- action | issues
- Academic Freedom
- Books
- Classrooms
- Copyright
- Film
- Government Secrecy
- Hate Speech
- Internet
- LGBT
- Libraries
- Music
- Nudity & Pornography
- Political Correctness
- Political Dissent
- Public Spaces
- Race Ethnicity Gender
- Radio & Television
- Religion
- Science
- Sex Education
- Theater & Performance
- Video Games
- Violence
- Visual Art
- Youth
- advocacy | projects
- education | resources
in support of free expression
The information presented here by the National
Coalition Against Censorship (NCAC) may be freely redistributed in its entirety,
provided that readers are informed that the information was obtained from
NCAC's World Wide Web site and that credit is given to the appropriate source
of whatever information is used. Permission is expressly granted for the information
obtained to be made available for file transfer from installations offering
unrestricted anonymous file transfer on the Internet. Information found here
may not be sold for profit or incorporated in commercial documents without
the written permission from the National Coalition Against Censorship.
©Copyright 2005 NCAC
WEB DESIGN
Jeanne Criscola Criscola Design
free speech first amendment censorship
Resources
AMERICAN
AMUSEMENT MACHINE ASS'N, et al.,
Plaintiffs - Appellants,
v.
TERI KENDRICK, et al.,
Defendants - Appellees
The case of American Amusement Machine v. Kendrick was a challenge to an Indianapolis ordinance that barred minors from video arcade games containing simulated "graphic violence." A trial judge upheld the ordinance, relying on social science research into the effects of "media violence." On appeal, the Free Expression Policy Project filed a friend-of-the-court brief on behalf of eight noted scholars and authors in the field of media and communications, who explained to the judges that political discourse has for many years misrepresented and distorted that actual (and rather meager) results of social science research into the effects of violent images or ideas in media entertainment. The scholars argued that although the mass media undoubtedly have many different effects on different individuals, "in a field as inherently complex and multi-faceted as human aggression, it is questionable whether quantitative studies of media effects can really provide a holistic or adequately nuanced description of the process by which some individuals become more aggressive than others."
On March 23, 2001, the U.S. Court of Appeals reversed the district court and struck down the Indianapolis ordinance. Judge Richard Posner wrote for the court that there was no evidence that exposure to the sometimes violent narratives in the video games targeted by the ordinance actually caused harmful behavior and, furthermore, that young people had First Amendment rights and were "unlikely to become well-functioning, independent-minded adults and responsible citizens if they are raised in an intellectual bubble." He added:
"Violence has always been an remains a central interest of humankind and a recurrent, even obsessive theme of culture both high and low. It engages the interest of children from an early age, as anyone familiar with the classic fairy tales collected by Grimm, Andersen, and Perrault are aware. To shield children right up to the age of 18 from exposure to violent descriptions and images would not only be quixotic, but deforming; it would leave them unequipped to cope with the world as we know it."
To read the brief, click here.
Action Alerts
