• by Hope Rayman Friedman , February 27, 2007

Ever wonder what a procedural crime drama might look like if it aired on a preschool network? There would be an introduction prior to the start of the episode that would inform parents of the curriculum, such as how to push someone down a ravine without falling, or how to count corpses. "One, two, three."

There's been a lot in the news lately about the increase in violent content on television. Parents Television Council, the Washington, D.C.-based lobbyist group, analyzed the data in a report that revealed "overwhelming evidence pointing to a direct and causal relationship between violent entertainment products and aggressive behavior in children."

That's a bit of a fib. Studies suggest violent TV can lead to aggressive behavior, but a causal relationship has never been proven. Scientists can't eliminate more likely determinants of violence from their studies - drug and alcohol abuse, and poverty.

I worked with violent children under the age of six when I was a mental health therapist. Mothers who smoked crack during pregnancy, and physical abuse in the home were more relevant factors than cartoon violence.

Albert Bandura's 1965 Bobo doll study is helpful in understanding the distinction between learning an aggressive action and performing it. One group saw an adult rewarded for acting aggressively toward a doll (picture a clown shaped like a large inflatable bowling pin). A second group saw the adult punished for attacking Bobo. The third group was the control group: Kids simply went into the playroom with the doll and the adult present, but there was no activity.

The kids who saw the adult punished showed significantly less aggression than the kids who hadn't watched Bobo's attack. However, when offered a reward, the kids who saw the adult punished could perform the aggressive act, which indicates that they did learn it. Bandura concluded that although kids could learn aggressive acts, reinforcement is necessary for aggression to be acted out.

Concerned parents can monitor their children's viewing habits. They can also impact their perception of televised violence by co-viewing and commenting on programs. Who says you have to watch gems like "Wife Swap" during family hour?

The issue of violence on TV could be a big political football as the 2008 presidential race heats up. Reportedly Sen. Jay Rockefeller will re-introduce a bill in Congress to extend indecency rules to cable and satellite, giving the FCC authority to regulate violence. If only something could be done about that pesky First Amendment right to free speech.

How do we define violence in entertainment? Is it something that's obscene and unacceptable to the community? If so, then the success of the "CSI" or "Law and Order" franchises indicate they're not violent shows.

Where do we draw the violence line in entertainment? Maybe there won't be a "CSI: Sesame Street" on TV anytime soon.