Media violence has been taken up as a public policy issue by a number of Western countries. Central to the debate has been the challenge of accommodating what may appear to be opposing principles - the protection of children from unsuitable media content and upholding the right to freedom of expression.
In the U.S., where television began as a commercial enterprise, the First Amendment, ensuring free speech and freedom of the press, has been used forcefully to argue against any government intervention in the operation of media organizations.
The Canadian Constitution also guarantees freedom of expression, but it embodies a greater acceptance that reasonable limits can be placed on individual rights for the greater good of society. In Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia and many European countries, television followed on the heels of state-owned radio and began with the premise that any enterprise using public airwaves had a social responsibility. This premise from the 50s may seem somewhat archaic in today's competitive media environment, but in Canada it provided the foundation for a public policy framework to address media violence.
Canadian Government and Industry Initiatives on Television Violence
Canada has long been the largest importer of American television programming. This is due to its geographical proximity to the U.S., as well as an inability to produce profitable programming for a small domestic market.
Violence in this programming had become a public policy issue by the 70s, but it was the deregulation of children's programming in the U.S. and the emergence of the VCR during the 80s that led to a substantial increase in public concern about the issue. Children's TV programming, especially cartoons, suddenly became less benign, and children and young teens had access to adult fare that had previously been denied to them in theatres.
In the early 90s, the federal broadcast regulator, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC), began consultations on the issues relating to television violence with the broadcasting, cable and program production industries, as well as public health professionals, educators, policy-makers and consumer groups. At the same time, following several tragic "flashpoints," a petition against media violence, signed by 1.3 million Canadians, was presented to the Prime Minister.
In 1993, a symposium hosted by the C.M. Hincks Institute for Children's Mental Health brought together all of the stakeholders. The industry-based Action Group on Violence on Television (AGVOT) was formed at this symposium and soon after, the Canadian Association of Broadcasters (CAB) filed with the CRTC a revised, strengthened voluntary code on violence in broadcasting.
The Code's provisions included:
- a prohibition on airing programs that are gratuitously violent and that promote or glamorize violent acts
- a "watershed hour" of 9:00 p.m. before which only violence suitable for adults could be aired
- a promise to develop a program classification system
- a commitment to sensitivity about violence against vulnerable groups, such as women and minorities
- a statement that violence would not be shown as a preferred way of solving problems, or as the central theme of children's programming and that children's programming would not invite dangerous imitation
All privately-owned conventional television stations and networks were obliged to follow this code, and it led to the creation of similar codes by specialty and pay-TV services.
The CAB also established the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council (CBSC), an industry self-regulatory body mandated to respond to complaints from the public about violence and other matters. If a complaint is dealt with satisfactorily through the self-regulatory process, it is not included on the CRTC's public record that is reviewed at licence renewal time for the station/network involved. If not resolved, complaints are brought to the federal regulator.
In late 1993, after a two-day meeting hosted by the CRTC, representatives of Canadian parent and teacher organizations recommended the formation of an online clearinghouse for resources on media education and information on media issues. This resulted in the formation of the Media Awareness Network under the aegis of the National Film Board of Canada. MNet incorporated as an independent not-for-profit organization in 1996.
In June 1994, the V-chip entered the picture as a technological tool that parents could use to control children's exposure to televised violence. This Canadian invention was tested in the field, but not immediately put into operation, since the program classification system on which it depended was not in place.
Canadian broadcasters raised concern at this time that American stations available in Canada over-the-air, via cable or by satellite did not have to adhere to any violence guidelines. This led the CRTC to conduct a series of national and regional public consultations on Violence in Television Programming, that resulted in establishing deadlines for launching a V-chip-based classification system and ensuring that foreign signals offered by Canadian distributors were encoded with a classification system.
In spring 1997, the industry group AGVOT launched a classification system, using on-screen, age-related icons similar to those employed in the U.S. In March 2000, broadcasters began to encode Canadian programs so that the classification system could be used in conjunction with V-chip technology. At the same time, private broadcasters and cable companies launched a Web site to provide information on the classification system, the V-chip and other related matters.
These initiatives - the V-chip, a classification system, industry codes and a public education initiative - remain in place today. All programs (excluding sports, news, talk shows and music videos) display an age-appropriate rating. Most Canadian-bought TVs are equipped with a V-chip (though less than 10 per cent of households use it). The CBSC reviews and adjudicates complaints from the public and adherence to the voluntary industry codes remains a condition of CRTC licensing.
The Rating of Films and Videos in Canada
In Canada, film and video classification is a provincial matter. The classification boards were established in the early 1900s as tools for film censorship but the responsibility has shifted over the years from censoring films to rating them.
Most boards still retain the ability to censor and ban movies through their theatre legislation; few exercise this power except in the case of adult sex videos and even these cases are rare. Films coming from the U.S. have generally been self-censored already by producers to avoid the MPAA N-17 rating (a rating that prevents anyone under 17 being admitted without an adult).
When a film is released on video, it is rated by the national Canadian Rating System for Home Videos. Ratings are produced by averaging the film classifications assigned by the seven provincial boards. All provinces, except Quebec, now require the Canadian Home Video ratings stickers to be displayed on rental video jackets. The system is voluntary, but video stores are encouraged to display posters explaining the classifications to customers.
Though video rental stores are not supposed to rent adult videos to children, there is no legislation to prevent them from doing so.
The Future
The entertainment communications environment has changed considerably since the establishment of codes, ratings and filtering devices to protect children from unnecessary and excessive violence on television. The Internet and video games are competing seriously with TV for young people's leisure time, and violence in these media has grown unchecked. Music videos continue to "push the envelope" on a number of issues and, with more theatrical movies on TV, the amount of violence after 9:00 p.m. has grown. Large multi-theatre entertainment complexes make it easy for children and young teens to sneak into R-rated films and many stores are lax about renting videos and videogames with adult ratings to under-aged clients.
The convergence of media platforms and the availability of wireless (and hand-held) communications technologies are challenging former protection strategies such as "watershed hours" and "putting the TV in a well-trafficked area of the home." Furthermore, the CRTC, in its 1999 Report on New Media, announced that it would not regulate new media activities on the Internet (including Web sites, video games and online radio and television programming) under the Broadcasting Act.
It seems clear that in a globalized, increasingly unregulated world, the protection of children is going to rely increasingly on the vigilance of media-aware parents, public pressure from consumers and professional groups, and the responsiveness of a responsible media sector.
For a detailed chronology of the milestones that comprised Canada's response to television violence, as well as related studies and reports, see the Media Violence Chronology in the sidebar.
