from coordination among the persons who perform the damaging acts. Professor Tilly argues that collective violence is complicated, changeable, and unpredictable in some regards, yet that it also results from similar causes variously combined in different times and places. Pinpointing the causes, combinations, and settings helps to explain collective violence and its variations, and also helps to identify the best ways to mitigate violence and create democracies with a minimum of damage to persons and property.

"The Case for Television Violence is a dense, dry and devastating dissection that surely counts as one of the most important books about American culture to appear in the last decade." --Andrew O′Hehir, "The Myth of Media Violence," Salon.com, 3/17/05 The Case for Television Violence makes the provocative argument that television violence has been misinterpreted. Rather than undermining the social order, television supports it by providing a safe outlet for aggressive impulses. Media scholar Jib Fowles challenges the conventional wisdom by: 1) demonstrating that the scientific literature does not say what many believe it says; 2) calling attention to the viewing habits and behaviors of the reader and those the reader knows; 3) explaining that the anti-violence critique is most profitably understood as the signature issue in the conflict between high and popular culture and 4) situating the arrival of televised violence within the historical context of the disallowance of traditionally sanctioned targets of aggression. The Case for Television Violence will intrigue scholars and students of Media Studies, Cultural Studies, Politics and Mass Communication.