The Fourth Estate in America: Sex and Violence

According to the constitutional premise that a well-informed person is the best guardian of their rights and freedoms, U.S. residents access media wherever they are: in their cars on the way to work, at their workplace, and finally at home. Aware of its influence, the media have taken on the role of "watchdog," protecting public order and citizens` rights.

This role explains the frequent media interventions in cases where these rights and order are violated by the government or other institutions. I`ve already mentioned leading examples of pro-social media actions—the exposure of the Watergate scandal and the Pentagon Papers on the Vietnam War.

These interventions brought tangible results—due to the exposure of abuses, President Nixon resigned, and the war saw fewer American casualties. Unlike in other countries that are grandly called democratic, in the U.S., journalists cannot be arrested for telling the truth, nor can a newsroom be shut down for actively seeking the truth. On the other hand, the government cannot be defamed unless investigative journalists can prove that governmental statements or actions are directed with particular malice against American society.


However, U.S. media are not only about heroic journalists and reporters fighting for the people`s right to information on government actions. Many "business sharks" focus on their own interests and the profits of their corporations rather than the public good. And since violence and sex sell best these days, many Americans criticize the media—take, for example, Michael Moore, a prominent advocate for reducing crime coverage in the news. Those who have seen "Bowling for Columbine" know what I mean. His idea of driving consumption through fear has many supporters among lawmakers, who have long tried to change the popular belief that "nothing sells like a corpse on the cover."

To address citizens` demands and Congressional pressure, the four main television networks—ABC, CBS, NBC, and Fox—established a system in 1993 to inform viewers of a program’s violent nature just before it begins. In 1996, commercial and cable networks went a step further, implementing a system that monitors "doses" of violence, sex, and vulgarity in their programming. Depending on the content, an appropriate symbol appears on the screen during the broadcast to indicate whether children and teenagers should watch the program (a similar system now exists in Poland).

Paradoxically, this system was deemed a violation of the First Amendment in the United States. Since 1998, technological solutions have been applied instead, with televisions now factory-equipped with a V-chip, allowing parents to block broadcasts of programs that children should not watch.

Read all articles in the series The Fourth Estate in America.