79 K12Q

.- . .flMo")
'\"'I

177 Ai35

 

 

Wag-WM

JUNiztmm

 

ABSTfiACT

TELEVISION PHEFSdiNCES, ATTITUDLS, AND OrlNlONS
OF INNER-CITY HIOTEHS AND NONHIOTEHS:
AN EXPLORATORY STUDY
By

Thomas F. Gordon

With the increase of racially oriented civil disorder
in the American society, the cry has gone out for an effective
means of dealing with the complex problems which are currently
inhibiting racial understanding. The purpose of the present
research is to explore the role television is playing in the
lives of those individuals who are most directly associated
with civil disturbances in the hope of gleaning information
relevant to their personal involvement in riot activity. At
the same time, an effort is made to formulate guidelines for
further research efforts. The study concentrates on an
analysis of the degree of violence orientation in the enter-
tainment programming preferred by rioters and nonrioters.
Other areas examined include attitudes and opinions concerning
violence on television, television coverage of the Detroit
riot, coverage of inner-city problems as well as civil rights
issues and spokesmen, and the area of television news
programming.

The television programs used in the violence analysis
were those telecast by the three commercial networks during
the prime time evening viewing hours of the 1967-68 television

season. The programs were established as violent or

Thomas F. Gordon

nonviolent by a panel of judges consisting of graduate
students from the Departments of Television and Hadio,
Psychology, and Political Science. The panel was supplied
with a definition of a violent television program and rated
each program accordingly on a five point bipolar scale
between "violent" and "nonviolent". Counterpart to the
violence ratings was the program checklist used to obtain
respondent program preferences. The checklist contained the
115 prime time program offerings for the Detroit area. The
checklist was utilized to insure respondent consideration
of all possible choices in his selection of those programs
he watches almost every week.

The results of the present study indicate that the
rioter does not attend to any more violent televisionwenter-
tainment programming than does his nonrioting neighbor. At
the same time, age appears to be the most relevant factor
in determining how much violent programming an individual
in either sample will watch. Overall. the rioter is less
preoccupied with television than is the nonrioter, although
television is still the dominant medium for both individuals.
The preoccupation factor was most evident in a check of the
number of shows watched regularly by both groups. The
difference, in this case, was significant at the .001 level
of confidence.

Through a Chi square analysis, the data revealed
three areas of difference which proved significant at the

.01 level of confidence. The first area was respondent

Thomas F. Gordon

choices of moderate vs. militant civil rights leaders, with
the rioter more likely to chose the militant leader although
the majority of rioters still preferred moderate leaders.
The second area involved the respondent's initial reaction
to seeing the riot for the first time. In this case, the
nonrioter displayed a greater degree of shock or surprise.
The third area of significance revealed that the rioter is

less likely to see violence on television as harmful.

TELEVISION PREFERENCES, ATTITUDES, AND OPINIONS
OF INNER-CITY RIOTERS AND NONRIOTERS:
AN EXPLORATORY STUDY

By
\;--
(5°
Thomas F. Gordon

A THESIS
Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
' for the degree of
MASTER OF ARTS

Department of Television and Radio

1969

Accepted by the faculty of the Department of
Television and Radio, College of Communication Arts,
Michigan State University, in partial fulfillment of

the requirements for the Master of Arts degree.

7 MW 7; was“

Director of Thesis

 

11

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

To the many individuals who assisted in the foregoing
research effort I would like to express my sincere appreciation.
First. to Lowell Newton and Bob Bennett of WXXZ, Detroit, for
their initial advice and assistance in approaching a foreign
territory.

To Criminal Division Chief of the Detroit Police
Department, Jim Garber, for his cooperation in supplying the
arrest records of the Detroit riot, without which the research
would never have been possible; and for his relevant advice
on preliminary interviewing done in the riot area.

To Dr. Sheldon Levi of the Institute for Social
Research in Ann Arbor for sharing with me his knowledge and
experience gleaned from their own formidable report to the
Riot Commission. As Director of Media Research for that
report, his patient assistance proved most helpful.

To the telephone interviewers, Ann Christensen,

Veta Smith, Narica Chism, Vivian Harris, Sandra Shellfish,
Elizabeth Horner, and Brenda Wilson, a personal thanks for
a Job well done.

To my thesis advisor, Dr. Thomas Baldwin, for his

initial encouragement and competent guidance throughout the

research effort; for his vote of confidence in securing

111

funds for the interviewers; and most importantly, for his
personal insights into the problem areas of racial
understanding.

To my sister, Judy Gordon, a special thanks for her
diligent assistance in a time we will both long remember.

Finally, to my wife for those special sacrifices that
can never be totally enumerated or extensively valued. Rer
technical support throughout the manuscript preparation was
without failing, and the boundaries of her moral support

approached those of the research problem itself.

iv

ba‘i‘(';‘k R—i ,3 L‘L‘ ) ruglu} [mug
in {Dutnvmmut semdfivsnwx

512C~§375L ’ DEL , 796:,

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
ACKNOMILEWNENTS I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i l 1
LIST OF TABLES I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I X" 1

LIST OF FIGURES I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Viii

Chapter
I I IN‘IRODUC'I'ION I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1
II I THE PROBLEM I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I u
111. METHODOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
The Study Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Sample Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Violence Viewing Index . . . . . . . 1n
Construction of the Questionnaire . . . . . 20
IV. RESULTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Violence Indeces . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Program Popularity . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
News Items I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 20
Television Coverage . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Civil Rights Leaders . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.
The Detroit Riot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Violence Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
Demographic Items . . . . . . . . . . . . . up
Age and Violence Preference . . . . . . . . 4y
V. DISCUSSION I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 54
The Present Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
Future ResearCh I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 60

APPENDICES I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

I. Program Violence Rating Form . . . . . . . . 09
II. Questionnaire and Program Checklist . . . . . 80
REFERENCES I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 88

Table

H

\C CDV O‘Kn 4Tb.) N

HHH
NH0

13.
1h.
15.
16,
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.

LIST OF TABLES

Violence Index of Programs . . . . .
Four Most Popular Programs . . . . .
World and National News . . . . . .
Local News . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Television and Inner-City Problems

Television and Civil Rights Problems

Television Time for Civil Rights Spokesmen

Favorite Civil Rights Spokesmen . .

Chi square Analysis-—Choice of Leaders
First Sighting and Reaction to the Riot

Sources of Information During the Riot

Recall of Television Riot Coverage

Criticism of Television Riot Coverage

Time Spent on the Street During the Riot

Preference for Violence in Civil Rights

Opinions on Television Violence . .

Effect of TV Violence on Children and Adults

Worst Violence on Television . . .
Perceived Causes of National Violence
Length of Residence in Detroit . . .

Marital Status . . . . . . .,. . . .

vi

30
31
33
31+
3:;
37
3o
39
L10
1.1
1+2
43
44
45
ac.

47

Table Page
22. Educational Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48

23. Age of Respondents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50

vii

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page

1. Average Violence Indeces and Age . . . . . . . . 53

viii

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Problems of civil disorder in the American society are
not new as phenomena of social protest. However, in recent
years they have gained a new significance as precursors to
needed social change. Recognizing this, the efforts of
social scientists and concerned civil officials have been
focused on the problem in an attempt to answer the urgent
questions raised and make the needed changes before the
system literally destroys itself.

The increase of civil disorder within the past five
years attests to the fact that something must be done soon.
Within this immediate five year period major riots have
taken place in Harlem, Los Angeles, Cleveland. Newark, and
Detroit to mention a few. These riots left hundreds dead,
thousands injured, and tens of thousands arrested. besides
the millions of dollars worth of property that was destroyed.(30)
The role of these riots in America's race relations cannot be
denied. The magnitude of their racial overtones has consistently
carried through the years and was accented by the assassination
of Dr. Martin Luther King. Jr. in April of 1968 which lead to

rioting in more than one hundred American cities.(10)

2
A major attempt to examine the many aspects of civil

disobedience was launched in July of 1907 when President
Lyndon B. Johnson appointed the "National Advisory Commission
on Civil Disorders". It became evident from this report that
violence as a mode of behavioral response in America was
especially prevalent. Following the assassination of
Senator Robert F. Kennedy. coupled with the fresh memory of
the King assassination and the lingering memory of the assas-
sination of President John F. Kennedy, President Johnson
moved to appoint the "National Commission on the Causes and
Preventions of Violence". The immediate Juxtaposition of
these major studies indicates the link that exists between
the two and indeed the areas of inquiry of the two
investigations have been somewhat overlapping.

An area of social concern that was touched upon by the
Riot Commission and is being probed in depth by the Violence
Commission is the role of the mass media in problems of urban!
unrest. The Riot Commission has felt that the problems which
could be effectively dealt with through extensive communication
research are of such importance that one of their final recom-
mendations was for the establishment of an Institute of Urban
Communications.(26) It is also evident that the Violence
Commission is taking a strong look at television in particular!
for possible correlations between violent content and behavior
of the American people.

The present study is a combination of the elements of

civil disorder and violence in the mass medium of television.

3
This study is an exploratory look at the rioter vs. the

nonrioter in relation to television viewing preferences,
attitudes, and the amount of violent television programming
attended to. This research was begun before the release of
the massive amounts of data to come out of the major riot
areas. Where applicable, the present research will be

related to the findings of various researchers who have worked

in the riot areas.

CHAPTER II
THE PROBLEM

The scOpe of any study dealing with riot behavior as
correlated with a measure of violence orientation or prefer-
ence must necessarily be limited in some way due to the sheer
magnitude of the area. Since a good deal of sociological
research has been done which focuses on the problems of the
ghetto Negro; and since a majority of riot action has been
concentrated in ghetto areas, the present research has been
limited to Negro respondents who were arrested on felony
charges during the Detroit riot of 1967. The rioters' views
will be compared to views of individuals living in the riot
area but ascertained to be nonrioters. The study is further
limited by concentration on male respondents only. In the
Detroit riot, approximately 88 percent of those arrested
were Negro and 77 percent of the Negro arrestees were
male.(29)

The crisis of race relations in America is unique in
that it threatens to destroy the very fabric of our social ‘/
system. Silberman, author of Crisis in ElEEE and White,
has stated that race is "not only the most urgent piece

of public business facing the United States today; it is

also the most difficult."(28) This view has been echoed

a

5

by the Riot Commission in their main conclusion that "Our
nation is moving toward two societies, one black, one
white—-separate and unequal."(26)

This pressing need to understand the complexities of
the race problem has generated a great deal of research and
will continue to do so until a satisfactory’solution is
achieved. Through research it has been recognized that a
major focal point of racial tension and perhaps a root cause
of the tension lies in the Negro ghetto. Such classics as
Clark's Dark Ghetto have shed much light on this fact.(8)
The Commission concluded:

What white Americans have never fully understood-—
but what the Negro can never forget-is that white
society is deeply implicated in the ghetto.

White institutions created it, white institutions
maintain it, and white society condones it.(26)

The importance of the ghetto as a symbol of the Negro
plight in America cannot be overstated. In an effort to
understand the increased ghetto protests and the more recent
violence that has issued from the ghetto, researchers have
traced one turning point to the 195A Supreme Court decision
on school desegregation.(6) From this point a new pride and!
a new emphasis on equality began to grow in the Negro ‘
population. As long sought goals appeared to be within I
reach impatience also began to grow.

The more patient protest marches, sit-ins, and boycotts
have formed the backbone of the nonviolent effort to achieve’/

racial equality. However, the use of violence has assured

the Negro of one thing, that he will be heard. Conot's

e

Rivers of Blood, Years of Darkness, a chronicle of the Watts
riot of 1965, stresses that the Negro wants to be heard, and
now he has found a way to get immediate action. As one Watts
rioter stated:

All we wants is that we get our story told, and

get it told right! What we do last night, maybe

it wasn't right. But ain't nobody come down here

and listen to us beforei(9)

The Watts riot is viewed by Conot to be the turning
point of Negro-white relations in America. The riot symbolized
the end of Negro passivity in the form of the doctrine of non-
violence and the beginning of an era in which the Negro as a
power unit must be met and dealt with on a level of equality.

