2

2f

1

1

Violence and sex in the media: Where do we draw the line?

WARNING: May include images disturbing to some audiences.

            In contemporary times, violence and sex has made its way into the media in vast abundance. For an adult, it may seem as though sexy and violent themes in movies and television is simply entertaining, but the repetition of these sexy and violent themes is having a negative impact on children. It is fair to say that media should not be censored, but are we letting our children be negatively impacted by violence and sex in the media?

            During the times of early film, sex and violence was not allowed on the screen because of the Hollywood production code. Sex and violence were simply implied and graphic detail and images were omitted from the screen. In recent times, we have allowed much more sex and violence in the media and on screen in explicit detail. Child psychologist Dr. Debra Kowalski, explains, "With children having so much exposure to the media, the messages that come across are very important and they shape how a child sees the world and what a child sees as important. A lot of the messages related to violence and sexuality can negatively impact a child." There are also current studies being conducted by Michael Suman, coordinator of The Center for Communications Policy at the University of California at Los Angeles. He has done a three year analysis of the effects of violence and sex in the media, on children. He has concluded that Violence depicted repetitiously in the media has three types of negative effects on children. It increases violence because children see people behave violently, and children often imitate what they are seeing on a regular basis. It desensitizes children because they see heinous things in the media, and they become used to passively accepting offensive and crazy behaviors. And the last idea is that it causes children to become fearful because they get the false notion that violence is always happening, and danger is always in inch away. The overabundance of violence and sex is misleading to children, and they start to believe that it is overabundant in the real world as well.

            In the movie Hostel II (2005) three American students who are on a trip, are lured into a European hostel, where they are sold to the highest bidder who's fondest wish is to kill them slowly, in any way they like. The movie depicts violence, sex, sadism, and torture in graphic and bloody detail. This movie is rated R, and a child who is under 17 can see this movie as long as a parent or guardian permits. A problem here is that parents no longer have as much control over what their child is doing, or watching on television. Recently, I saw the movie Hostel was available on On Demand. On Demand is a program for people who have Comcast, and basically, you can watch the content on demand by simply clicking an OK button. If a child wanted to see this movie without their parent or guardian, it would be very easy for them to do so. On television, there is a program called “The First 48”, and it airs on A&E. This show is a real life account of gruesome murders, and details about the violent and vicious acts are elaborate, and disturbing images are inevitable. This show has a disclaimer at the beginning of the episode, warning of the material, but anyone can view this channel and this show. On MTV, there is an extremely popular show entitled “The Jersey Shore”. On this show a group of roommates typically drink a large amount of alcohol, go out to a club, and “smoosh” attractive people they meet along the way. In this show, sex is a common theme, and it seems as though the roommates are usually involved with new sexual encounters every night. MTV is available for anyone who has cable, including children. Sometimes, parents may not be able to monitor what their children watch on TV because they may be at work while their child is at home, or the child may have their own personal TV.

            The uprising of sex and violence in the media is a danger to our children because children are still forming their concept of reality. As children see an overrepresentation of sex and violence, it becomes commonplace in their schema of reality. So where do we draw the line? I don’t think the media should censor itself; instead we should police the little ones, and maybe try our best to change some of our own personal media patterns at home.          

Beresin, E. V.. "The Impact of Media Violence on Children and Adolescents: Opportunities for Clinical Interventions." American academy of child & adolescent psychiatry. American Academy of Child Adolescent Psychiatry., 2010. Web. 20 Feb 2012. http://www.aacap.org/cs/root/developmentor/the_impact_of_media_violence_on_children_and_adolescents_opportunities_for_clinical_interventions.

Fragmented Quotes, . "TV and Film Violence." www.cybercollege.com. Cyber College, 2011. Web. 20 Feb 2012. http://www.cybercollege.com/violence.htm.

"Key Facts: TV Violence." . The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, 2003. Web. 20 Feb 2012. <http://www.kff.org/entmedia/upload/Key-Facts-TV-Violence.pdf>.

