Page 348 - Handbooks of Applied Linguistics Communication Competence Language and Communication Problems Practical Solutions

326 Perry Hinton

cess to a gun and never actually having held one in their lives (including my-
self). As I mentioned elsewhere (Hinton 2000), the focus on the crime statistics
presented in the preface of Potter’s book may not have resonance in cities with
little street crime such as Tokyo or countries where ordinary citizens do not have
access to guns, such as the United Kingdom.
Indeed, when we examine a contemporary text for the British market,
Gunter and McAleer (1997: viii), in their preface, make reference to the con-
cerns about television violence “in the United States” (my emphasis) and their
statistics from Britain simply provide demographic data on the availability of
television, rather than setting up an image of British youth. The conclusion to
their preface is that parents are responsible (along with broadcasters) for their
children’s viewing. So, the issue of media and children is set up in a very differ-
ent manner in the British, compared to the American, text – and this may lead to
a different view of the audience reception of the media.
If the research arising from the specific concerns about the possible causes
of youth violence in the United States of America then enters the globalized aca-
demic debate on media violence (e.g., Carlsson 1999), the specific cultural con-
text of the concerns is at risk of being ignored. Yet the research shows clear cul-
tural differences, with the Surgeon General’s Report on Youth Violence (2001)
acknowledging lower levels of youth violence in a number of other countries
in comparison to the USA. Furthermore, there is clear evidence of cultural dif-
ferences in reaction to media portrayals of ‘violence’. For example, Weigman,
Kuttschreuter and Baarda (1992), in a study lasting three years and encompassing
a number of different countries, found that there were significant correlations
between aggressive behaviour and watching violent television for both boys and
girls in the United States of America but not in the Netherlands or Australia. In-
deed, it is not necessarily the case that we have the same context for the ‘media
violence’ debate within the cultures of other countries.
There is also the question of what is meant by ‘media violence’. Indeed, it is
often the definition that is seen as the central problem for researchers (Gunter
and McAleer 1997; Gauntlett 1998; Livingstone 1990). In fact, the focus and
definition will reflect an ideology (Gauntlett 1998) that itself will provide a cul-
tural context in the way that the particular audience is viewed within the re-
search. Within the United States of America there is a public debate about youth
violence, which provides a framework to the research within which the authors
reside (e.g. Potter 1999). It is not surprising, in this context, that the research
seeks to examine the media in order to determine its potential effects on the
youth of America.
However, outside of the specific concerns of the United States of America,
maybe it is more appropriate, in the global media environment to conclude, as
Gunter and McAleer (1997: 116), writing in the United Kingdom, state, “The
debate around television violence will continue both in the public and academic