America has chosen in the past to ignore the implica-
tions that riots of this nature are a form of communication.V/r
Instead, they have been viewed as the result of the actions
of troublemakers who are irresponsible, unattached, uprooted,
unskilled, and unemployed. This view has been termed the
"riffraff theory" and includes such deviants as criminals,
migrants, and emotionally disturbed persons.(7)

The second of three major theories which has been

/

advanced to explain the riots contends that the riots are /'
due to "a gap between the rioters' objective, economic and 3‘
social situation and their expectations." This theory has
been termed the "relative-deprivation theory".(7)

The "blocked-opportunity theory" is the third major Vfik

theory and sees riots as the consequence of the prolonged

exclusion of Negroes from American life.(7) This "blocked-

7

opportunity" theory appears, through all available researcn,

to be the most accurate:
One is led to conclude that the continued exclusion
of Negroes from American economic and social life
is the fundamental cause of riots. This exclusion
is a result of arbitrary racial barriers rather
than lack of ability, motivation or aspiration
on the part of Negroes, and it is most galling
to young Negroes who perceive it as arbitrary
and unjust.(7)

In addition to feeling that his way is blocked, the
rioter feels that he had substantially improved his status
in the past three to five years and is confident in his
future and himself.(2u) From these data we can see the
growing pride which was mentioned earlier; it is also easier
to understand the basis for Negro impatience when things fail
to move as rapidly as expected.

The impact of the electronic media in the Negro ‘4:
revolution has been recognized by black and white alike.
William B. Monroe, Jr., director of NBC News in Washington, D.C.,
has stated that television is a major media of communication‘
which has promoted the Negro struggle.

Television is their chosen instrument-not
because television set out to integrate the
nation or even improve the South. but because

when the Negroes got ready for their revolution,
television was there.(23)

J

The impact of television on the riots was investigated
by the Riot Commission with the thought that the medium was!
acting as a catalyst to violent behavibr. The conclusion E
was. that despite incidents of sensationalism, inaccuracies,

and distortions, television on the whole made a real effort

to give a balanced, factual account of the riot. Despite

8

this effort, the overall effect was "an exaggeration of both
mood and intent."(26) This critical evaluation came just a
few weeks before the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther

King, Jr. and prompted the implementation of new guidelines
for handling such disturbances. After the King assassination
the television industry received appropriate commendation

for the way it handled the resulting disturbances.(10)

With the increased control in news reporting of riots,
the emphasis of television's influence on the Negro revolution
could easily shift from a direct visible influence to one more
indirect. This indirect influence appears to be taking shape
in the entertainment function of the medium. A more extensive
discussion of this form of influence will be presented later.

The present study attempts to capitalize on both
situations and examine news preferences as well as enter-
tainment preferences. The role of television in the ghetto
is just beginning to be understood. At present we know that
96 percent of the homes in America have television sets and
that the average middle class home has the television set in
use for six hours per daY.(17) We also know that the average
middle class male watches about two and one-half hours of
television per day and gets most of his news from television.

However, as Greenberg pointed out in his testimony before

‘.‘_

the Violence Commission, despite the middle class dependence

o—I“

M

ongtelevision, "The citizen of below-standard income is
socially and significantly even more dependent on that

medium, for the same and other gratifications.9(14)

9

When it is realized that the low-income adult watches
about five hours of television each day while the low-income
Negro watches about six hours per day, we begin to see the
potential influence that the media could have for these
individuals.(1h) For our own purposes, given that we have
a strong bias among low-income Negroes for television, the
question becomes, what are they getting out of the medium?

One of the fears which has prompted the concern of
officials as well as responsible citizens is that rioters and
other individuals who spend a great deal of time with the
medium may be absorbing the excessive amounts of violence
which are being presented on television, and that this
violence is in turn being related to their behavior. Various
studies have indicated the great quantities of violence on
television. One recent study conducted after the death of
Senator Robert F. Kennedy recorded 291 incidents of violence
during seven prime evening viewing hours.(27) Fredric
Wertham, U. S. Senate Consultant on crime, has also reported
counting 334 killings or attempted killings on one station
in a single week.(34)

Studies by Berkowitz and by Bandura have indicated
there may be a strong possibility that aggressive behavior
presented in the media may be imitated.(4)(2) However,
these studies have been subject to a good deal of controversy
and the generalizability of the findings are in doubt.
Berkowitz. however, has taken an apparently justified stand

against the catharsis theory of violence in the mass media.(3)

10

One of the least controversial statements about the
effect of violence on television was presented by Joseph Klapper
to the Violence Commission:

... surveys indicate .... certain personality
traits lead to a taste for violent media
material, and that this material serves some
sort of ill-understood psychological function-—
perhaps good, perhaps bad, and perhaps neither-
for children with certain maladjustments. The~
surveys really do not tell us very much about
whether such fare will render audiences more;
likely to behave violently.(20)

It is evident that what the individual brings to the
medium will influence what he will get from it. The counter
argument, of course, is that the individual had to gradually
formulate what he brings to the medium and, thus, it is the
overall acceptance of violence as a common occurance in
American life that may be most harmful.

With this overview of the problem areas, the present
research was entered into with the realization of the complex-
ities involved and at the same time the conviction that the
medium of television could hold promising keys to the Negro
problems in our society. Federal Communications Commissioner
Nickolas Johnson has stated:

Today the airways-rather than the roadways of
the 1700's-—provide the ways for the meetings
of men and minds. It is television and radio
that hold open the hope of reinstituting the
dialogue among men-carrying a message in the
air to each man's home, across the barriers of
race, of class, of occupation, of prejudice,

of the division of peoples into city and suburb.
People talking to one another-sharing their

thoughts, their lives, their cultures-that
is what television and radio can be.(18)

11
The Riot Commission added to their statement of
separate societies the qualification that, "This deepening
racial division is not inevitable. The movement apart can

be reversed."(26)

CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

The Study Design

The major distinction made between respondents in this
study was the classification of rioters vs. nonrioters. This
distinction was achieved through sources of sample selection
and questions asked of the respondents. Post hog comparison
of the present data with other data to come out of the Detroit
area provides a degree of validation for the distinction
achieved.

The original questionnaire was pretested in face-to-face
interviews with respondents in the riot area around Twelfth
Street. The questionnaire was then revised and finally
administered in a telephone survey to both samples. The
questionnaire was designed to obtain male Negro program
preferences as well as respondent opinions on various aspects
of television programming. Opinion items were limited to
television news, riot coverage, civil rights issues, and

violence present on television.

Sample Selection
To select the rioter sample, a rioter was defined as

an individual arrested for participation in the Detroit riot
12

13

of 1967. In an attempt to make any differences between rioters
and nonrioters more apparent, the rioter classification was
further limited to those persons arrested on felony charges.
A felony charge included such offenses as assault, looting,
arson, or homicide. In comparison, misdemeanor charges were
primarily curfew violations. The rioter sample was then
drawn at random from the 3,230 felony arrestees on file in
the Prosecuting Attorney's office in Detroit. A systematic
sample was drawn by computing a skip interval for the 3,230
defendants and proceeding through the files in order. Only
male respondents were selected. In cases where the interval
produced a female name, the first adjacent Negro male was
selected to replace it.

The sample of respondents for the riot area was selected
through the use of a map of the area and the R. L. Polk City
Directory for the Detroit West Side. Streets in the area
were listed, and it was calculated that a random selection of
eight individuals from each of the twenty-five streets in the
area would provide a sufficient number of individuals to work
with.

For this exploratory study a sample size of approximately
thirty respondents in each group was judged to be adequate.

At the completion of the interviewing, thirty-one usable
interviews were obtained for the nonrioter sample and
twenty-seven for the rioter sample. Two interviews were

discarded for the nonrioters due to incomplete information

1Q

while one interview was discarded for the rioters because the
individual was white. It is noted here that there were eleven
refusals from the nonrioters and only one from the rioters.
This low refusal rate for rioters held true for other studies
conducted for this group. The general refusal rate tended to
run around 3 percent for most studies dealing with rioters.(7)

The interviewing for this study was conducted through
the office facilities of the Detroit News newspaper in the
late afternoon and early evening hours of May 25, 1968.

Female interviewers were utilized and four of the seven were
Negro. Although it was unknown if any bias would result
from racial differences between interviewer and respondent
over the telephone, the mixed choice of interviewers was a
precautionary measure. A spot-check of completed interviews
revealed no apparent differences along these lines.

If a respondent was not reached on the first call,
interviewers were instructed to make repeated call backs as
time permitted. Due to an inability to reach rioter
respondents and a general lack of time, seven of the rioter
interviews were completed in the week following the 25th

of May.

Violence Viewing Index
To determine the degree of violent content in the 115
television programs used for evaluation of respondent

preferences, a panel of judges rated each program. The panel

15
consisted of 39 graduate students selected from the academic
areas of Television and Radio, Psychology, and Political
Science. I

Objectivity of the rating was attempted through the use
of a specified definition of a violent television program. A
violent program was defined as:

A program where usually at some point the action
results in injury or destruction to some object,
animal or human. The injury may be psychological
or physical...a result of verbal or motor action.

This definition was developed by James Smith and the
author. Smith used the resulting violence ratings in his
master's thesis, the results of which have been utilized by
Greenberg in his reports to the Violence Commission.(iu)

Having carefully read the definition, each judge was
asked to rate the programs with which they were familiar on
a five point bipolar scale between violent and nonviolent.
An example of the scale is shown below; the scale numbers
appear here for illustration only and did not appear on the
administered instrument.

Bonanza

Violent __: : __: ‘__: __ Nonviolent
5 7i— 3 2 1

From these ratings a violence index was computed for
each program by dividing the point total for the program by
the number of judges who had rated it. For example, Bonanza
was rated by 30 judges and received a point total of 121.
Dividing 121 by 30 produced the violence index of n.033 for

that program. The rating instrument in its final form appears

in Appendix I.

16

Of the 115 programs on the original rating form, 17
were discarded because they were either news programs; or they
had been rated by fewer than five judges. The original pro-
grams were selected from the 1967-68 prime time evening
offerings of the three commercial networks-ABC, CBS, and NBC.
Prime time in this case was defined as 7:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m..
Monday through Sunday.

From the program checklist secured from each respondent
it was possible to average the violence indeces of those
programs checked as being watched regularly to provide an
overall violence index rating for that individual. The
violence indeces for the individuals in the two groups could
then be averaged to provide an index representative of each
group.

No attempt was made to statistically determine
variance in the violence ratings of the programs by the
judges. It was evident from the calculations of the violence
indeces that at no time were there wide discrepancies in
judge ratings. A case in point is Hogan's Heroes which
received a violence index of 3.129. The point total for the
program was 97 and it was rated by 31 judges, 29 of these
judges rated the program 3, one rated it 4 and one rated it
2. Table 1 presents the rank order listing from most violent
to least violent of 98 programs utilized for the final

analysis in this study.