HPC vs Contemporary rating system

            The enforcement of the Hollywood production code was an unfair way to censor movies and movie makers. In some ways, the Hollywood production code was an obstruction of the first amendment rights of movie makers. The Motion Picture Production Code was the set of industry moral censorship guidelines that governed the production of the majority of  motion pictures released by major studios in the United States from 1930 to 1968. The Production Code explained what was acceptable and what was unacceptable to put in movies. The Contemporary rating system is much fairer that the Hollywood production code because it gives the viewer a chance to make the decision for themselves, and it allows movie makers to exercise their first amendment rights.

            In 1934 the HPC was officially enforced, and in the code contained unfair rules that censored filmmakers, and obstructed their first amendment rights. Some rules of the HPC were even violations of our civil rights. For example, one rule of the HPC is that motion pictures can’t depict relationships between people of different races or between people of the same sex. I think it is fair to say that these rules discriminated against people of different races, and homosexuals. Films were only allowed to show heterosexual same race couples, and the exclusion of these people sent the message to the American movie viewers that these relationships don’t really exist, and if they do, then they are somehow wrong or unacceptable. Homosexual imagery was rarely acknowledged in early American cinema, but when it was acknowledged, homosexuals and gender benders were suggested as being villainous, murderous and psychotic. In fact, in classical Hollywood horror films, the villain is usually most frightening because they are non white, non straight, and non male dominant. For example, the movie Dracula (1931) depicted vampires who preyed on men and women, and their attacks are usually in the form of seduction or rape. Homosexuality was also suggested to be a sickness in early film and media. For example, in the play “Tea and Sympathy” the male character struggles with repressed homosexual feelings. The play concludes with the heterosexual myth that a great woman can fix a gay man with her charms.

            The contemporary rating system is not flawless, but it is fairer because it allows the filmmaker to express his opinions and beliefs, even if it may be different from the norms of society. Consider the movie Jungle Fever (1991). The movie depicts a black man who has a sexual love affair with an Italian woman. Although each family disagrees with the interracial relationship, true love could not keep the two lovers away from each other. Under the HPC, this movie would not have been allowed, but in today’s society, the movie received a rating of R, which means that “Under 17 Requires Accompanying Parent or Adult Guardian. These films may contain mild or implied sex scenes, prolonged nudity, strong violence often with blood and gore, strong horror scenes and explicit/illegal/prolonged drug use. A movie rated R for profanity often has more severe or frequent swearing than the PG-13 rating would permit. An R-rated movie may have more blood, gore, drug use, nudity, or graphic sexuality than a PG-13 movie would permit. Some R-rated films have an "unrated" DVD release with scenes of violence, sexual material, or profanity that have been edited from the original cut.” The contemporary rating system does not ban movies, but it warns the viewers of the reasons why a specific film has been rated in a specific way, and it gives the movie goer the chance to decide for themself. The filmmakers still have the right to express their views and opinions in the contemporary rating system without their movies being banned, even if they are radical, extreme, and offensive. The first amendment should protect our rights to freedom of speech, even if it is different from the social normality.

 "The Big Screen Cinema Guide." Mpaa ratings information. MPAA, 1995. Web. 19 Feb 2012. http://www.bigscreen.com/MPAA_RatingsInfo.php.

Hayes, David P.. "The Motion Picture Production Code." The Motion Picture Production Code. N.p., 2009. Web. 19 Feb 2012. <http://productioncode.dhwritings.com/multipleframes_productioncode.php>.

