Letter: Television violence and rising crime
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: In view of recent tragic events involving children, it is perhaps worth remarking that none of the considerations mentioned by Heather Mills ('Link between crime and TV 'not proven' ', 9 March) remotely justifies either the general tenor of her report, or the stated findings of Guy
Cumberbatch, or the bizarre opinion of 'a media expert' that 'it comes down to a battle of prejudices . . . about who or what relevant to the question of a causal link.
2. Even if, and granting the same assumptions as before, the volume of violence has declined while the crime rate has increased, this does nothing to disprove the view that the violence that is shown - along, say, with increasing access to video violence - is a significant causal factor.
3. The allegedly mitigating consideration that most portrayals of violence are accompanied by the 'firm moral message' that violence is wrong appears, inconsistently, to concede that firm moral messages exert influence where portrayals of violence do not.
4. Certain results of a study are said to suggest that those who watch a lot of television violence are less aggressive than those who watch less. However, this assumes, quite unjustifiably, that if exposure to television violence is linked to crime, then greater exposure automatically means more crime. But there are all sorts of reasons why this may not follow. All the point shows is that if a link is conceded, it would not be an adequate remedy simply to show less violence.
So, where exactly is the evidence to suggest that the link between crime and TV is not at least a reasonable conjecture?
Yours sincerely,
ALAN HOLLAND
Lancaster
11 March
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments