Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Don't Blame Pop Culture For Teen Misbehavior

By Karen Sternheimer, AlterNet. Posted December 27, 2008.


Poverty and family abuse -- not TV or the Internet -- are the causes of teen violence, drug and alcohol abuse, and unplanned pregnancy.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

A barrage of studies now proclaims that a single source causes nearly all bad behaviors among young people: "the media." Researchers announce that teenagers' smoking, drinking, pregnancy, obesity, poor academic achievement, violence, and other troubles overwhelmingly derive from television, movies, video games, music, and internet use.

Studies announcing that new forms of media damage kids now claim previously feared influences are unimportant. A 2008 study declaring violent Internet sites the most important media factor promoting teen violence concluded that television, music, movies, and video games really aren't big deals. A new report branding sexy TV shows a major cause of teenage pregnancy also finds, contrary to previous beliefs, that viewing other TV shows predicts less pregnancy.

Old notions that cigarette ads incite teen smoking have yielded to newer studies blaming television viewing, or simply having a TV in the bedroom. Now, the latest study fingers smoking in movies as the pivotal instigator of teen smoking, downplaying television and other previously suspected influences.

Researchers disagree about what forms of media most corrupt youth, but they agree that "media are increasingly pervasive in the lives of children and adolescents" and "newer forms of media seem to be especially concerning." Indeed, just 15 years ago, the types of media researchers now find so devastating didn't exist or were less graphic. Explicit rap music, ultra-violent first-person video games, Internet sites, increased smoking in movies, sexual explicitness in prime time, advertisements employing sophisticated suggestion, and brutally realistic movie mayhem intensified in the last decade and a half.

And this leads to a bizarre contradiction: The more objectionable media available to youth, the bigger the declines in their rates of violence, pregnancy, and other risky behaviors.

The FBI reports that from 1990 through 2007, rates of serious violent and property crime among youths under age 18 plunged by 49%, including unprecedented declines in murder (down 66%), rape (down 52%), robbery (down 32%), and serious assault (down 28%). The National Crime Victimization Survey finds even larger declines in teens' violent victimizations. The Centers for Disease Control reports massive declines in teenagers' rates of giving birth (down 30% since 1990), pregnancies (down 40%), gun deaths (down 55%), suicide (down 30%), and violent deaths (down 37%). Large-scale surveys such as Monitoring the Future and The American Freshman find students today reporting higher levels of happiness, optimism, leadership interest, and volunteerism and lower rates of smoking, drinking, depression, dropout, and materialism. Youngest teens show the biggest improvements.

How do we reconcile surveys claiming young people increasingly suffer from media-inflicted damage with solid statistics showing massive improvements in young people's real-life attitudes and behaviors? Decades of research warn that surveys and experiments are easily biased tools vulnerable to unreliable results. Subjects can be powerfully influenced to confirm the researchers' beliefs even when researchers conduct studies ethically. That's why researchers usually produce results consistent with what they and their funders already believe. In a notable example, respected media-violence scientists claimed Sesame Street and Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood provoked aggressive behaviors in children.


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: media, drugs, internet, teens, tv, alcohol, video games

Karen Sternheimer, Ph.D., is a sociologist at the University of Southern California and author of Kids These Days: Facts and Fictions about Today's Youth (Rowman & Littlefield, 2006) and It's Not the Media: The Truth about Pop Culture's Influence on Children (Westview Press, 2003). She blogs at www.everydaysociologyblog.com.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Media and Technology! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Marketing is a much bigger problem
Posted by: Sunnydayz on Dec 27, 2008 3:42 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have found that its not the programs, the songs or the games, its the deliberate marketing campaigns that are fairly effective at influencing culture.

I also would agree that we should be careful to make sure that our perceptions are correct. Its easy to think many social ills are more prevelent while they may actually be improving and declining in the statistics. Talking about things and having them reported on MORE doesnt mean they are happening MORE.

But when it comes to watching the media for its contribution to the negative issues, I would address the marketing aspects of media more than the shows, songs or games.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» marketers are not the worst... Posted by: wolfgangmo
Blaming the Victim Protects the System
Posted by: susan rosenthal1 on Dec 27, 2008 4:30 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In the 1970s, William Ryan wrote Blaming the Victim, and your research reveals how much his argument remains relevant.

As you point out, blaming the victim obscures the systemic sources of human misery.

Obama's election has raised huge hopes for change. Those hopes will be dashed.

To turn things around we must organize a REAL alternative to the heartless capitalist system.

POWER and Powerlessness

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Our Female population needs to demostarte the moral strength for the weaker man.
Posted by: larazzafilms on Dec 27, 2008 4:40 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think that this needs to be said putting aside all the machismoness, I truly believe that our female gender has played into the stupidity of weak men. Men thinking with their dicks instead of their true representation of man hood had sacrifice obsession for patients. Meanwhile, our female counterparts have taken the bait and caved in to the stupidity based upon the approval of the lost man??? The man can only be as strong as his partner relates to him. MTV, Glamor, Sex in the city etc etc. have placed this bait and switch concept on society, which has over lost the diluted message into translation-definitely by those weaker members of moral society. Television does pray on marketing and ALL of its producers need to be held accountable and take responsibility for selling their souls for profits. The damage has been done and society's moral standards continue to nose dive. This can not be a blame game, it does start within the home front but shame on those hypercritical entrainment companies who are exploiting the misfortunes of those failed parents. Which many are preoccupied with placing food on the table by a system of urgency. The whole system is fucked up period! Watch the "The Corporation" and you will see a clearer projection of the twisted lies and how "greed" is the altimate covert motive. So with a true summery,parents please take the time to communicate with your children. Programming Producers/responsible media, help support those working parents and not add salt to the wounds. Our Government needs to forget about the interests of Corporations and begin placing more interests on society and its behavior. If we don't, God will.. and there is no denying it! History clearly defines this and it's better to learn this now -then on our childrens death beds.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Since Plato was a pup
Posted by: goodsensecynic on Dec 27, 2008 6:16 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
'twas ever thus.

Plato wanted to ban poetry and lutes and flutes from the streets of Athens lest the youth be corrupted. Rousseau went on at length about the evils of the theatre. White folks imagined that Dixieland, Jazz and the early Elvis would corrupt their daughters (their sons being given a "pass" according to the demented doctrine that "boys will be boys"). In turn, Frank Sinatra, the Beatles and every subsequent pop music and "lifestyle" fad have rendered bewildered parents apoplectic.

The result? Nothing much that is really new. Young people have divided themselves into fairly predictable segments. Some are idealistic visionaries, some are relentless self-promoters, some are psychopaths and sociopaths. The majority, however, are relatively benign conformists and/or harmless dolts, who see (and are encouraged to see) not much past the tips of their noses. They have enough to do just negotiating the dangerous path to what passes for adulthood (and, in some cases, maturity).

Their taste (or lack thereof) in clothing, music, literature (if any), "lifestyle issues," and "role models" varies from generation to generation (or from week to week), and a substantial proportion of their parents will twit them no matter what - failing to understand that they (the parents, that is) live according to the unstated principle: "they older we get the better we were."

And amid all the acrimonious argumentation and bombastic bloviation concerning symbolic individual reactions to extant social circumstances, only a few people (young or old), will comprehend that it is material circumstances (economic, political, structural, institutional, ecological, international, etc.) that shape the beliefs and behavior, the attitudes and actions of us all.

The promise and perils of the present and of the future depend on shifting attention from personalities and individual "character" traits to fundamental social conditions and relationships. The patterns of the former will reproduce themselves across boundaries of time, space and culture, but the possibilities for either a tonic or a toxic polity are collective and communal.

We make our own history, but it is easier to make it well if we concentrate on diminishing poverty, ignorance and illness, and increasing respect and generosity through cooperation (not competition), reason (not mythology), reciprocity (not selfishness), humility (not arrogance) and so on.

How are these larger changes to come about? Not through personal faith, individual will or some 21st-century variation on the theme of "moral rearmament," but through practical efforts to improve human rights, health care, education, economic equity, environmental protection and to inject a modicum of wisdom in both foreign and domestic policy choices (perhaps by relying more on negotiation than upon violence -- whether external militarism or a burgeoning police state).

These and similar measures to improve the quality of life (for ourselves and others) will do more good than sanctimonious screeds puffing up our own self-images and demonizing those of whom we disapprove. "Yes we can!" ... but only if we attend to the material cicumstances that profoundly influence our "consciousness" and enlarge the opportunities to let loose our "better angels" (as adherents to the Abrahamic religions might say).

The potential for enlightened change is available, but we need to make it real. If we do, people will probably be able to take care of themselves.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Maybe media is a symptom, not cause
Posted by: nfamous on Dec 27, 2008 8:58 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Kids are probably more apt to consume more media when their home and family lives are unstable. My parents used to force me to turn off the tv or to stop playing video games for better or worse and come and eat dinner with the rest of the family. Later on my mom got lax and start letting us do whatever we wanted. The problem for all humans is lack of meaningful connection to other humans. However that is manifest we will see problems because it is essential to the human condition. It is not necessarily about being loved as much as it is about being involved and feeling like you matter to someone or something. The media doesn't help in those cases because you cannot interact with humans while interacting with media most of the time except for social sites like Facebook and online gaming but that is not the same as face to face contact. Technological substitutes for real human contact will continue their onslaught to our senses and sensibilities as we enter the age of globalism. The breakdown of the family is the root cause and the media isn't helping.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The problem with our young people and their bad behavior...
Posted by: bikerheart on Dec 27, 2008 9:12 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is my serious belief that the empathetic parent who thinks corporal punishment never necessary along with the parents who think children outgrow bad behavior not only lead to bad behavior as an adult but to the decline in the overall intelligence used by our young people.

Our children need to know limitations, rules, manners and expected behavior from the time they are beginning to learn. In infancy they need to know we are there for them but certain behaviors will not be tolerated. We can achieve this without striking a child at this stage. RESPECT for ALL adults is a must. This doesn't mean that they blindly listen to all demands made of them but it does mean that they will not be rude and they will hold the door and let their elders go first.
I have too often seen a parent NOT correct a child that rudely pushes past a doddering elderly person, nearly knocking them down, and the parent does not make the child return and apologize or offer assistance. In fact I have seen a parent become indignant if the older person says anything. At this point the parent as well as the child need punished.

Too many of our children do poorly in school because the parent sides with the child. It sends a bad message to the child and from that point on instead of striving to be their best and do their best they strive for excuses to a declining behavior. If the parent disagrees they should do it discreetly so that the child does not know that the parent does not agree with the teacher.

Too many parents want their kids to have everything and will sacrifice their own needs for things that are NOT necessary for the growth of a decent human being....then wonder why the child thinks after they are grown they can continue to expect hand outs. A child respects far more what they have earned than what they are handed because it makes mom or dad feel good inside.

The failure of our country as a whole to be able to produce enough doctors, scientist and other occupations that we need to get ahead is because we do not let our kids know we will accept nothing less than the best they can do and will not tolerate indulgences that are not earned.

Too many are failing as parents and it is refecting in our society as a whole.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The more things change...
Posted by: movieluddite on Dec 27, 2008 9:16 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Babylonian parents probably blamed cuneiform for their kids' misbehavior.

Some things never change.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If you're a well behaved kid, people persecute you and call you "abnormal".
Posted by: maxpayne on Dec 27, 2008 1:37 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
For not dating, not being a macho egotistical type of male, and for being well behaved in general, I was picked on but put up with it. I can't imagine most kids would be so tolerant. Society is too intolerant of well behaved kids.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

People belive what they want to believe
Posted by: eric hoffer on Dec 27, 2008 1:45 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Alright, another article about media influence. Does anyone else see the contradictions here?

I'll bet the same people who agree with this article that teens aren't influenced by media would write in the next article that voters are negatively swayed by mainstream news. Or they would say that "consumerism" or "hedonistic America" is corrupting the noble savage of the developing world.

And what about the classist notion that the poor do more drugs etc.? Ever been to an ivy league halloween party?

Naturally people are influenced by what they see around them and what they see as norms in society. We are social animals and we imitate to fit in. Does anyone really believe that ten year old girls just wake up one day convinced that they should be wearing a thong or that teenage boys come up with fauxhawks, distressed jeans and a slouch by chance? Well it's the same for drugs and violence. It depends on our particular culture and to a lesser extent what the media sells to us as culture.

The parents back in the day who said that Elvis was corrupting their kids were correct for the same reasons they would be today if they said Bratz were turning their girls into porn stars.

Are parents to blame for not isolating their kids? Ask 50cent. Kids do what other kids are doing and the kids do what the media tells them is cool for their culture. You try and stop them and the pull becomes even stronger. It's a catch 22. Parents can only control what's at home and even that's up for debate.

So am I saying people are like dogs in a mongrel pack? Imitating the alphas in order to share in the kill? To put it simply, yes. That's why we have laws, written or unwritten to govern our behavior.

And by the way, teen brains are not fully developed. Their opinions should not be given the same weight as adults. They are compulsive, ignorant, easily manipulated and profoundly inexperienced. I haven't forgotten what it was like, have you?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

IN THEIR LITTLE FACES
Posted by: VZEQICVA on Dec 27, 2008 3:07 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Children were not always little consumers and programmed to follow. There's very little encouragement for individual thinking and ideas, instead it's follow the crowd. Tiny babies are immediately exposed to advertising instead of teddy bears and baby things. They recognize a brand name before they remember their relatives. Something is always in their faces. They don't know any other way but to follow the media and tons of advertising. They are forced to watch stuff whether of not they have an interest. They never learn how to form an original thought because they never get the chance. Which also explains why the parents are the way they are. There's never a quiet moment or a time when stuff around them isn't moving. There's just so much stimulation a brain can take and kids and grownups get a little crazy. Thanks, ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Strawman Arguments
Posted by: TerryS on Dec 27, 2008 11:32 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Karen Sternheimer wrote:

"A barrage of studies now proclaims that a single
source causes nearly all bad behaviors among young
people: "the media." Researchers announce that teenagers'
smoking, drinking, pregnancy, obesity, poor academic
achievement, violence, and other troubles overwhelmingly
derive from television, movies, video games, music,
and internet use."

way to win an argument, just completely lie
about your opponent's position! (Notice the lack
or quotes and/or links.)

Scientists are arguing that the media a contributing
factor, *not* the only cause of bad behavior.

Sternheimer wrote:

"The FBI reports that from 1990 through 2007,
rates of serious violent and property crime
among youths under age 18 plunged by 49%,
including unprecedented declines in murder
(down 66%), rape (down 52%), robbery (down 32%),
and serious assault (down 28%)."

From the Bureau of Justice Statistics:

"Offending rates for teens (14-17 years old) and
young adults (18-24 years old) increased dramatically
in the late 1980's while rates for older age groups
declined."

link

"Homicide rates recently declined to levels
last seen in the late 1960's" - 2005

link


"The number of offenders under age 18 admitted
to State prison has more than doubled from 3,400
in 1985 to 7,400 in 1997"

link


More statistics:

"...the homicide rate nearly doubled from the mid
1960's to the late 1970's (see graphs). In reaction
to this huge crime increase, the public supported
policies that have led to a 335% increase in the
incarceration rate (pdf). This has brought the
crime back down to the early 1960s levels, but the
United States now has the highest incarceration rate
in the entire world (pdf)."

link


Again, the media is *not* the only reason for bad
behavior. In the case of violent crime, incarceration
rates are also an important factor.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Scientific Method
Posted by: TerryS on Dec 28, 2008 12:39 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Karen Sternheimer wrote:

Recently, researchers reported that most
published studies find the media are "crucial"
contributors to "negative health results for
children."

That's right, it just completely goes against
common sense that kids spending over 4 hours
per day sitting (and eating) in front of the TV
(plus the huge number of junk food advertisements)
would become overweight.

"The study, not incidentally, was funded by Common
Sense Media, a lobbying group whose mission statement
declares that "media and entertainment profoundly
impact the social, emotional, and physical development
of our nation's children." Its researchers produced
favorable results by downplaying a key fact: journal
editors and reviewers notoriously favor studies that
find significant results and rarely publish studies
that find no effects."

This argument is basically the same argument used
by the global-warming deniers. That most scientists
are closet environmentalists who let their private
prejudices cloud their judgment.

But, the scientific method isn't based on scientists
being completely free of bias, instead it is based
on:

"Scientific researchers propose hypotheses as explanations
of phenomena, and design experimental studies to test
these hypotheses. These steps must be repeatable in
order to dependably predict any future results."

linked text

For example the hypothesis that TV is a contributing
factor to the obesity epidemic, there have been
numerous studies finding a link:

linked text


""Turn off the TV," "put away the video games,"
and similar attacks on fictional entertainment
images play well on the campaign stump, but real
conditions like poverty, deficient health care,
and family instability require our undivided
attention if real change is the goal."

