In the Service of Young People? Studies and Reflections on Media ...

Sonia Livingstone & Andrea Millwood Hargravemay lead to considerable public concern. While norms <strong>of</strong> taste <strong>and</strong> decency can betracked with some reliability through st<strong>and</strong>ard opinion measurement techniques,methods for assessing harm are much more contested <strong>and</strong> difficult. Arguablytoo, <strong>the</strong> research evidence – <strong>of</strong> which <strong>the</strong>re is a huge amount – is concentratedon a media environment <strong>and</strong> a regulatory regime that is now rapidlychanging, rendering <strong>the</strong> evidence potentially out <strong>of</strong> date as regards its usefulnessin policy formation.With <strong>the</strong> arrival <strong>of</strong> newer media, particularly <strong>the</strong> internet (though also digitaltelevision, mobile phones, etc.), it is not clear how far <strong>the</strong> public recognises orfeels empowered to respond to <strong>the</strong> exp<strong>and</strong>ing array <strong>of</strong> content on <strong>of</strong>fer. It is likelythat <strong>the</strong>se newer, more interactive media pose a challenge not only to regulatorsbut also to ordinary families. Can <strong>the</strong>y apply familiar domestic practices <strong>of</strong> regulation<strong>and</strong> restriction to newer media? What range <strong>of</strong> concerns do people haveregarding new media forms <strong>and</strong> contents? What do <strong>the</strong>y need to know aboutwhe<strong>the</strong>r or not <strong>the</strong> greatly-exp<strong>and</strong>ed range <strong>of</strong> contents now available to childrenhave been shown to cause harm?Policy debates attempt to balance <strong>the</strong> <strong>of</strong>ten-conflicting concerns over possibleharms against o<strong>the</strong>r concerns, most notably, civil liberties <strong>and</strong> freedom <strong>of</strong>speech, economic competition, children’s rights to exploration <strong>and</strong> privacy, <strong>and</strong>parents’ capacities or o<strong>the</strong>rwise to regulate <strong>the</strong>ir children’s media use. Difficultissues arise. How do we draw <strong>the</strong> line between <strong>the</strong> <strong>of</strong>fensive <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> harmful? Isit a matter <strong>of</strong> particular kinds <strong>of</strong> contents, particular forms <strong>of</strong> media, particulargroups <strong>of</strong> children? What kinds <strong>of</strong> harms, if any, have received robust empiricalsupport? What is <strong>the</strong> evidence for <strong>of</strong>fence across diverse sectors <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> population?It was to explore <strong>the</strong>se questions – to give industry, <strong>the</strong> regulators <strong>and</strong>, indeed,<strong>the</strong> public a clear view <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> evidence – that we conducted a critical literaturereview regarding harm <strong>and</strong> <strong>of</strong>fence across media forms (Millwood Hargrave& Livingstone, 2006). Recent research on television, radio, music, press, film,games, internet, telephony, advertising, as well as <strong>the</strong> regulation associated wi<strong>the</strong>ach <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se, was evaluated in order to assess <strong>the</strong> potential for harm <strong>and</strong> <strong>of</strong>fencein media content, <strong>and</strong> to identify where future empirical research is needed. 1<strong>In</strong> <strong>the</strong> present article, we <strong>of</strong>fer a brief overview <strong>of</strong> findings for each mediumin turn, <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong>n present our conclusions. The volume on which this article drawsprovides a full discussion <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> many research findings summarised here, includingan extensive <strong>and</strong> up to date bibliography. There, we distinguish <strong>the</strong>ories<strong>of</strong> short-term <strong>and</strong> long-term effects, direct <strong>and</strong> indirect effects, <strong>and</strong> harm <strong>and</strong><strong>of</strong>fence. We also review <strong>the</strong> advantages <strong>and</strong> disadvantages <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> main researchmethods in use (experiments, surveys, qualitative social research), noting <strong>the</strong>ethical <strong>and</strong> political issues that structure <strong>the</strong> field <strong>of</strong> research <strong>and</strong> stressing <strong>the</strong>value <strong>of</strong> integrating or comparing qualitative <strong>and</strong> quantitative research findings.50