whats wrong with rating

8/16/2019 Whats Wrong With Rating

1/8

What's Wrong with the Ratings?

By Barbara J. Wilson, Ph.D.

Please note: This article was originally written for Media&Values

Magazine in the early 1990's. Although ratings systes ha!e

changed since then" soe of the ideas a#out how ratings e!ol!e

are still rele!ant.

"I saw plenty of media violence when I was a child and it didn't hurt me."

"Everyone knows it's just entertainment."

"It's only a cartoon, everyone knows it's not real."

"As long as I go to the movies with my kids, it's O."

If you follow the public debates over media violence, you may be familiar

with arguments like these. Made by adults from an adult perspective, they

dismiss and discredit the problem of media violence for children. ut I

suspect few of these complacent critics understand how a child really sees

the violence in a movie like !"eenage Mutant #in$a "urtles! or a video

game such as !%onic the &edgehog.! Most adults nd it di(cult to

remember their childhood reactions to media. )ewer still can analy*ethem.

"his lack of understanding becomes a huge problem in crafting ++ or even

evaluating ++ ratings systems designed to protect children from the eects

of violence on movies and, increasingly, on television. In fact, analysis of

the Motion -icture ssociation of merica /M-0 lm ratings system ++ the

familiar 1, 1-, R and #+23 that appear in ads and movie reviews ++

demonstrates that it is based on several faulty assumptions about

children's responses to violence in media.

How Does A Film Get a Rating

s a system of self regulation by the motion picture industry, the M-

rating program was designed to measure parental reactions. 4ack 5alenti,

M- president, has noted that the M- is concerned with nding out

what !most merican parents will think about lm content.!

"he ratings are established by a board of seven 6os ngeles area parents

++ real mothers and fathers ++ whose fulltime paid $ob is to review lms. Its

http://www.medialit.org/reading-room/whats-wrong-ratings#biohttp://www.medialit.org/reading-room/whats-wrong-ratings#biohttp://www.medialit.org/reading-room/whats-wrong-ratings#biohttp://www.medialit.org/reading-room/whats-wrong-ratings#biohttp://www.medialit.org/reading-room/whats-wrong-ratings#biohttp://www.medialit.org/reading-room/whats-wrong-ratings#biohttp://www.medialit.org/reading-room/whats-wrong-ratings#biohttp://www.medialit.org/reading-room/whats-wrong-ratings#biohttp://www.medialit.org/reading-room/whats-wrong-ratings#bio


2/8

membership is not intentionally selected to include educators, childhood

development e7perts or others with special training in the eects of media

on children.

)ilms are submitted violuntarily by studios and producers that pay a fee forthe service. 8nsubmitted lms ++ usually international productions and

some independent eorts ++ are usually reviewed and advertised as

unrated and may be harder to market. "he M- Ratings oard e7amines

each individual lm in terms of theme, language, nudity, se7, drug use and

violence. Informing parents is important to the M-. ut it is also clear

that the rating system's main purpose is defusing public criticism and

protecting the lm industry from government intervention.

8nfortunately, the M-'s preoccupation with what is oensive to adults

comes at the e7pense of what is arguably a more important 9uestion:

What types of portrayals are really harmful to children?

In light of social science research on the eects of medial portrayals on

young viewers, there are several problems with the current M- rating

categories:

• Age division.

"he M- rating system divides viewers into three broad age ranges: ;+2<

years, 2


3/8

interested in motives and searching for role models might be more inclined

to imitate the behaviors seen than a younger child who doesn't yet grasp

the comple7ity of how motivation aects action.

• !onte"t o# violen$e.

"he rating scheme focuses primarily on the amount of violence and its

e7plicitness, while ignoring how the violence is portrayed. "he conte7t of

the violence, such as the nature of the perpetrator and whether the

violence is $ustied /i.e, self defense0, are important determinants of the

impact of media violence.

Moreover, many of these features will aect children dierently

depending upon their individual level of cognitive development, that is,

their ability to reason, to recogni*e conse9uences and to separate reality

from fantasy. "hese distinctions are hardly simple@ in fact they are 9uite

comple7 and vary widely from child to child. ut they must be considered

when labeling lms or television programs. n e7tensive review of socialscience research on children's response to media portrayals undertaken by

myself and my colleagues at the 8niversity of =aliforniaA%anta arbara in

2BB; provides a number of clues.

!hildren Are Di%erent

Co children react to media violence? "he answer to this 9uestion is more

comple7 than a simple yes or no. It depends upon the emotional maturity

and the level of learning ability of each child. Most parents of two or more

children know how much children's abilities and understanding can vary

even at the same age, and a year or two of development creates broad

dierences.

=ertainly any parent who has taken two young children to even a mildly

scary movie like %now White or "he Wi*ard of D* has observed very

dierent reactions. si7+year+old may be enthralled, while a three+year+old

hides under the seat. 2


4/8

Recent research on child development has provided us with a much

greater understanding of the progressive changes in children's cognitive

abilities that occur during the preteen years. Most studies nd that

preschoolers and children in the early grades dier from older elementary

school children not only in what they know but in how they think about theworld. )or our purposes, then, we should classify children into two broad

categories according to cognitive development: younger children, roughly

ages three to seven, and older children, ages eight to 2>.

%ome of the dierences between the two groups apply directly to the

eects of violence portrayals. "he following points should be kept in mind:

• &onger $hildren are more de'endent on a''earan$es than

older $hildren. "heir thoughts are tied closely to surface features of a

character or ob$ect such as how it looks or sounds. E"'s physical

appearance frightened some younger children.

• Older $hildren are able to $onsider more $on$e'tal as'e$ts

o# the same $hara$ter.

While a younger child is likely to focus primarily on a character's physical

appearance or actions /Roadrunner has a long tail and goes eep+beep0,

an older child is able to move beyond appearances and consider the

character's motives and words /Roadrunner escapes while Wile E. =oyote

falls o the cli0.

• Older $hildren $an distingish reality #rom #antasy.

young child is apt to attribute life and realism to any character who looks

real. =onse9uently, #in$a "urtles, ig ird and many other animal gures,whether animated or not, are perceived as real so long as they appear to

act like humans. s they mature, children gradually develop the ability to

compare media depictions to real life. )irst they attribute realism to

anything that is possi!le in real life. 6ater they attribute realism only to

those depictions that are pro!a!le based on their own e7perience.

• Older $hildren are better at drawing in#eren$es.

"he ability to form opinions and draw conclusions from data is essential tothe understanding of media portrayals. Research suggests that younger


5/8

children are less able than older children to integrate pieces of information

together from stories and narrations, and then to draw inferences from the

information. =onse9uently, linking dierent scenes together to make sense

of the plot can be particularly di(cult for younger children, especially if

the scenes are not in close in pro7imity or are out of chronological order.

!onte"t o# (iolen$e

Many people complain about the amount of violence on television and in

the movies. -erhaps more important than the sheer volume of violent

actions, though, is the way in which even a small amount of violence is

portrayed. "he conte7t of violence is a critical determinant of whether a

particular portrayal will have a harmful eect. =onte7tual features help to

e7plain why a movie like !Rambo: )irst lood II! is more ob$ectionable thana movie about the &olocaust, even though both may contain e7plicit

depictions of violence. Research has identied four aspects of the conte7t

in which media violence appears. Each takes on special importance when

considering the developmental level of the child viewer.

• Reward and 'nishment.

-ortrayals in which violent characters benet from their actions are mostlikely to produce harmful eects on child viewers. =haracters who receive

money, popularity or praise for violent acts can encourage aggressive

attitudes and imitative behavior in child viewers. =haracters need not be

e7plicitly rewarded for such eects to occur. s long as there is no

punishment associated with a violent act, young viewers have been shown

to imitate such depictions. 8nfortunately, much of dramati*ed violence on

"5 and in movies is conveyed without negative conse9uences@ neither

perpetrators nor victims suer much and the perpetrator is often rewardedfor antisocial behavior.

lthough both younger and older children are inFuenced by the reward

and punishment of violent characters, children at dierent stages of

development will respond dierently to the timing of these elements of the

plot. In many scenarios, a character receives rewards immediately after

performing an aggressive act. )or e7ample, the 4oker in !atman! evadesthe authorities throughout the movie and even gains the attention of a


6/8

pretty woman. Dnly in the end is he captured and punished. s mentioned,

younger children are less able to link scenes together and draw inferences

from them. "hus, for movies in which rewards are immediate and

punishment is delayed, younger children are more likely to see the

violence as sanctioned and thus acceptable.

• Reality o# violen$e.

nother important feature is the degree of realism associated with a

violent portrayal. Research indicates that naturalistic violence is more

likely to be imitated and used as a guide for behavior. &owever, in this

case the inFuence of realism is more critical for older, not younger,

children. ecause older children are better able to distinguish reality from

fantasy, they will be aected more by movies, such as !Garate Gid! and

!Rocky,! that feature violent acts that are humanly possible. In contrast,

younger children respond to both fantasy and realism, making cartoons

that contain animated violent characters, like !"he "ransformers: "he

Movie,! $ust as problematic for them as more realistic depictions.

• Jsti)ed violen$e.

third aspect of the reaction to violence is the degree to which it ispresented as $ustied or defensible in a given situation. 5iolent actions

that are seen as an appropriate response by the characters performing

them are more likely to be imitated by all ages of viewers.

common theme in many programs is the hero who is forced to be violent

because his $ob demands it or because he must retaliate against an

enemy. "he popular turtle heroes in !"eenage Mutant #in$a "urtles! are agood e7ample. "heir message may be ultimately pro+social but the point is

conveyed through script twists that make the violence appear $ustied.

Research suggests that both younger and older children can be confused

by such mi7ed signals. &owever, because of their perceptual limitations,

youger children are particularly susceptible. s many parents have

learned, younger children were more likely to focus on the "urtles' violent

behavior /#in$a chops0 which is concrete and easy to see, than on their

invisible and more abstract !good! cause.


7/8

• Per$e'tion o# the $hara$ter.

fourth conte7tual cue concerns the nature of the character who acts

aggressively. =hildren are more likely to watch closely and imitate

characters who are similar to themselves. "hus, violent movies that

feature young perpetrators are more problematic than programs involving

violent adults. In addition, the particular age of the perpetrator is

important. ounger children are more likely to be attracted to child actors

like Macaulay =ulkin in !&ome lone >.! Dlder children will be more

strongly inFuenced by preteen and teen characters such as those in the 1+

rated !)ree Willy! and such R+rated lms as !=olors! or !oy* 'n the &ood!

that they may see on video or cable.

How Ratings !an Wor* Better ccording to this analysis, an eective

ratings category structure should e7amine movies and lms in the light of

these four conte7t areas. Ratings categories also need to determine the

age groups most likely to be aected. In general, I recommend at least two

categories, roughly three to seven and eight to 2>. separate category for

adolescents would recogni*e both their more fully developed sensibilities

and their likelihood of identifying with and modeling the actions of teenage

or young adult characters. n eective system would also have to take

special note of the impact of violence, horror and se7uality on young

viewers.

"he subtleties of these developmental dierences and their comple7

interaction with media make the current ve+category M- ratings

system highly 9uestionable. "hey also make the task of ratings reform far

from easy. ut I do not believe they make it impossible.

bove all else, those of us who are struggling to reform ratings or nd

other remedies to the problem of media violence must consider thevarying capacities of children. We must recogni*e that all children are

dierent. We must also remember that younger children perceive the

world dierently than older children, who in turn think dierently than

adults. 6osing sight of this important principle is to lose sight of those we

are trying to protect.

Athor Bio+

arbara 4. Wilson, -h.C., is -rofessor and &ead of the Cepartment of

%peech =ommunications at the 8niversity of Illinois at 8rbana+=hampaign.efore $oining the 8niversity of Illinois, she was on the faculty at the


8/8

8niversity of =alifornia, %anta arbara for 2> years. &er research focuses

on the social and psychological eects of the mass media, particularly on

children. %he is co+author of =&I6CRE#, CD6E%=E#"%, #C "&E MECI

/%age -ublications, >;;>0 and three book volumes of the #ational

"elevision 5iolence %tudy /%age -ublications, 2BB3+2BBH0. -rofessor Wilsonhas also published over ; articles and chapters on the impact of media

on youth.

whats wrong with rating

Documents