           

The red scare in Hollywood 1950, and American Muslims post 9/11

The red scare in Hollywood 1950, and American Muslims post 9/11

In the time of the cold war, there was an immense fear of communism in the United States. There was political and military tension between the western world, and the communist world. Each side possessed nuclear power, and everyone was held in suspension waiting for a war to erupt, although it never did. During this time, there was a witch hunt in the United States, and more specifically in the entertainment industry. Hollywood directors, screenwriters, and actors were accused of being communist and infiltrating propaganda into their films, and were blacklisted from working in Hollywood. This seems to parallel the experiences of the American Muslims after the terrorist attacks of 9/11. After the attacks, there was an unjustified fear of American Muslims and people of Middle Eastern ethnicities in general. The government even created new laws enabling them to tap phones, and spy on suspects, without direct evidence or proof or wrongdoing, without search warrants. In doing so, the government illegally persecuted innocent suspects, just as the Hollywood ten were illegally jailed.

The Hollywood ten is a specific example of how the government illegally jailed innocent people because of fear and speculation of communism rising in America. Artists were blacklisted from work because of their alleged membership in the American Communist Party, involvement in liberal or humanitarian political causes that enforcers of the blacklist associated with communism, and refusal to assist investigations into Communist Party activities, and some were blacklisted because their names were mentioned by those on trial. Suspected communists working in the film industry were forced to appear before the House of un American Activities Committee to testify about Communism and if they were associated with it. While some answered the questions and some gave names implicating others as being involved in Communism, ten refused to give evidence or specify their political affiliations. Citing their First Amendment rights, their defense failed and the Hollywood Ten were convicted and ordered to serve 1-year in prison, although it has never been illegal to be a communist.

 American Muslims and others of Middle Eastern Ethnicity in post 9/11 were subjected to the same treatments because of fear and speculation of terrorism. The emergence of hate crimes directed towards people of Middle Eastern decent was absolutely unbelievable. Fear and speculation even gave rise to the Patriot Act, which has been widely criticized as being unconstitutional, just like the HUAC hearings in 1950. The Patriot act gives the government powers to get phone, banking and other records by the power of a national security letter, which does not require a court warrant. In the national security letter, the FBI says in writing that the information is relevant to an ongoing terrorism or national security investigation, yet the government doesn’t need to show any proof or basis for their illegal search and seizure. Because of the nature of the patriot act, it unfairly targets minorities, and people of Middle Eastern decent. Following September 11th, many Arabs, South Asians and Muslims along with Americans of Arab decent reported being questioned by the FBI and other law enforcement agencies. There were also reports of the FBI conducting surveillance on mosques and Islamic centers. Reasons for this increase in surveillance varied from protecting America from future attacks, to ensuring the safety of Muslims from becoming victims of hate crime, it seems as though these minorities are being unfairly targeted.

There are many examples of the government doing illegal things. The Hollywood Ten and people of Middle Eastern decent have been targeted because of fears from the government, and fears from the people.

Art is poisonous

Art is Poisonous

Andres Serrano's "Pieta II"

            Artists struggle with their artwork being censored, and artists even modify their final piece of work to be deemed acceptable by certain committees. Artists are censored for many different reasons like promoting un-American acts, using vulgar words, or sexual deviancy. There have been many accusations against art and media for creating adverse effects on society, and this holds some truth. For example, musicians like Marylin Manson have been accused of inspiring horrible acts of violence with their violent and sadistic lyrics, like the Columbine high school shooting. Although the people who carried out this violence listened to Marylin Manson and possibly found inspiration from his lyrics, the media is not to blame for heinous acts in society. Art and media should not be censored or blamed for acts of consumers.

            In 1993, an artist Andres Serrano created a piece of art that shows a plastic figurine of Michelangelo's statue of the Madonna and Jesus submerged in cow's urine and blood. Students from the University of Alabama and county officials wanted the return of the photograph, which had been purchased by the university arts department, because they considered the work offensive and blasphemous. Before exhibiting the work, gallery officials were receiving letters of protest from students and government officials. The University President Charles McCallum said that although he found the photograph offensive, he supported, "free and open discussion of such matters as the nature of art, freedom of speech, and the role of religious beliefs in the academic environment. The students and officials attempted to have this piece of art censored because they were offended by the blasphemous act. It would have been unfair to censor this artwork because in doing so, the artists’ rights would have been violated. There are no limitations, or details in small print in regards to freedom of speech, and so art should never be censored.

            Let’s consider another example. If the art has violent undertones and suggested violent acts, should we blame the artists for the acts of the consumer, and thus censor their art? In 1984, a young American shot himself in the head while listening to the song “Suicide Solution” written by Ozzy Osbourne, and performed by Black Sabbath. Ozzy claimed his song was about slowly killing himself with alcohol, and dedicated the song to his late friend. The parents of this teen then sued Ozzy, claiming that his song contained subliminal messages telling listeners to get a gun and shoot, and the pounding rhythm and tones encouraged self destructive behavior. The young teen was already suffering with depression and emotional instability. Art can be interpreted and taken differently depending on the consumer, and the artist should not be blamed for the individual differences, or previous mental conditions of the consumer. The courts dismissed the case, since the first amendment was an absolute bar to the lawsuit.

            Music has taken a great amount of heat for creating adverse effects on society. Major music stations on TV like MTV and BET are being accused of subjecting their young audiences to profanities, and sexually explicit content in their music videos. These videos may include vulgar, profane and sexually explicit lyrics, with soft core porn to go along with the lyrics. Women leave little to the imagination, dancing and catering to men with loads of cash and nice cars in some of these videos. The critics of the major stations like MTV and BET are claiming that these videos are influencing young boys to treat women with disrespect, and young women are being taught to objectify themselves, and tolerate the disrespect. Music videos should not be censored from MTV or BET because these videos are art and expression, and not reality. If the viewer doesn’t understand this, then their parents and guardians should not be letting them view this material. These channels are directed at young viewers, but ultimately the parents should be deciding if their child is mature enough to separate entertainment from reality.

            The television show “Jackass” on MTV gives a disclaimer at the beginning of their television show, warning viewers that the stunts on the show are stunts performed by professionals and could result in serious injury if done by a viewer, and that the show is for entertainment purposes. Although rap music videos don’t have this disclaimer at the beginning of their videos, I think the youth will understand the divide between entertainment and real life if they have people to teach them this before they begin watching adult material.

Watch and make your judgment!

WARNING! Explicit lyrics

Suicide Solution performed by Black Sabbath

WARNING! Explicit rap video

Rack City by Tyga

Hollywood classical style reinforces the status quo

America was founded on the main idea of white patriarchal capitalism. It is the way most Americans think about themselves and the world around them. White patriarchal capitalism has a few specific aspects. White refers to the idea that people of European decent are superior to people from other parts of the world. Patriarchal refers to a culture that regards the men as the most important members of society, and are entitles to better opportunities. This also reinforces the gender role of women being the ones at home taking care of the children, while the husband is out making the money. Capitalism is the idea that success and worth are measured by ones material wealth (Benshoff and Griffin 20-27). We know how prominent capitalism is in our society because everyone has their American dream. The typical American dream includes a big house, nice cars, and other material items indicating financial success.

Most Hollywood films depict the central idea as being white patriarchal capitalism. The protagonist is usually a straight white male searching for power or wealth. By the end of the film, he is victorious conquering all those around him, making him the superior being. The love interest for the protagonist is usually white, and is defined by her physical beauty. For example, in the Indiana Jones movies, the white male hero saves his white love interest from Asian gang members, while still managing to save a village of children. Focusing on the white male as the main character in most Hollywood movies reaffirms the status quo of white male superiority because it seems as though only white males can gain wealth and save the day. Gender roles of women are reinforced too because in most movies, we see the female as being a side character to her man. She is usually not seen for her work or intelligence, but rather as a sexual object of desire.

Another recent example of white patriarchal capitalism is the film Drive (2011). The white male hero attempts to save the day for his white love interest. While seeking wealth in exchange for his driving talents, the main character gets involved unknowingly in shady business. The villains in this movie are Hispanic, or Italian mobsters, and the main goal is to kill the main character. While dodging bullets, the main character manages to protect his love interest and her child, as she hides helplessly in her apartment. In the end of the movie the male hero is battled and broken, but he is still victorious and rises above all of his enemies.

Hollywood movies reinforce our American status quo because every single time we watch a Hollywood movie, white patriarchal capitalism is what we see, and this permeates our implicit and explicit attitudes. We learn things that are repeated and reinforced to us, and white patriarchal capitalism is reinforced in almost every popular movie.

Benshoff, Hary and Griffin, Sean. America on film representing race, class, gender, and sexuality at the movies. 2nd. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2009. 20-27. Print.

Blackfaced

Can “Blackface” ever be appropriate?

 

Blackface is a style of entertainment that is based on stereotypes about black people. Blackface continues to be a success even today, and every culture has been a victim. Blackface originated during the minstrel period, and was based on the white men’s characterizations of slaves and free black people. Audiences even expected black people to fit into the typical stereotypes that were portrayed by people in blackface. Many cultures have been characterized, but for some reason many of the black stereotypes still stick around in our society. If blackface can lead people to really believe in stereotypes, can blackface ever be appropriate?

There is heavy use of blackface in the media even in today’s society. In many cases blackface can be very funny, but it all depends on context, execution, and intent. In an episode of “The Mighty Boosh” the spirit of jazz is waken from the dead as one of the main characters plays the trumpet. The spirit of jazz is in blackface, and displays every known stereotype about black jazz musicians from the south. This episode was using the stereotype about black people and jazz, to be funny and ironic. Some people may regard this as being racist, but blackface can be an appropriate form of entertainment.

In a world that is being consumed by the media, it is becoming harder and harder to separate ourselves from what we see in the media. I think that the perception of blackface depends on our ability to separate entertainment and art, from our judgment of the world. The Sarah Silverman Program is a comedy on television, and there is always a risky subject being covered. In an episode of The Sarah Silverman Program, Sarah was in blackface. She believed that it was easier to be a black person than a Jewish person, and because she knows what it is like to be Jewish, she put on blackface makeup, thinking it would make her look like an actual black person and thinking other people would treat her like a black person. This episode is meant explore honest ideas and thoughts and stereotypes about race to be ironic and funny. The writers even made their message very clear because they knew people would only see the shocking blackface instead of the show as a whole with purpose. At the near end of the program, Sarah and her other supporters all in blackface say,

"What do we want?"

"The freedom to explore issues of race in American culture through the use of postmodern irony!"

The Movie "White Chicks" is different because two black males dress up in whiteface as white females. In this movie, two black male cops trade lives with two white, rich, twenty year old females. While conducting their investigation, they paint themselves to look white, dress in women’s clothing and imitate white valley girl stereotypes.  This movie pokes fun with stereotypes about all different types of people, and I think the movie strives to show how inaccurate and nonsensical stereotypes can be. For example, one of the characters fills the stereotype of being the black male who is infatuated with white females. This character then falls in love with one of the male cops, who is at the time dressed up as a white woman. This is funny and ironic because the stereotypical black man who loves white women, falls in love with a black man dressed as a white woman.

Race is a very slippery slope in our society today, and even exploring the issues may be offensive to some people. It all depends on the maturity of the viewer. Growing up, my parents really wanted me to understand that stereotypes and judgments based on them have no validity. As an adult, I have enough understanding of the media and the real world and I understand that what I see in the media isn’t always relevant to real life.

The Mighty Boosh

          

Sarah Silverman's Twitter

Feilding, Noel, perf. The Mighty Boosh. Perf. Julian Barratt, Dir. , and . Film. http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=5&ved=0CEUQtwIwBA&url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pNuUNHlsPgI&ei=82IeT-SIOcjZiAKLmPzBCw&usg=AFQjCNHrpc2tfQYbVApW8BURJNkfZ0sc-A.

Padget, Ken. "Blackface!." Blackface!. N.p., n.d. Web. 22 Jan 2012. http://black-face.com/.