Barack Obama is the *only* politician I have ever
heard urge parents to "Turn off the TV and put away
the video games,". If this was such a popular
sentiment, why don't other politicians use it?
The only group of people that love the electronic
babysitter more than kids are parents, so telling
them to turn off the TV was potentially political
suicide. Obama was extremely gutsy to come out
with such a controversial statement.

linked text

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Actually, it is the media, AND poverty, AND parenting style, and...
Posted by: Elliot on Dec 28, 2008 8:32 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm not sure what media effects studies you've been reading (if you've actually read any of them), but most control for socio-economic status (i.e. poverty). Any thing you can think of, be it parenting style, poverty, or any social ill unrelated to media can be (and likely has been) controlled for in effects studies, and even after those effects have been controlled for, there are still effects of media that most of us would consider to be detrimental. This is the case not just for kids, but for adults as well.

2 things: First, we need to accept the fact that something that we take pleasure in, something that makes us feel good and endorses our progressive beliefs, MAY do us or other people harm. Sure, those who make out all television or other pleasurable media to be "bad for you" are going overboard, but don't use the old straw man argument to include the majority of social scientists that don't overstate the effects of certain kinds of media.

Which leads me to my second point: yes, the effects of media on behavior are comparatively weak next to the effects of family and socio-economic status, and yes, we should try to alter those circumstance. But what makes you think we can't do both (that is, study the effects and alter the content of media AND work towards ending poverty)?

There are two easy ways out of this: either you can complain about huge problems like poverty and how we never do enough to end it, in which case you'll always have something to bitch about, OR you can blame all media, do everything you can to censor it, and not lift a finger to end poverty. The alternative is more difficult: find out the specifics of media effects, do what you can to alter the content and viewing habits of ALL people (not just kids) to bring out a better world, not thru censorship, but thru the promotion of sound media effects research and wide publication of the results, AND by working to end poverty, gender differences, etc.

Don't take the easy way out. Give media effects research its due.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Blame Anyone But The Parents
Posted by: mikelz on Dec 28, 2008 11:20 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This makes more sense to me than anything I've read in a while.
Look, I was raised by blaming, name-calling and physically abusive drunks.
I didn't become a problem drinker or smoker because of movies with Clark Gable, Errol Flynn or Robert Taylor. I did it because it's what my parents and all my other adult relatives did.
I didn't perform erratically in school because I wanted to be like Jughead. I had so many periods of completely hating myself that I went out of my way to fail.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Where do you think Pop Culture came from?????
Posted by: jeffrey7 on Dec 28, 2008 5:02 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hippies became so because the news force fed us scenes from Haight Ashbury, Monterey Pop, the Beatles. The Media did the same with Jazz, Big Bands and Folk music, MTV created a whole mindset that left kids thinking people actually rode around in Bentley's and wore rolexes and let their pants hang off their asses to become millionaires.

No the Media created Pop Culture because that's what it's designed to do. Whp pumped up Sinatra?? The Media. Who demonized and by doing so glorified Death metal? The Media.
Who created Britanny Spears? Disney!!!

Where did the stupid spolied whore ideal come from...media. It's always been about thought control,buying control and creating a sub-culture that exemplifies exactly what's being crammed down our throats by dickholes that only want to fleece you out of your money and make 10 year old girls sing 'Hit Me baby One more time' and 10 year old boys vamping 'Cop Killer'

No it's not our kids,it's what they're exposed to that's called 'pop' that the problem. Sure some folks might not be the best parents in the world but the job comes with an instruction manual that was made by the parents we grew up with. If they had no sense of 'culture' or were abusive,that tends to be the path the children take. Sometimes our kids are smart enough to think for themselves and they don't by into the media bullshit...unlike their parents who believed Bush was a great President and Katrina is all cleaned up and Bin Ladin attacked America.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This comment has been removed from the site due to non-compliance with AlterNet's community policies.
» STOP SPAMMING Posted by: goatini
Copout Inc.
Posted by: CJJ on Jan 3, 2009 4:44 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
No one wants to admit that pop culture, and the folks who consume it and prop it up (US) have any blame.

Wimps.

WE make pop culture. That's hard to admit.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement