Ill Effects is a radical re-examination of the whole 'media effects' debate. It questions not only whether the media is capable of directly influencing people's views and actions, but also whether the idea of 'effects' is the most useful way of conceptualising the relationship between the media and audiences. Ill Effects looks at the reasons why the media are routinely blamed for horrific events such as the murders of James Bulger and Suzanne Capper and the Hungerford massacre, as well as for perceived trends such as the alleged 'death of the family' and the rise of 'yob culture'. The authors' concern goes beyond individual cases: they discuss the development and current state of play of research into media effects, the remarkable power of 'common-sense' notions of media effects and the way in which the effects issue has become embroiled in debates about freedom of expression and censorship. They suggest how audiences really respond to media texts, and argue that there is an urgent need for informed and interdisciplinary approaches to the study of the media. Martin Barker, University of the West of England, UK Julian Petley, Brunel University,UK Pat Holland, David Buckingham, The Anneberg School for Communication,UK David Mi

Congressional scrutiny and public criticism of violent television have spanned nearly four decades with little change in the emphasis of those protests. Despite the intensive spotlight cast on broadcasters, few in Congress have really tried to affect any real changes in the amount and nature of violence in television programming. Although there have been many studies conducted on the effects of television, few authors have explored the political, cultural and societal influences in the battles over television violence. This book explores the complexities of Congressional and public scrutiny and the dynamics of communications policy-making in the United States.

If one culprit is suspected above all others for encouraging society to become more violent and unfeeling, it is television. This medium, which has become so pervasive in the last 50 years, seems to play an enormous role in the lives of the vast majority of people. But who controls the content which exerts such an enormous influence and to an extent controls the people? What are they doing now and what will they be doing tomorrow? Is violence essential to sell toothpaste and hamburgers? What are our children becoming and what will their children be like? Will every child carry a gun or other weapon just waiting for someone to trigger their violent nature and ignite their preprogrammed anger?