FEPP Archives - Issues - Violence in
Of The Court Brief In Indianapolis Video Games Censorship Case
(November 8, 2000) - Scholars and authors specializing
in the field of media and communications submitted a brief to the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit explaining that there is no scientific
or empirical justification for a censorship law that barred access by
any person under 18 to any video game that contains simulated "graphic
violence" and is considered "harmful to minors." In March
2001, the court invalidated
Ask American Academy of Pediatrics to Reconsider Misstatements About Media
(2001-02) - FEPP and a group of media scholars asked the
American Academy of Pediatrics to reconsider its November 2001 Policy
Statement on Media Violence because of its "many misstatements about
social-science research on media effects." The AAP responded, but
refused to allow its letter to be published.
In Front of the Children: "Indecency," Censorship, And The Innocence
(2001, 2nd edition 2007) - From Huckleberry Finn to Harry Potter, Internet
filters to the v-chip, censorship is often based on the assumption that
children and adolescents must be protected from "indecent" information
-- whether in art, in literature, or on a Web site. In Not In Front
of the Children, FEPP Director Marjorie Heins explores the fascinating
history of indecency laws and other censorship aimed at youth.
Psychologist Surveys the Wreckage
(June 19, 2002) - University of Toronto Professor Jonathan
Freedman's comprehensive examination of "media violence" research
is a must-read for anyone interested in whether social-science studies
have actually proved anything about the effects of entertainment. Media
Violence and Its Effect on Aggression: Assessing the Scientific Evidence.
Asks AMA To Stop Playing Politics With Media Violence
(June 2002) - At a panel on media violence in May 2001,
Dr. Edward Hill, chair-elect of the American Medical Association, said
there were "political reasons" for the AMA to sign on to an
inaccurate statement claiming scientific proof of adverse effects from
media violence. A year later, in the wake of continuing misstatements
about the social science research, FEPP asked the AMA to reconsider its
of the Court Brief by 33 Media Scholars in St. Louis Video Games Censorship
(September 25, 2002) - 33 media scholars, historians, psychologists,
and games researchers filed a brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for
the Eighth Circuit, opposing a law that bars minors from video games containing
"graphic violence." The scholars' brief explains that, contrary
to popular belief, most efforts to prove adverse effects from media violence
have yielded null results, and that "experts on childhood and adolescence
have long recognized the importance of violent fantasy play in overcoming
anxieties, processing anger, and providing outlets for aggression."
Court Strikes Down St. Louis Video Games Law
(June 3, 2003) - The decision agrees with FEPP's
brief on behalf of 33 media scholars that experimenters have not proven
violent content to have widespread adverse effects.
(November 21, 2003) - Why did two media violence researchers
back out of their scheduled appearance at the FTC?
image: war of our fathers by richard marin