17

TABLE 1.--Violence index of programs

 

 

 

Violence
Program Index Rank

Untouchables 4.90 1
Garrison's Gorillas 4.87 2
Felony Squad 4.69 3
Gunsmoke 4.59 4
Mission Impossible 4.59 4
N.Y.P.D. 4.58 5
Mannix 4.56 6
Wild Wild West 4.54 7
The Avengers 4.50 8
Rat Patrol 4.50 8
The Saint 4.43 9
The Invaders 4.36 10
The Virginian 4.35 11
The F.B.I. 4.33 12
High Chaparral 4.31 13
Cimarron Strip 4.27 14
Batman 4.23 15
Voyage to the Bottom of

the Sea 4.23 15
Rawhide 4.21 16
Pro Hockey 4.20 1?
Ironside 4.18 18
Guns of Will Sonnett 4.17 19
It Takes a Thief 4.09 20
Star Trek 4.07 21
Bonanza 4.03 22
Big Valley 4.00 23
Dragnet_ 4.00 23
Tarzan 3.87 24
Judd for the Defense 3.83 25
Run for Your Life 3.83 25
Peyton Place 3.73 26
Daniel Boone 3.69 27

TABLE 1.--Continued

18

 

 

 

Violence
Program Index Rank
Get Smart 3.69 27
Lost in Space 3.61 28
Death Valley Days 3.60 29
Maya 3.44 30
Daktari 3. 35 31
Hogan's Heroes 3.13 32
F Troop 3.09 33
Cowboy in Africa 3.00 34
Juvenile Court 2.67 35
Lassie 2.63 36
Rowan and Martin 2.46 37
Traffic Court 2.33 38
Smother's Brothers 2.29 39
Truth or Consequences 2.26 40
Michigan Sportsman 2.23 41
Flashback 2.20 42
The Monkees 2.19 43
Newlywed Game 2.12 44
Mothers-in-Law 2.05 45
Michigan Outdoors 2.00 46
Gomer Pyle USMC 2.00 46
Jackie Gleason 2.00 46
Jonathan Winters 2.00 46
Walt Disney 1.96 47
Gentle Ben 1.92 48
Jerry Lewis 1.90 49
Danny Thomas 1.89 50
Sports Profile 1.83 51
Off to See the Wizard 1.83 51
Bewitched 1.79 52
Red Skelton 1.79 52
Gilligan's Island 1.77 53
Lucille Ball 1.76 54

TABLE 1.--Continued

19

 

 

 

Violence
Program Index Rank
Horse Racing 1.75 55
Carol Burnett 1.71 56
Beverly Hillbillies 1.70 57
Andy Griffith 1.69 58
I Dream of Jeannie 1.64 59
Dating Game 1.62 60
Dennis the Menace 1.59 61
The Second Hundred Years 1.57 62
That Girl 1.47 63
Green Acres 1.43 64
He and She 1.43 64
My Three Sons 1.43 64
The Flying Nun 1.42 65
Country Music Hall 1.40 66
G.E. College Bowl 1.40 66
Family Affair 1.35 67
Petticoat Junction 1.33 68
Hollywood and the Stars 1.33 68
Dean Martin 1.32 09
Anniversary Game 1.30 70
Good Morning World 1.2? 71
Kraft Music Hall 1.2? 71
George Pierrot 1.17 72
Dream House 1.17 72
Hollywood Palace 1.14 73
Operation Entertainment 1.11 74
Ed Sullivan 1.10 75
Grand Ole Opry 1.08 76
Robin Seymore 1.00 77
Weekend 1.00 77
Hollywood Squares 1.00 77
Lawrence Welk 1.00 77

20

Construction 9f the Questionnaire

 

The questionnaire for this study was developed to
explore five major areas of television programming. The first
area inquired about the programs each respondent watched every
week or almost every week. To avoid the tendency respondents
might have to recall those programs they had viewed the night
before, the interviewers read off a checklist of the 115
programs mentioned earlier. Interviewers were instructed to
emphasize that the respondent should answer "yes" only to
those programs watched every week or almost every week and
to hold the respondents to yes-no answers in order to save
time.

The program checklists were used to analyze violence
differences in the two groups sampled. To ascertain differ-
ences which might prove more indicative of the group preferences,
each respondent was also asked to state his three most favorite
programs.

The lengthy program list did not prove to be awkward
and took between five and seven minutes to complete. The only
difficulty reported with the list was holding respondents to
yes-no answers. It appears that when a respondent enjoys a
program, he wants to make sure his opinion is registered with
adequate intensity, perhaps in hopes the program will thus
remain on the air. No attempt was made to examine television
specials or movies due to the difficulty in rating the varied

program content.

21

The second area of programming examined was the
individual's attendance to world, national, and local news.

The preferred source of these three levels of news was then
ascertained. If television was not listed as the respondent's
preferred source of local news, he was asked if he ever
watched local news on television. However, television proved
to be so overwhelming as the source of local news that the
question was of little benefit.

The third area studied involved the perceived competence
of television in dealing with inner-city problems and problems
of civil rights. In this section, also, a civil rights
question was asked to check which civil rights leader the
respondent thought was doing the best job. This question
permitted a check on the moderate vs. militant leader choices
of the two groups.

The fourth programming area studied dealt with reactions
to the Detroit riot only. Each respondent was asked what his
major source of information was during the riot, his reactions
to the riot itself, and his reactions to the television cover-
age of the riot. The respondent was also asked whether he
spent much time on the street during the riot. This question
was an attempt to achieve a self-admitted difference between
rioters and nonrioters.

The fifth and final programming section of the question-
naire dealt with respondent opinions of violence on television

and its effects on our society. Questions were included in

this section to measure the respondent's tendency toward

22

violent action as well as his opinions as to the root causes
of the major acts of violence which prompted the appointment
of the Violence Commission.

Following these five areas of programming several
questions were asked to obtain demographic type data. items
included in this section were length of residence in the
Detroit area, marital status, age, education, and employment.
Several studies provide comparative data for these items.

The complete questionnaire and program checklist appear in
Appendix II.

After pretesting the questionnaire face-to-face in the
riot area and making appropriate revisions, the instrument
was again pretested by telephone to insure that all items,
particularly the program checklist, could be handled over the
telephone. The use of the telephone was questioned because
of the income bias that may have been introduced. Other
factors to be considered were interviewer costs, time consid-
erations, dangers in working with felony arrestees, and ease
of contacting all respondents. The final decision was made
when preliminary data from a study conducted for the National
Institute of Mental Health was released. This data indicated
that only 15% of the arrestees of the Detroit riot were
unemployed and of those who were employed the average annual
income was $6,500.(24) This consideration appeared to
overcome the fear that a telephone could not be afforded by
the respondents. The advantages then overweighed the

disadvantages, and the telephone was utilized.

CHAPTER IV

RESULTS

Violence Indeces

The violence indeces for the 98 programs used for the
final evaluation ranged from 4.90 to 1.00. The most violent
program was The Untouchables while four programs——two talk
shows, a game show, and Lawrence Welk, ranked least violent.
One program, Cowboy in Africa, was rated at the neutral
position on the bipolar scale with a 3.00.

The average violence index (AVI) for the total 98
programs was 2.63. The 40 programs above the neutral point~
had an AVI of 4.00, and the 57 programs below the neutral
point rated an AVI of 1.64.

The computation of the average violence index for each
of the two samples provided a difference in the direction
originally anticipated although this difference was not
significant. The rioter AVI was 3.02 while the nonrioter
index was 2.87. Differences in the AVI for favorite programs
produced a greater difference but again not significant.
These indeces were 3.46 for rioters and 3.00 for nonrioters.

When this study was conceived it was expected that
rioters, being more inclined to action, would attend to more

violent programming than nonrioters. In retrospect the

23

24

present findings are consistent with the preponderance of
research findings which indicate that the rioter is really
not much different than the nonrioter.

In an attempt to reduce the number of variables and
thus provide a more obvious difference in the two groups, a
matched sample of fourteen respondents was drawn from the
original groups. This provided a matching on race, sex, age,
and marital status. The results drew the AVI ratings for the
two groups even closer together. In fact, they were almost
identical with the nonrioters rating a 3.05 AVI and the
rioters a 3.04 AVI for the total program list. The favorite
prOgrams followed the same line with nonrioters rating a
3.40 AVI and rioters a 3.39 AVI. Although sample size
restricts generalizability, these ratings provided further
evidence that the differences between rioters and nonrioters
in the amount of violent programming attended to is negligible.
This suggested also that either age or marital status was a
relevant factor in the original differences obtained. As will

be noted later, various age correlations appear to answer

this proposition.

Program Popularity
A popularity check was run on the programs by totaling
the number of times a program was mentioned in each group.
This popular ranking is presented in Table 2 for the t0p
four programs. This ranking does not necessarily indicate
a preference but merely a popularity. Programs which received

equal mention appear with the same rank number.

25
TABLE 2.--Four Most Popular Programs

 

 

 

 

 

N__ONRIOTERS J moms
Program Rank Program Rank
Mission Impossible 1 Mission Impossible 1
The F.B.I. 1 Voyage to the Bottom
I Spy 2 of the Sea 2
Untouchables 2 I Spy 3
Wild Wild West 2 The Invaders 3
Felony Squad 3 F Troop 3
Juvenile Court 3 Ed Sullivan 3
Traffic Court 3 The F.B.I. 4
Bonanza 4 Wild Wild West 4
Big Valley 4
The Virginian 4

 

The popularity list indicates that for the nonrioters
two of the eleven comprising the top four are below a 3.00 AVI
or nonviolent. For the rioters only one of the eight programs
is nonviolent. This difference appears to be more a function
of the number of shows each group checked as being watched
regularly than a true indicator of violence orientation.

The rioters checked an average of 42.? shows while the
nonrioters checked an average of 52.5. These figures proved
significant at the .001 level of confidence in a t test of
mean differences: 3 = 8.126, two tailed, d: = 194.

The significant difference in programs checked indicates
that nonrioters are more preoccupied with television as a
source of entertainment than are the rioters. If this is
so, a similar relationship should follow through in the use
of television as a news source, as indeed it does in the
data presented below. The data to follow in this section will

present statistical results only where significant differences

26
were achieved. In subsequent discussions of the differences
obtained, the differences were not significant unless so

noted.

News Items
To get at news the first question asked was, "Do you
pay much attention to world and national news?" This was
followed with questions as to the major sources of world and

national news. Table 3 presents the results of these inquiries.

TABLE 3.--World and National News

 

 

Do you pay much attefition to worId and national news?

 

RIOTERS NONRIOTERS
85.0 Yes 87.1
15.0 No 12.9

Where do you get most of your world news?

78.3 TV 88.9
8.7 Radio 14.8
13.0 Newspaper 3.7
4.3 Magazine 0.0

Where do you get most of your national news?

73.9 TV 96.3
4.3 Radio 7.4
17.4 Newspaper 3,?
4.3 Magazine 0 O

 

These data indicate that both samples pay almost equal
attention to world and national news but the reliance on
particular sources of news varies. Although television is
the predominate news source for both groups, the nonrioter
is more likely to use the broadcast media than is the rioter. /

At the same time, the rioter utilizes the print media to a

27
greater extent in both categories. This variance could be a
function of the difference in educational levels which will
be pointed out later. Allen reports the same overall reliance
on television for news in his study of media habits in a
Pittsburg ghetto.(1)

' When the same questions were asked about local news,
differences appear again in the sources of news but this time
attention to local news shows a wider split. This difference
in attention to local news tends to follow a prediction
made by Bob Bennett, a Negro reporter for WXYZ, who regularly
covered the Twelfth Street area before and after the riot.
Bennett, while discussing the present research project
before the research had begun, felt that the rioter would
be more oriented toward news on the national level because
there he could see more advancement than was evident in his
own local area. It also appears from the data that the rioter
gets more local news by radio than does the nonrioter. The
local news breakdown is presented in Table 4. Cases where
percentages do not add up to 100 are the result of respondents

listing more than one major source of news.

TABLE 4.-—Local News

 

 

 

Do you pay much attention to local news?

 

RIOTERS gpwsiorsas
%
85.2 Yes 93.5
14.8 No 6.5

Where do you get most of your local news?

65.4 TV 75.9
30.4 Radio 17.2
17.4 Newspaper 6.9
0.0 Magazine 0.0

 

28

Television Coverage

A specific element of local news was used to get into
the perceived competence of television in handling problems
related to the Negro. The first area examined was television
coverage of inner-city problems. The results indicate that
the rioter is more willing to rate the coverage as poor and
to indicate that there is not enough time given to the
problem. The percentages in each case are presented in
Table 5. In succeeding cases where critical remarks were
made by respondents, the number of respondents is placed
beside the percentage figure to indicate the figure was
calculated only from the total number who gave critical

responses.

Table 5.--Television and Inner-City Problems

 

 

How weIl do you feEIthe problems of the inner-city are
covered on TV?

RIOTERS NONRIOTERS
22.2 Very well 29.0
44.5 Fairly well 48.4
14.8 Not very well 12.9
18.5 Poorly 9.7

Do you have any criticism of television news coverage of
inner-city problems?

40.? Yes ' 41.6

59.3 No 58,4
Criticism:

54.5 - 6 Not enough time 9-69.2

45.5 - 5 Slanted news 4-30.8

Is enough time given to inner-city problems on TV?

37.1 Yes 54.8
62.9 No 45.2

29

Table 5.--Continued

 

 

IF NO: WHy do you tfiink there is not enough time given to
inner-city problems?

 

RIOTERS NONRlOTERS
%—
35.3 - 6 Other things to do 6 - 40.0
23.5 - 4 Need in depth 5 - 33.3
coverage

 

The overall impression from the data in Table 5
indicates first, that television does not devote enough
time to inner-city problems, particularly for the rioter.
and second, that what time is given to inner-city problems
is handled "fairly well". Along this line, the Riot
Commission pointed out that. "The Commission's major concern
with the news media is not in riot reporting as such, but
in the failure to report adequately on race relations and
ghetto problems ..."(26) The Commission noted this as a
failure of the media to communicate.

They have not communicated to the majority of
their audience—-which is white-—a sense of the
degradation, misery, and hopelessness of

living in the ghetto. They have not communicated
to whites a feeling for the difficulties and
frustrations of being a Negro in the United
States.(26) ,

One of the main points to come out of the research
conducted by the Institute for Social Research for the
Commission was that the rioter is more sensitive to discrim-
ination.(7) This is reflected in the time portion of Table 5
with the rioter feeling more strongly that not enough time

is provided for inner-city problems.

30

The second major area of perceived competence of
television dealt with problems of civil rights. The data
again indicate that a slight majority of rioters feel there
is not enough time given to problems of civil rights. The
overwhelming judgment by both samples of television's
coverage of civil rights problems was again "fairly well",
with rioters more inclined to say "poorly". The civil

rights breakdown is presented in Table 6.

TABLE 6.--Television and Civil Rights Problems

 

 

 

 

How weIl do you feel the problems of civil rights are

covered on television?

 

RIOTERS NONRIOTEHS
76
11.1 Very well 16.1
48.2 Fairly well 48.4
18.5 Not very well 19.4
22.2 Poorly 12.9
0.0 No Opinion 3.2

Do you have any criticism of television news coverage of
civil rights problems?

48.1 Yes 32.3

51.9 No 67.7
Criticism:

53.8 - 7 More time and detail 2 - 20.0

46.2 - 6 Slanted news 8 - 80.0

Is enough time given to problems of civil rights on
television?

44,4 Yes 54.8
55.6 No 45.2

IF NO: Why do you think there is not enough time given
to civil rights problems?

33.3 - 5 Don't know 4 - 28.6
40.0 - 6 More time and detail 9 - 64.3
0.0 - 0 No public demand 1 - 7.1
26.7 - 4 Whole problem too big 0 - 0.0

 

31

It is possible at this point to compare the present
data with the hypothesis that the rioter is more nationally
oriented, particularly the data concerning the criticism of
news coverage. Since inner-city items are more local in
nature and civil rights in general is more national, one
might expect less criticism from rioters on the local items.
Indeed, the data from Tables 5 and 6 show a 40.7 percent to
48.1 percent increase in criticism from local to national
items for rioters. More indicative, however, is the
41.9 percent to 32.3 percent decrease in criticism for
nonrioters in the change from local to national levels.

In conjunction with this observation it is noted that
the type of criticism, for those who stated so, remains about
the same for rioters but changes for nonrioters. The dominant
criticism for rioters in both the local and national items
was "not enough time". The nonrioter stated lack of time
as a criticism of local coverage but shifted to slanted news
as the dominant criticism of national news. The rioter did,
however, see slanted news as a relevant factor in denying
civil rights spokesmen enough time on television to make

their views clear. (See Table 7)

TABLE 7.—-Television Time for Civil Rights Spokesmen

 

 

Do spokesmen for civil rights problems have enough time on
TV to make their views clear?

 

RIOTER NONRIOTEHS
%
44.4 Yes 61.3

55.6 No 38.7

32

TABLE47.--Continued
IF NO: Why do you feel this is so?

 

'RIOTER NONRIOTBRS
%
20.0 - 3 Don't know 2 - 16.6
26.7 - 4 Slanted News 0 - 0.0
53.3 - 8 Need more time 3 - 75.0
0.0 -_0 No sponsors 1 - 8.4

 

Table 7 also points out that when spokesmen are
considered, the rioter becomes even more separated from the
nonrioter as to the amount of time he feels is granted to
civil rights spokesmen. This split could be due to the
rioter's more intense following of national leaders. If,
as Caplan and Paige point out, the rioter is more sensitive

to discrimination, he would feel this exclusion more

keenly.(7)

Civil Rights Leaders

The area of civil rights leaders seems to be an
important area of consideration when examining differences
between rioters and nonrioters. In the present study a
significant difference was found in the type of leader
preferred by each group. Table 8 presents the results of
the spokesman question. The question was originally asked
as an open-end question; and if no response was made, the

five leaders in the top half of the table were read as

possible choices.

33

Table 8.--Favorite Civil Rights Spokesman

 

 

WhiEk spokesman Tor civil rights do you think is doing the
best job?

 

RIOTERS NONRIOTEHS
75
0.0 Whitney Young 0.0
18.5 Stokely Carmichel 0.0
11.1 Roy Wilkins 19.4
7.4 H. Rap Brown 0.0
8.4

33.3 Ralph Abernathy 4
Names volunteered by the respondents:

,,,.» Belafonte \_‘_
0.0 <=::, ‘, :> 6.5
“*~ Clay e” "

,, Cunion \\
,, ” Cavender “.\
22 . 2 < Rockefeller > 0 . 0
\\ Mrs. King /
\5 All named

7.5 ——-—- -— Don't know --'- 25.7

 

Table 8 illustrates that of the arrest sample, the
dominant choices were for moderate leaders while 25.9 percent
preferred either Stokely Carmichel or H. Rap Brown. These
two leaders were classified as militant for purposes of
further analysis. At the same time not one in the nonrioter
sample listed the militant leaders as favorites. For the
nonrioters 67.8 percent chose Roy Wilkins or Ralph Abernathy
with Abernathy as the favored choice by almost half the
sample. It should be noted that at the time of the inter-
viewing Abernathy was a major name in the news as the
successor to the assassinated Martin Luther King, Jr.

Thus, if we consider Abernathy as a substitute for King,

34
we can compare data gathered immediately after the riot.
Singer interviewed 500 arrestees at their places of detention
after the riot and reports that 36.4 percent rated King as
their favorite Negro leader.(29) The present study found
33.3 percent favoring Abernathy in the rioter group. The
Chi square analysis for the significant findings in leader
choice is presented below Table 9. The analysis was

significant at the .01 level of confidence.

TABLE 9.--Chi Square Analysis - Choice of Leaders

 

 

 

 

RIOTERS NONRIOTEHS
%—
25.9 Militant o
44.4 Moderate 67.8
22.2 Other 6.5
7.5 Don't know 25.?

 

x2 = 14.85 df = 3 p<.01

These data also reveal that an important indicator of
the rioter's personal involvement in civil rights issues may
be his ready identification of civil rights leaders. The
rioter might then be further identified by the degree of
militancy of his choice.

Table 8 shows that 22.2 percent of the rioters
volunteered names that were not on our original list, while
only 6.5 percent of the nonrioters did so. Unfortunately,
no check was made of the total number of respondents in each
group who volunteered answers as opposed to those who required
reading of the list. An analysis of this nature might prove

even more conclusively the value of naming leaders as an

35
indicator of personal involvement. A similar item from Table 8
lends support to this idea in that 25.7 percent of the non-
rioters answered "don't know" even after reading of the list.
At the same time, only 7.5 percent of the rioters were
without an opinion as to which spokesman for civil rights

was doing the best job.

, The Detroit Rig;
To probe television's role in the Detroit riot the
approach was to emphasize the respondent's perception of the
riot itself, his major sources of information during the riot,
and his evaluation of the television coverage of the riot.
There were no differences between groups as to the first
place they actually saw the riot, in person or on television.
However. there was a significant difference in the reported
first reaction to seeing the riot. The greatest reaction
differences occurred in the areas of curiosity as to what
was happening, evaluation of the importance of the riot,
initial shock, and the degree to which the riot was
expected. In these cases, as Table 10 indicates, the rioter
rated slightly above the nonrioter in all instances except
the category of shock or surprise. The reaction items in

the lower half of Table 10 proved significant at the .01

level of confidence.

36

TABLE 10.--First Sighting and Reaction to the Riot

 

 

Do you recall where you first saw the Detroit riots of
last summer; was it in person or on television?

 

RIOTERS NONRIOTERS
%
77.8 In person 74.2
22.2 On television 25.8

What was your first reaction when you did see the riots?

 

3.7 No response 19.4
29.6 What was happening 12.9
14.8 Nothing big 0.0
29.6 Shocked, surprised 51.9
14.8 Felt it would happen 6.5
0.0 To stay home 9.7
7.4 Excited 0.0
x2 = 17.0433 df = 6 p<.01

These data seem to indicate that a major difference
between the rioter and the nonrioter was the nonrioter's
surprise and initial shock at the onset of the rioting.
Couple the slight majority of 51.9 percent of nonrioters
reacting this way with the 19.4 percent who could offer no
response to the question and the division becomes even
greater. The Chi square analysis for the seven categories
is presented below Table 10.

There were only slight differences between groups as
to sources of information utilized for riot news while the
riot was in progress. As might be expected, rioters tended
to use other people more frequently as sources of information
than did nonrioters. This difference mirrors the level of
active participation of the two groups. In both samples

television was the dominant source of news. Table 11 presents

37

the figures obtained for riot information sources. The
percentage total is greater than one hundred in Table 11
and the lower half of Table 10 because some subjects

responded in more than one category.

TABLE 11.--Sources of Information During the Riot

 

Where did you get most of your information during the riot?

 

RIOTERS NONRIOTERS
; %
18.5 Radio 22.6
7.4 Newspapers 6.5
70.4 Television 61.3
51.9 Other people 35.5

 

The greater reliance of the rioters on television
could again be attributed to their greater interest in
civil rights issues. As the Riot Commission points out,
the Negro tends to distrust most of the "white" media but
trusts television most because he can see for himself what
is happenin8.(26)

When asked to recall what was remembered best about
the television coverage of the riot, it was expected that
the rioter would recall more violent action. This assumption,
however, was thought to be a function of the rioters greater
attraction for violence. The data revealed that the rioter
does recall more violent action but from our previous
discussions it would be difficult to attribute this to his
more violent nature. Instead, the recall could be due to
the rioters greater sensitivity to racial issues. Since

the majority of televised scenes revealed blacks, those

38

rioters seen on television may have been perceived as being
discriminated against. Singer supplies some data to support
this when he reports that 20.6 percent of the arrestees
studied answered the question, "What were most of the people
doing during televised race riots?", by stating that "whites
were aggressing Negroes." At the same time only 1.6 percent
report seeing Negroes "aggressing against whites."(29)
Singer's data also report that for the same question,
52.2 percent of the arrestees stated that people were
"destroying property ... fighting. ... fighting the police
or National Guard."(29) The present data show a close
similarity in that 48.1 percent of the rioters reported that
what they remembered best about the television coverage was
the burning, looting, and killing. In comparison, 29 percent
of the nonrioters reported the same items as remembered best.

These items are detailed in Table 12.

TABLE 12.--Recall of Television Riot Coverage

 

 

What do you remefiBer best about the television coverage?

 

RIOTERS NONRIOTERS
%
14.8 What was happening 6.5
48.1 Burning-looting-killingZ9.0
37.1 Nothing special 48.4
0.0 Slanted news 9.?
0.0 Good coverage 6.5

 

When both samples were questioned as to their criticism
of how television covered the riots, both samples indicated

by a clear majority that the riot coverage was "good" or "as

39

well as could be expected". Consistent with the theory that
the rioter tends to feel slightly more discriminated against,
in the present study he tended to be slightly more willing
to criticize the television coverage of the riot. Likewise,
the criticism tended to be more toward the condemnation of_
slanted news. Table 13 presents both sets of data with the
number of respondents beside the critical percentages for

perspective.

TABLE 13.--Criticism of Television Riot Coverage

Do you Have any criticism of the way television handled or

covered the riots last summer?

 

RIOTERS NONRIOTERS
:33
18.5 Yes 3.2
81.5 No 96.8
Criticism:
37.5 - 3 Good coverage 4 - 80.0
62.5 - 5 Slanted news 1 - 20.0

 

No significant difference was found in the probe designed
to distinquish between rioters and nonrioters by the amount of
time spent on the street while the rioting was taking place.
Table 14 presents the responses to this item. In retrospect,
the close approximation of the nonrioter sample to the riot
area and the length of time the riot lasted would make it
difficult for the nonrioter not to have spent some time on
the street. It is noted, however. that the percentages for
the arrest group who admitted spending time on the street

are exactly the same as the arrest percentages in Table 10

4O

denoting where the respondent first saw the riot. It was
originally anticipated that in asking for an admission of
time spent on the street the respondent might fear an

admission of guilt and not answer honestly; however. this

does not appear to be the case.

TABLE 14.--Time Spent on the Street During the Riot

THIS is a yes-no answer: Many peopIe in the Detroit area

were able to watch some of the riot action in person as it
progressed over the week long period. Yes or no, did you
spend any time on the street observing or watching when
the rioting was taking place?

 

 

RIOTERS NONRIOTEHS
:3
77.8 Yes 54.8
22.2 No 45.2

 

The question in Table 14 could be criticized as being
too general in that the phrase, "did you spend any time on
the street?", was too broad to make a reliable distinction.
Judging from the frankness of questions used by other
researchers it would appear more beneficial to ask directly
if the respondent participated in the riot and utilize a

question of the type used here as an added check.

Violence Issues
The original assumption that rioters were more inclined
to violence prompted the next question concerning violence as
a means of making progress with civil rights problems. Again,

however, the results were not significant, and the majority

41

of both samples felt violence was not the best means of
making civil rights progress. The results of a 15-city study
of Negro attitudes conducted for the Riot Commission presents
the same evidence. Their conclusion was, "Most Negroes, .....
though they speak in terms that seem to justify the riots,
reject violence both as a general strategy and as an approach
they would be willing to take part in themselves."(6)

The present data are consistent with this statement,
most strongly for the nonrioters with 93.5 percent. As
might be expected, the rioters are less in agreement with
70.4 percent but still clearly a majority. The 15-cities
study states, "A somewhat larger number—-but still very
much a minority-indicate positive approval of violence as
a possible strategy for gaining Negro rights."(6) It is
noted here also that the percentage of rioters who advocate
violence, 22.2 percent, closely agrees with the percentage
of rioters who were tagged as militant, 25.9 percent.
Table 15 provides the comparative percentages for violence

advocation.

TABLE 15.--Preference for Violence in Civil Rights

fgtely, various opinions have been expressed about the use

of force or violence as a means of advancing civil rights
problems. No one, of course, is entirely right. Do you
agree or disagree with the statement that violence is the
fastest and most effective means of making progress with
civil rights problems?

 

RIOTERS NONRIOTERS
22.2 Agree 6.5
70.4 Disagree 93.5

7.4 No opinion 0.0

 

1:2

Although no differences were obtained in the amount
of violence each group watches on television, there was a
significant difference in opinions about the presence of
violence on television. The nonrioters with 64.5 percent
were more likely to state that violence on television was
bad and should not be shown. At the same time 48.1 percent
of the rioters felt that violence on television was "ok"
and was generally not harmful. Another distinction between
groups was the rioter's tendency to feel that violence on
television was needed to make the programs more interesting
or appealing. Although only 14.8 percent of the rioters
responded this way, there were no nonrioters who stated the
same view. Table 16 presents respondents' opinions to the

violence question with the Chi square values below the table.

TABLE 16.--Opinions on Television Violence

TRere Eas been a great deal of controversy over the amount

of violence that is shown on television today. How do you
feel about violence on television?

 

 

RIOTERS NONRIQTERS
%
7,4 No response 0.0
29.6 Bad-shouldn't be shown 64.5
48.2 OK-not harmful 25.8
14.8 Needed to make program 0.0
0.0 Depends on person 9.7
x2 = 15.130 df = 4 p<.01

The rioters more lenient views toward violence on
television follow through in their perception of the effect

of television violence on children. The rioters were less

43
likely to see television violence as having any effect on
children although a majority of 51.9 percent still felt it
did affect children. A clear majority of nonrioters, 74.2 percent,
felt violence on television does affect children who view
violent programs.

Both groups were in agreement as to what effect violent
shows have on adults. The slight majority here felt no effect
was evident. This close agreement appears consistent with
the closeness of the violence index ratings for the two
groups. Table 17 presents the data for both children and

adults.

TABLE 17.-~Effect of TV Violence on Children and Adults

Do you tHink tfie vioIence on teIevision has any effect on

children who view these programs?

 

 

RIOTERS NONRIOTERS
%
51.9 Yes 74.2
44.4 No 25.8
3.7 No response 0.0

Does it have any effect on adults?

44.4 Yes 45.2
51.9 No 54.8
3.7 No response 0.0

 

The similarity of responses for both groups appears
again in their reaction to what they feel is the worse kind
of violence that is presently shown on television. When
asked why they felt that particular form of violence was the

worst, responses were again similar with the exception of

44

the nonrioters' tendency to use reasons based on a concept

of brotherhood. The results are presented in Table 18.

TABLE 18.--Worst Violence on Television

 

 

What do you think is the worst kind of violence shown on
TV?

 

RIOTERS NONHIOTERS
%
14.8 Don't know 6.4
48.2 4 Shooting, killing, war 58.1
14.8 Riots, stealing, gang-fights 16.1
11.1 All violence 9.?
11.1 Miscellaneous 9.7
Why?

29.6 No response 41.9
33.3 People imitate 35.5
18.5 Utmost in violence 0.0
18.5 Too realistic 0.0
0.0 Against brotherhood 22.6

 

A further probe of perceived causes of the violence
prominant in America produced a split in the responses
obtained from the two groups. The initial probe was to
obtain reactions to the major acts of violence evidenced by
the assassinations of Senator Kennedy, Martin Luther King, Jr.,
and President John F. Kennedy. In this instance, reactions
were quite similar with no major discrepancies evident. The
second part of the same question asked the respondent if he
thought the violent assassinations showed that America was a
"sick society or just that it was the work of sick individuals".
This probe was to be asked only if the respondent gave no

response to the assassination inquiry. However, in some cases

45
the question was asked even if a response was given. For
purposes of meaningful analysis both questions should have
been asked of all respondents. As it now is presented, those
not responding to the second question and thus classified as
"no response" are those who answered the first question. This
violates the assumption of mutual independence necessary in
a statistical analysis based on random sampling. Thus, no
test of significance is presented even though a Chi square
analysis of the data thus grouped was significant at the
.05 level. Table 19 presents both sets of data with the

number of respondents beside the percentages in question.

TABLE 19.--Perceived Causes of National Violence

 

 

 

Over the past few years there have been several assassinations
of leaders such as Senator Robert F. Kennedy, Martin Luther
King, Jr., and President John F. Kennedy. Why do you think
these assassinations have taken place in America?

 

filQIEBé NONRIOTERS
% %
22.2 Organization behind it 29.0
26.7 Helping Negro & poor 35.5
14.8 Crazed people 9.7
4.3 Could happen anywhere 0.0
32.0 No response 25.8

IF NO RESPONSE: Do you think it shows that America is a
sick society or just that it was the work of sick
individuals?

40.7 Sick society 12.9
40.7 Sick individuals 51.9
18.6 No response 35.2

 

46

Demographic Items

 

The present study reveals that a strong majority of
respondents in both samples have lived in the Detroit area
five years or longer. The percentages were nearly equiva-
lent for the two groups with 92.6 percent for the rioters
and 93.6 percent for the nonrioters. Other categories
registering respondents were 2-3 years and 3-4 years as

evidenced by Table 20.

TABLE 20.--Length of Residence in Detroit

 

How long have you lived in the Detroit area?

 

RIOTERS NONRIOTERS
%
0.0 0-1 years 0.0
0.0 1-2 years 0.0
7.4 2-3 years 3.2
0.0 3-4 years 3.2
92.6 5 years or more 93.6

 

These data agree with other findings to come out of
Detroit. The "riffraff" theory assumed rioters more likely
to be short term residents of the city; but as was pointed
out earlier, this was not the case. One study reported that
in Detroit 59 percent of the rioters and 35 percent of the
nonrioters were born in the city.(7) Singer reports that
of the 500 arrestees he investigated only 8.6 percent had
lived in the city less than a year. At the same time,

78.8 percent had lived in the city six years or more.(29)

The marital status of the rioters vs. nonrioters

revealed no significant differences. There appears to be

47
a greater number of nonrioters who are married and more rioters
than nonrioters that are single. Fogelson and Hill conducted
a study for the Riot Commission which revealed that 48.4 percent
of the rioter sample were single and 38.4 percent were
married. For the nonrioters, 19.2 percent were single and
60.1 percent were married.(11) The remaining percentages
in each case were divorced, separated, or widowed. Singer
reports the same percentages in his data.(29) These
percentages are relatively close to the results obtained for
the nonrioters in the present study while the rioters display
a lower percentage of single persons. However, for their
data Fogelson and Hill are careful to point out that
" ... it is clear that single persons are over-represented
among the arrestees, whereas married, separated, widowed,
and divorced persons are under-represented."(11) With this
allowance in mind and the high degree of consistency
displayed thus far, the present marital data appear to be

reliably acceptable. These data are presented in Table 21.

TABLE 21.--Marital Status

 

1

 

Wfiat is your marital status?

 

RIOTERS NONRIOTERS
%
22.2 Single 16.1
66.? Married 71.0
7.4 Separated or divorced 9.7
3.7 Widower 3.2

 

48

The results of the education question provided data
consistent with evidence now available on the rioters'
educational level. Originally it was thought the rioter would
be less educated than the nonrioter. This thinking was consis-
tent with the "riffraff" theory which has fallen before the
masses of data to come out of the riots. Caplan and Paige
state, "Although it is true that the rioter is likely to be
a high school dropout, his nonrioting neighbor is more likely
to be an elementary school dropout."(7) The data from the
present study is consistent with this finding and is

presented in Table 22.

TABLE 22.—-Educational Level

I
L

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

RIOTERS EDUCATION NONRIOTEHS
%
22.2 Grade School 39.0
59.3 High School 48.0
18.5 College 1.3

 

The findings that the rioter is actually better
educated than the nonrioter has been a major refutable point
against the "riffraff" theory. The percentages reported in
Table 22 are for respondents reporting any level within
the three major categories and does not necessarily mean
that particular educational level was completed.

The area of employment reveals that the present data
are consistent with the Caplan and Paige comparison of.

rioter vs. nonrioter employment. The specific percentages

49
do, however, vary. Caplan and Paige report that, "ln Detroit
the unemployment rate among the nonrioters was practically
identical with that for the rioters, 32%.(7) The present
data indicate that the unemployed nonrioters accounted for
16.1 percent of the sample while 18.5 percent of the rioters
were in the same category. Similarly, 83.9 percent of the
nonrioters reported being employed at the present time while
81.5 Percent of the rioters reported the same. Due to the
difference in time when the two studies were conducted, and
the nature of the samples themselves, it is difficult to
make a direct comparison of percentages. However, it is
important that the relationships between the samples in each

study do hold true.

Age egg Violence Preference

The age of the respondents, particularly the rioters,
proved consistent with available data. With a small sample
it is difficult to talk about particular percentages for
specific age groups; therefore, the most appropriate
percentages to report would be those indicating the extent
of participation by specific age brackets. By reporting
bracket percentages it is possible to establish to what
degree the sample represents the actual pOpulation. Hill
and Fogelson in their ten-city study of rioters for the
Riot Commission stated, "... the young people between the
ages of 15 and 34 constitute an overwhelming majority of

the arrestees; these proportions range from 70% in Detroit

50
to 93% in Buffalo."(11) The present study indicates that in
the same 15-34 age category 71 percent of the rioters were
represented.

The Hill and Fogelson study compared area residents
but limited their selection to people 59 years old or
younger. They stipulated this limitation because no one in
their arrestee sample was over 59. No such limitation was
made in the present study since the sample drawn was a
random sample of the area. As a result, there were nine
respondents between the ages of 60 and 69. This difference
in the samples prohibits a meaningful direct comparison of
percentages. However, Hill and Fogelson do report that,
"... the similar proportions of those between 15 and 34 among
the potential rioters (area residents)-with the exception
of one city (New Haven)-—are all under 50 percent."(11)

The age percentages for the present study are presented in

Table 23.

TABLE 23.-~Age of Respondents
W

 

RIOTERS AGE NONRIOTERS
%
71.0 15-34 22.6
29.0 35-59 48.4
0.0 65-68 29.0

 

The rioter age data is consistent with other rioter
data; however, it is difficult to ascertain nonrioter

representation without comparative data. If anything, the

51
65-69 age group may be over-represented, and it would be
expected that the groups showing would tend to be somewhat
more conservative. If this were the case, it would be easier
to achieve significant differences on such items as the violence
index. However, as has been shown, this was not the case.

It was pointed out earlier that a comparison of the
smaller samples matched on age, sex, marital status, and race
produced average violence indeces for the groups that were
almost identical. At the same time there was a 3.02 to
2.87 difference between rioters and nonrioters for the total
groups. Since race and sex were constant throughout the
study, the difference could be due to either marital status
or age. The age component did show variance that could be
attributed to the difference in question. There were no
rioters over 59 years of age while there were nine from
59-69 for the nonrioters. The average violence index for
those over 59 was 2.70 while the AVI for nonrioters excluding
those over 59 was 2.94. The age difference does then appear
to account for a good deal of the AVI variance.

In comparison to the present AVI system, experimental
studies of perceived violence have been undertaken through
the use of a stereoscope viewer. The subject is presented
two pictures or fields and through natural binocular fision
the images are fused into one unit. Binocular fision, then,
provides a unitary response to the combined fields.(3i)132)
Thus, by presenting a nonviolent image and a similar violent

image, it has been found that, "People with a history of

52
involvement in violence and people who eventually become
involved in violence, perceive violent scenes in the stereo-
scope."(25) It has been established also that a linear
relationship exists for an individual's age and his perception
of violence. This held true in an ascending linear
relationship for students in grades 3 through 13.(22)

A similar relationship exists for the AVI ratings of
the two groupslin the present study. However, it is noted
that between the ages of 35 and 45 there is a slight decrease
in the AVI ratings followed by a marked increase for the
45-58 age group and an even more marked decrease from
58-68.

Since the AVI ratings of the two groups are so similar,
except for the 59-68 age group as pointed out earlier, and
since these exceptions do not overlap across samples, it
is possible to combine the data for purposes of visualizing
the prominant decrease for the 58-68 age group. Figure 1
presents the resulting curvalinear relationship. Since the
AVI ratings are preference indeces it is apparent from
Figure 1 that the preference for violent shows increases in
the mid 50's and drops rapidly after age 58.

For comparative purposes the Nielsen top ten programs
in the nation for various age groups were utilized to compute
AVI ratings for those age groups. The Nielsen programs
reflect program tastes from October 23 to December 3, 1967.(16)
The results indicate that the 6-11 year olds have an AVI

of 1.59 for 10 programs. The 12-17 year old group rated a

53
2.81 AVI for 9 programs, the tenth being a movie. The 18-34
age group rated a 3.61 AVI for 4 programs, since six were
movies. Although the 18-34 rating is exaggerated, the
increasing trend is evident. The final Nielsen age group
of 50+ years old rated a 2.70 AVI for 9 programs, the tenth
being news. Thus, the AVI ratings for the Nielsen age groups
appear to support the stereoscope linear increase findings,
at the same time support the present findings of a decrease
for the older respondents in the sample. No Nielsen ratings
were provided for the 35-49 age group so no comparison can

be made.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

AVERAGE VIOLENCE INDEX
u

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

g
20 30 40 50 6O 7O

 

AGE

Figure 1.--Average Violence Indeces and Age

CHAPTER V

DISCUSSION

The Present Study

The data in this study appear to be highly consistent
with other research data to come out of the Detroit area.
This consistency for both rioters and nonrioters crosses
the areas of refusal rate, education, news preference, choice
of civil rights leaders, opinions on inner-city problems as
well as civil rights problems and spokesmen, advocating
violence as a solution to civil rights problems, residence.
and age. From the consistency of these comparisons it is
fair to assume that the rioter-nonrioter distinction
originally sought was attained.

The main conclusions to be drawn from these data are
first, that the rioter does not attend to any more violent
television entertainment programming than does his nonrioting
7 neighbor. Second, age seems to be an important factor in
determining how much violent programming an individual in
either sample will watch. Third. the rioter is less pre-
occupied with television than is the nonrioter, although
television is still the dominant medium in his life. This
preoccupation with television includes entertainment as

evidenced by a significant difference in the number of

54

55
programs watched regularly. television as a source of news,
and television as a perceived source of influence upon society,
particularly children. Fourth, the rioter displays a signifi-
cantly greater tendency to follow militant civil rights
leaders than does the nonrioter. Fifth, the rioter is
significantly less likely to react to the first sight of the
riots with surprise or shock.

The present study has instituted two distinct research
innovations. The first is the violence index used to determine
the relative degree of violent content for each program. The
second is the program checklist used to determine the respon-
dents overall viewing preferences. The two instruments worked
well together to distinguish the programs the respondent
prefers above all others offered in his area and to provide
a system for ranking all programs as to their degree of
violence.

The rating of the programs by the panel of judges
displayed remarkable consistency, so much so that a test of
inter-judge reliability was deemed unnecessary. The use of
a large number of judges produced a rating stability that
would not be possible using a smaller number of judges.

After the present study was completed, a study of the
demographic characteristics of viewers who are heavy viewers
of violent programs was reported in Mediglscope.(33) The
program rating system utilized in the study was similar

to the one developed for the present study in that a

five point bipolar scale was used to rate the programs as

56
violent or nonviolent. However, the rating was made by
three television critics and the criteria of rating was not
stipulated in the study report. An attempt made by James Smith,
co-developer of the present rating system, to contact the study
directors to ascertain the criteria used for rating received
no reply.

The program checklist used in the present study over-
comes difficulties the respondents may have had in attempting
to recall programs which they watch regularly. Greenberg
reports that what tends to happen in a recall situation is
that the respondent recalls the programs he watched the
previous evening.(12) As reported earlier, if respondents
could be held to yes-no answers the list was completed in-
five to seven minutes without losing the respondent's
interest. There is also the advantage of being able to
cover all program listings of a specified time period with-
out having the respondent check through a program schedule
as is often done in a face-to-face interview. The difficulty
remains with combining the violence rating system and the
checklist of not being able to effectively deal with
movies, specials, or news.

The first conclusion that the rioter does not attend
to any more violent television entertainment is now not
surprising in light of the fallacies that have been pointed
out in the "riffraff" theory. This conclusion, of course,
is based on the assumption that the violence index deveIOped

for this study is a valid measure of the violent content of

57

the programs rated. Since the ratings obtained from the panel
of judges were based on a specified definition the question
arises as to the objectivity of the ratings. Even if the-
ratings are objective, can it be assumed that the objective
rating relates to the individual's perceived violence? In
essence, the question becomes, does an individual's preference
for a violent program (objectively rated) correspond to the
amount of violence he actually sees in that program? The
problem of selective perception is too large to deal with
effectively in this exposition; however, studies with the
stereoscope appear to provide important evidence along these
lines.

As pointed out earlier, studies with the stereoscOpe
indicate that an individual's perception of violence increases
in a linear fashion with his age. These studies then are
studies in selective perception which cover the ages of
8-19. At the same time, the AVI ratings computed for various
age groups in the present study revealed similar characteristics.
This comparison makes two points. First, if the correlation
between perceived violence and the AVI ratings of preferred
violence hold true, the AVI system could prove to be a fruit-
ful tool for researching both areas. Second, since the
correlations do appear to hold for the present data, a
cutoff point around the ages of 55-58 has been located for
maximum attendance to violence in television entertainment.
The task remains to determine what psychological processes

account for the change. Is the change due to preference

58
only or perception, or more likely. some combination of the
two? Why the prominent increase in attendance to violent
entertainment just before the dramatic decrease?

' One possible explanation for the AVI increase before
the final decrease may be offered in the frustration-
aggression theories. It is noted here that the frustration-
aggression theories bear striking similarities to the
"blocked opportunity" theory which appears to be the most
accurate for explaining the rioter's behavior. If the
rioter can see the goals he is striving for, but discrimi-
nation blocks his path, then frustration results. Similarly.
as frustration increases, aggression also increases.(7) It
has been pointed out by Berkowitz that in the frustration-
aggression theories the element of hope must be considered.
The individual must see the goal as obtainable.(5) In the
case of the increased AVI ratings before the final decrease
it may be that the Negro respondents at the 55-58 age range
are asserting their final hopes at achieving certain goals,
thus feeling the greatest frustration which results in
attendance to more aggressive television content.

There are interrelationships in the last three conclu-
sions which merit further elaboration. The conclusion that
the rioter is generally less preoccupied with television
than is the nonrioter is a difference which extends throughout
the data. This difference comes through first in the attention
paid to world and national news and then more strongly in

local news. Although television is the dominant news source

59

for both groups, the rioter consistently rates lower in usage
of television for news. This difference could be partially
dependent upon the rioters slightly higher educational level.
The nonrioters greater preoccupation with television
is most evident in the number of shews checked as being
watched regularly. In this category the nonrioter averages
almost ten percent more programs than does the rioter.
Similarly, the‘nonrioter sees television violence as having.’
an effect on children while the rioter is less likely to see
any such relationship. Caplan and Paige report that the
rioter is somewhat more active than is the nonrioter, as
evidenced by membership in organizations and social inter-
action with neighbors.(7) If this is the case, the rioters'
greater activity would utilize more of his time and he would
naturally have less time to devote to the television medium.
The rioters' activity appears to be somewhat politically
oriented as evidenced by his greater tendency to follow
militant leaders. If the rioter is more active and more
militant, this could explain his lesser degree of shock and
surprise at the riots. At the same time, considering all
these factors which result in less preoccupation with tele-
vision, it is not unusual to find that the rioter would feel
television violence has less effect on our society, particularly
on the children. 7
The rioters' tendency toward militancy is a significant
finding that also merits further consideration. The present

finding that the rioter is more inclined toward militancy is

60

perhaps not as revealing or important as the indication that

the rioter is much more able to state an opinion and choose

a leader without prompting than is the nonrioter. This factor
could be used in future research as an indicator of personal
involvement in civil rights issues and potential involvement

in riot activity. There is a question which remains unanswered-
is the greater interest of the rioter and his ability to name
civil rights leaders a result of his past involvement in the

riots or a precondition for his involvement?

Future Research

There are several angles from which to approach the two
major areas of violence and civil disturbance covered in this
exploratory study. To explore the area of violence on tele-
vision in general two distinctions must be made. The first
is the actual, objective, strictly defined violent act present
in the program. A content analysis of a sampling of programs
similar to the analysis by the Riot Commission could be used
to establish this objective rating. The second is the
perceived violence. In actuality, it is the perceived violence
we are most interested in since it could be argued that if
a stimulus is to become part of an individual's behavioral
repertoire it must be perceived and internalized by the
individual. How the stimulus is perceived will vary according
to the individual's past experiences and current behavior;
also. if the question of how violence affects an individual
is to be investigated, it is essential to know how the

violence is perceived.

61

The stereoscope studies mentioned earlier have
demonstrated an ability to examine violence perception in
an experimental setting. It is proposed here that an investi-
gation of various violent and nonviolent programs could be
studied with the stereoscope by utilizing scenes from the
specified programs as the image presented to the subject. The
scenes might have to be transferred to drawings to reduce
the stimuli but the subjects could be told which program the
scene was taken from to further set his frame of reference.
The same subjects could be given the preference checklist
and assigned an AVI rating as was done in the present study.
Over time, a correlation between the stereoscope ratings of‘
perceived violence and the AVI ratings of preferred programs
could be established for various age groups, races, socio-
economic classes, sexes, educational levels, or whatever
variable was deemed relevant. Allowances, of course. would
have to be made for the inability of the stereoscope to
account for verbal violence. Once the correlation was
established the AVI system could be taken to the field on a
large scale and the resulting preference ratings easily
transferred to perceived ratings.

Another approach to the perceived violence problem
would be to draw a smaller random sample from the target
population and train these individuals to use the semantic
differential for rating the programs. They would then be
instructed to rate the programs solely on how violent they

thought the programs generally were. This method should

62

approach a perceived rating. The AVI system based on the
trained subjects' ratings could then be used on the target
population.

These proposed studies are based on the assumption
that a relatively homogenous class of respondents will have
similar past experiences and current behaviors, both are
major factors in determining the individual's selective
perception. The Medialscope study of demographic character-
istics of heavy viewers of violent programs bears out this
assumption.(33) With the assumption of similar background
experiences and current behaviors accepted, a phenomena
as personal as selective perception attains greater
generalizability.

The area of urban unrest also commands various avenues
of approach to the problem. There has been a great deal of
research on rioting and the attitudes of the Negro population
in riot cities as well as the nation. To date, an acceptable
theory of "why" the Negro riots has been advanced as a result
of this research. This "blocked opportunity" theory illustrates
the Negroes frustration and impatience at discrimination which
prevents him from doing or having the things entitled to all
Americans. The theory is reflected in the Riot Commission's
conclusion that white racism has lead to a nation headed
toward "... two societies, one black, one white-—separate
and unequal."(26)

Now that the causes of riot behavior are beginning to

be understood the answer to the "why" question is being

63
supplied. The next area of concern is the solution to the
problem. The Riot Commission has called for national action
to obtain the following objectives:

1. Opening.up opportunities to those who are
restricted by racial segregation and
discrimination, and eliminating all barriers
to their choice of jobs, education and
housing.

2. Remove the frustration of powerlessness
among the disadvantaged by providing the
means for them to deal with the problems
that affect their own lives and by
increasing the capacity of our public and
private institutions to respond to these
problems.

3. Increasing communication across racial
lines to destroy stereotypes, to halt
polarization, and distrust and hostility,
and create common ground for efforts
toward public order and social justice.

These are large orders which require time to fulfill
but as communication specialists it is the last objective
which should be of immediate importance. The Commission
concluded their recommendations for national action with
what appears to be a general goal. "The major goal is
the creation of a true union-a single society and a single
American identity."(26) The choice of the term "identity"
suggests an important approach to the integration problem
in that the identity concept provides a starting point for
development of a broad communication approach to the third
objective above.

Research data lends support for the identity viewpoint.
Caplan and Paige conclude their report for the Riot Commission

with the statement:

on

Our data suggest that Negroes who riot do so
because their conception of their lives and
their potential has changed without commen-
surate improvement in their chances for a
better life. In addition to abandoning the
traditional stereotype that made nonachieve-
ment and passive social adaptation seem so
natural. they have developed a sense of black
consciousness and a desire for a way of life in
which they can feel the same pride and sense
of potency they now derive from being black.(7)

"Black consciousness" and "pride" as well as the sense
of one's place in society are what identity is about. Campbell
and Schuman in their study of racial attitudes in 15 cities
state:

We must mention one other significant note in
these data. There seems to exist in the Negro
community a desire for cultural identity that
is neither violent nor separatist in character.
It expresses itself in the desire for knowledge
of Negro history, in an interest in African
culture and language, and in the concern to be
openly and proudly black. While it may some-
times occur in forms that seem impractical, on
the whole it appears to be a positive impulse
toward racial identity which may in the long
run contribute substantially to a more genuinely
equal relationship between the races.(6)

This statement provides evidence of the importance of
the Negroes' sense of identity as a precursor to achieving
equality. Luby's research in Detroit for the National
Institute of Health came to the same conclusion. Luby states
that the Detroit riot was an expression of the Negroes

"... growing identity, growing pride, growing
esteem and an indication that the black man no
longer is measuring himself in terms of the

white man .... Black people ... are now developing
a sense of identity, a feeling of self-determination

and feelings that they are able now to control
their own community."(24)

65

If indeed establishing a positive self-identity is
essential to achieving Negro equality: and if identity is
the sense of self and one's place in society, and if the
Negro spends as much time with television as previous
research indicates (particularly the low-income Negro),
then it is probable that the Negro may be obtaining some
information about\society and his own place in it from
television. Studies by Greenberg and Dominic and by Gerson
indicate this is the case with Negro teenagers.(13)(15)

In actuality television may be the most effective short
range approach to the identity problem for both races. The
Riot Commission stated:

The absence of Negro faces and activities from

the media has an effect on white audiences as

well as black. If what the white American

reads in the newspapers or sees on television

conditions his expectation of what is ordinary

and normal in the larger society, he will

neither understand nor accept the black

American.(26)

It may be interesting to note an analogy between the
behavior of human beings of different color and the behavior
of chickens in a laboratory. Chicks, yellow and black, were
raised together and mingled in playing and feeding. There
were no discriminations made in mating behaviors of the
combined group. At the same time chicks raised only with
their same color when later put together tended significantly
to segregate in mating behavior. Control groups for both
colors raised separately and the experiment repeated showed

no discrimination in mating due to the fact they were raised

apart.(19) Although a gross simplification, this experiment

66

gives emphasis to the strong visual character of the integration
problem and further suggests the importance of television in
our visually oriented society.

The present research also hints at the identity
problem. primarily in items dealing with the amount of time
which television devotes to Negro problems. These indications'
are strongest for the rioter in that he would like to see
more time given to his own inner-city problems and to the
entire area of civil rights. As was mentioned, previous
research indicates that the entire Negro community is searching
for "their" place in society, and it is the rioter who feels
this lack of identity most strongly.

Recognizing the need for research in the identity
area there are two major avenues of attack with emphasis on
a mass communication approach. The first area is that of
understanding the role television does play in the socializa-
tion processes of both Negroes and whites. The pioneer works
of Greenberg and Dominic and of Gerson in the area of television
influence have proven encouraging and should be expanded. At
the same time, more data is needed as to Negro attitudes
toward television. If, as the Riot Commission points out,
the Negro has become disenchanted with television news it
may be that the entertainment function of the medium is having
the greatest influence. With the apparent increase in the
appearance of Negroes in situation entertainment this

possibility becomes even more plausible.

6?

The second area of immediate research need is into
the identity formation process itself. McLaughlin has under-
taken a respectable exploration into the area through the
development of a computerized dictionary used with the
General Inquirer system. This dictionary analyses responses
to the "Who am I" question which has proven insightful into
identity formation processes over time.(21) The General
Inquirer system holds other possibilities for examining
Need-Achievement which appears to be related to the identity
question.

As these areas of research begin to produce usable
results then innovative suggestions relevant to identity
formation processes can be made to the broadcasting industry
for the benefit of both races. The Negro problem in America
is too complex to be solved by the implimentation of a
single research approach. However, the communication problem
has been recognized by both sides and the identity approach
could provide a necessary guideline to fractional communi-
cation research efforts. efforts which could contribute
substantially to the formation of "a single American
identity".

APPENDICES

69

APPENDIX I

PROGRAM VIOLENCE RATING FORM

The following includes the definition and list of television
programs used by a panel of graduate students to determine a

violence index for each program.

70

Below is a working definition for a Violent Television
Program. The attached sheets contain a list of television
programs.

Would you please read the definition and mark those programs
with which you are familiar as either violent or nonviolent
on the scales provided.

Definition of a Violent Television Pro rm m-A program
where usualIy at some point the act on results in
injury or destruction to some object, animal or human.
The injury may be psychological or physical...a result
of verbal or motor action.

71
TRLBVISION PHOGHAMS
1. Rowan and Martin
Violent ° : : : __: Nonviolent

O
— — fl —

2. Operation Rntertainment
Violent ° : : : __: Nonviolent

3. Gentle Ben

Violent __: __: __: __: __: Nonviolent
- 4. Dream House

Violent __: __: __: __: __: Nonviolent
5. The Saint

Violent __: __: __: __: __: Nonviolent
6. Hollywood Palace

Violent __: __: __: __: __: Nonviolent
7. Avengers

Violent __: __: __: __: __: Nonviolent
8, Lost in Space

Violent __: __: __: __: __: Nonviolent
9. Provincial Affairs

Violent __: __: __: __: __: Nonviolent
10. Nations Business

Violent __: __: __: __: __: Nonviolent
11. Country Music Hall

Violent __: __: __3 __: __: Nonviolent

12. Traffic Court

Violent __: __: : : : Nonviolent

13.
Violent
1a.
Violent
15.
Violent
16.
Violent
1?.
Violent
18.
Violent
19.
Violent
20.
Violent
21.
Violent
22.
Violent
23.
Violent
2h.
Violent
2‘5.
Violent

~ .

72
Judd for the Defense

Nonviolent

: Nonviolent

Guns of Will Sonnett

Nonviolent

Hollywood Squares

: Nonviolent

Star Trek

': :.__: Nonviolent

h_~—

Gomer Pyle USMC

a. ,__ ,__ .__: Nonviolent
Off to See the Wizard

: Nonviolent

Nonviolent

- Nonviolent

: _: _: _: _: Nonviolent
Batman

: __: __3 __: __: Nonviolent
Daniel Boone

: : : : : Nonviolent

Michigan Outdoors

Nonviolent

73
26. Untouchables

Violent : : : : : Nonviolent

27. Dean Martin

Violent : : : : : Nonviolent

28. Telescope

Violent : : : : : Nonviolent

29. Dragnet

ViOlent : : ': : : Nonviolent

30. That Girl

Violent . Nonviolent

31.’ Bewitched

Violent -: : : : : Nonviolent

32.’ Ironside

Violent -: : : : : Nonviolent

33. Flying Nun

Violent : : : : : Nonviolent

34. Cimarron Strip

Violent :' a : : : Nonviolent

35. The Second Hundred Years

Violent' : : : : : Nonviolent

36. Festival

Violent : : ': : : Nonviolent

3?. Juvenile Court
Violent : :‘ : :

38. Run for Your Life

Nonviolent

Violent : : : : : Nonviolent

7h
39. Jonathan Winters

Violent : : : : Nonviolent

#0. He and She

Violent : : : : : Nonviolent

#1. Kraft Music Hall

Violent : : : : : Nonviolent

42. Green Acres

Violent : : : : : Nonviolent

#3. Beverly Hillbillies

Violent : : : : : Nonviolent

4“. Bob Young News

Violent : : : : __: Nonviolent

#5. Huntly-Brinkly News

Violent : : : : __: Nonviolent

#6. Walter Cronkite News

Violent : .: .: : : Nonviolent

“7. The Virginian
'V1°1°nt ‘ 3 : x : Nonviolent
#8. Daktari,

Violent : : : : : Nonviolent

#9. Weekend

Violent : : : : : Nonviolent

50. Public Eye

Violent - : : : : Nonviolent

o
- - fl — .—

51. Newsmagazine

Violent : : : : : Nonviolent

52.
Violent
53.
Violent
5“.
Violent
55.
Violent
56.
Violent
57.
Violent
58.
Violent
59.
Violent
60.
Violent
61.
Violent
62.
Violent
63.
Violent
6“.
Violent

75

The Invaders

: __: Nonviolent

: __: __:‘__:‘__: Nonviolent
It Takes a Thief

: _: _: _: _: Nonviolent
Red Skelton

: : : : : Nonviolent

: : Nonviolent

Garrison's Gorillas
Nonviolent

Nonviolent

: Nonviolent

Don Hesser's Jubilee

: : : :1 : Nonviolent

: : : Nonviolent

Front Page Challenge
Nonviolent

Nonviolent

65. I Spy

Violent : : : : : Nonviolent

66. Carol Burnett

Violent : : : : : Nonviolent

67. Peyton Place
Violent : : : : : Nonviolent
68. Family Affair

Violent : : : : : Nonviolent

69. Felony Squad

Violent : : : : : Nonviolent

70. Danny Thomas

Violent : : : : : Nonviolent

71. Andy Griffith

Violent : z 3 : : Nonviolent

72. Rat Patrol

Violent : : : : : Nonviolent

73. Lucille Ball

Violent : : : : : Nonviolent

7h. Cowboy in Africa

Violent : : : : : Nonviolent

75. The Monkees

Violent : : : : : Nonviolent

76. Gunsmoke

Violent : : : : : Nonviolent

77. Gilligan's Island

Violent : : : : : Nonviolent

78.
Violent
79.
Violent
80.
Violent
81.
Violent
82.
Violent
83.
Violent
8“.
Violent
85,
Violent
86.
Violent
8?.
Violent
88.
Violent
89.
Violent

90.

Violent

77

Dennis the Menace

The Way It Is

0.
O.
O.
O.
O O

z 0 O O O
O O O O
— — — — —

O.
O.
O.
O.
O.

- Nonviolent

Nonviolent
Nonviolent
Nonviolent
Nonviolent
Nonviolent

Nonviolent

- Nonviolent

Nonviolent

° Nonviolent

. Nonviolent

Nonviolent

Walt Disney's Wonderful

World of Color

: Nonviolent

78
91. Truth or Consequences

Violent : : : : : Nonviolent

92. Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea

Violent : : : : : Nonviolent

93. Lassie

Violent : : : : : Nonviolent

9h. Opportunity Line

Violent : : : : : Nonviolent

95. G. E. College Bowl

Violent : : : : : Nonviolent

96. Maya

Violent : : : z : Nonviolent

97. Pro Hockey

Violent _: _: _: _: _: Nonviolent
98. Newlywed Game

Violent _: _: _: _: _: Nonviolent
99. Sports Profile

Violent : : : : : Nonviolent

100. My Three Sons

Violent : : : : : Nonviolent

101. Hollywood and the Stars

Violent : : : : : Nonviolent

102. Dating Game

Violent : : : : : Nonviolent

103. Rawhide

Violent : : : : : Nonviolent

10“.
Violent
105.
Violent
106.

Violent

107.
Violent
108.
Violent
109.
Violent
110.
Violent
111.
Violent
112.
Violent
113.
Violent
114.
Violent
115.
Violent

79

Robin Seymore

Anniversary Game

Nonviolent

Nonviolent

Nonviolent

Nonviolent

Nonviolent

: Nonviolent

Nonviolent

Nonviolent

Nonviolent

Nonviolent

Nonviolent

Nonviolent

80

APPENDIX II

QUESTIONNAIRE AND PROGRAM CHECKLIST

81

Hello. my name is , and I am with a
research team from Michigan State University. We are
taking a television viewing survey of the peOple in the
Detroit area. Your name was drawn at random from the
phone book, and I would like to ask you a few questions

sabout what you think about TV, if I might ....

All of our information is just to give us a general
look at how people feel about TV, so don't hesitate

to express your honest opinion.

wmflamkwNo-s

82

TELEVISION PROGRAMS CHECKLIST

Grand Ole Opry
Michigan Sportsman
Death Valley Days
Anniversary Game
Jackie Gleason

Get Smart

Lawrence Welk
Hogan's Heroes
Petticoat Junction
Mannix

In Person

Robin Seymore
Rawhide

Dating Game 7
Hollywood and the Stars
My Three Sons
Sports Profile
Newlywed Game

Pro Hockey

Maya

G. E. College Bowl
Opportunity Line
Lassie

Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea
Truth or Consequences
Walt Disney's World
Ed Sullivan
Mothers-in-Law
F.B.I.

Lowell Thomas
Bonanza

Mission Impossible
High Chaparral
Flashback

Smother's Brothers
Man at the Center
The Way It Is
Dennis the Menace
Gilligan's Island
Gunsmoke

The Monkees

Cowboy in Africa
Lucille Ball

Rat Patrol

Andy Griffith
Danny Thomas

Felony Squad
Family Affair
Peyton Place

Carol Burnett

51.
52.
53.
.54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60

61.
62.
63.
6h.
65.
66.
6?.
68.
69.
70.
71.
72.
73.
74.
75.
76.
77.
78.
79.
80.
81.
82.
83.
8h.
85.
86.
87.
88.
89.
90.
91.
92.
93.
94.
95.
96.
97.
98.
99.
100.

I Spy

Big Valley

Front Page Challenge
George Piersot

Don Messer's Jubilee
F Troop

I Dream of Jeannie
Garrison's Gorillas
Jerry Lewis

Red Skelton

It Takes a Thief
Good Morning World
N.Y.P.D.

The Invaders
Newsmagazine

Public Eye

Weekend

Daktari

The Virginian
Walter Cronkite News
Huntly-Brinkly News
Bob Young News
Beverly Hillbillies
Green Acres

Kraft Music Hall

He and She

Jonathan Winters
Run for your Life
Juvenile Court

The Second Hundred Yea:
Festival

Cimarron Strip
Flying Nun

Ironside

Bewitched

That Girl

Dragnet

Telescope

Dean Martin
Untouchables
Michigan Outdoors
Daniel Boone

Batman

Horse Racing

Wild Wild West
Tarzan

Off to See the Wizard
Gomer Pyle USMC
Star Trek

Hollywood Squares

33

TELEVISION PROGRAMS CHECKLIST
(Continued)

Guns of Will Sonnett
Tommy Hunter

Judd for the Defense
Traffic Court
Country Music Hall
Nations Business
Provincial Affairs

108.

109.’

110.
111.
112.
11 .
11 .
115.

Lost in Space
Hollywood Palace
Avengers

The Saint

Dream House

Gentle Ben

Operation Entertainment
Rowan and Martin

84
TELEVISION VIEWING QUESTIONNAIRE

Do you have a television set at home? (a) Yes, (b) No.

I have a list of television programs here that I will
read off to you: please answer yes or no as to whether
you watch the program every week or almost every week.

What are your three most favorite television shows?
Are there any others you especially like?

Do you pay much attention to world and national news?
(a) Yes, (b) No.
IF YES: Where do you get most of your world news?

Where do you get most of your national news?

Do you pay much attention to local news? (a) Yes, (b) No.
IF YES: Where do you get most of your local news?

IF TELEVISION IS NOT THE SOURCE: Do you ever watch local
news on television? (a) Yes, (b) No.

How well do you feel the problems of the inner-city are
covered on TV?

(a) Very well

(b) Fairly well

(c) Not very well

(d) Poorly

Do you have any criticism of television news coverage
of inner-city.problems?

Is enough time given to inner-city problems on television?

'(a) Yes, (b) No. IF NO: Why do you think there is not

enough time given to inner-city problems?

How well do you feel the problems of civil rights are
covered on television?

(a) Very well

(b) Fairly well

(c) Not very well

(d) Poorly

10.

11.

12.

85

Do you have any criticism of television news coverage of
civil rights problems?

Is enough time given to problems of civil rights on
television? (a) Yes, (b) No. IF NO: Why do you think
there is not enough time given to civil rights problems?

Do spokesmen for civil rights problems have enough time
on TV to make their views clear? (a) Yes, (b) No.
IF NO: Why do you feel this is so?

Which spokesman for civil rights do you think is doing
the best job?
IF NO RESPONSE:

(a) Whitney Young

(b) Stokely Carmichel

(c) Roy Wilkins

(d) H. Rap Brown

(e) Ralph Abernathy

Do you recall where you first saw the Detroit riots of
last summer, was it in person or on television?

What was your first reaction when you did see the riot?

IF NO RESPONSE: Was it to see for yourself or to stay
at home? ‘

Where did you get most of your information during the riot?

IF NO SPECIFIC RESPONSE: Was it
(a) Radio
(b) Newspapers
(c) Television
(d) Other people you know

IF TV: What do you remember best about the television
coverage?

Do you have any criticism of the way television handled or
covered the riots last summer?

This is a yes-no answer next: Many people in the Detroit
area were able to watch some of the riot action in person
as it progressed over the week long period. Yes, or No,
did you spend any time on the street observing or watching
when the rioting was taking place?

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

86

Lately, various opinions have been expressed about the
use of force or violence as a means of advancing civil
rights problems. No one, of course, is entirely right.
Do you agree or disagree with the statement that
violence is the fastest and most effective means of
making progress with civil rights problems?

There has been a great deal of controversy over the
amount of violence that is shown on television today.
How do you feel about violence on television?

Do you think that the violence on television has any
effect on children who view these prOgrams?

Does it have any effect on adults?

What do you think is the worst kind of violence shown on
TV?

Why?

Over the past few years there have been several assassi-
nations of leaders such as Senator Robert F. Kennedy,
Martin Luther King, Jr. and President John F. Kennedy.
Why do you think these assassinations have taken place
in America?

IF NO RESPONSE: Do you think it shows that America is
a sick society or that it was just the work of sick
individuals?

How long have you lived in the Detroit area?

(a) 0-1 year
(b) 1-2 years
(c) 2-3 years
(d) 3-4 years
(e) 5 years or longer

What is your marital status?
(a) single
(b) married
(c) separated or divorced
(d) widower

How old are you?

87

21. How many years of formal education have you had?

22, Are you presently employed? (a) Yes, (b) No.

10.

REFERENCES

Allen, Thomas H. "Mass Media Use Patterns and Functions
in a Negro Ghetto", unpublished Master's Thesis,
university of West Virginia, 1967.

Bandura, Albert: Ross, D.: and Ross, S. A., "Imitation
of Film Mediated Aggressive Models", In Shalom
Endleman (ed.) Violence in the Streets, Chicago:
Quadrangle Books, 1963.

Berkowitz, Leonard, "Experimental Investigations of
Hostility Catharsis", Paper delivered at the
American Psychiatric Association Divisional
Meeting, Chicago, November 15. 1968.

Berkowitz, Leonard, "Some Aspects of Observed Aggression,"

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
VoI. 2, 1965.

Berkowitz, Leonard, "The Study of Urban Violence:
Some Implications of Laboratory Studies of
Frustration and Aggression," In Massotti, L. H.,
and Bowen, D. R. (eds.). Riots and Rebellion,

Beverly Hills, California: Sage Publications,
Inc.. 1968.

Campbell, Angus, and Schuman, Howard, "Racial
Attitudes in Fifteen American Cities," In
Supplemental Studies for the National Advisory
Commission on Civil Disorders? Washington, D.C.:
0.8. Government Printing OTfice, (July) 1968.

Caplan, N. S., and Paige, J. M., "A Study of Ghetto
Rioters", Scientific American, August, 1968.

"Crisis Proves TV-Radio Maturity", Broadcasting,
April 15. 1968.

88

11.

12.

13.

14,

15.

16.
17.

18.

19.

20,

21.

89

Fogelson, R. M., and Hill, R. B., "Who Riots? A Study
of Participation in the 1967 Riots", In Supple-
mental Studies for the National Advisory Commission
on Civil Disorders, Washington, D. C.: U. S.
Government Printing Office, (July), 1968.

Greenberg, Bradley S., A general observation from
personal research reported in Dr. Greenberg' 8
Mass Communication course at Michigan State
University, 1968.

Greenberg, Bradley S., and Dominick, Joseph, "Television
Usage, Attitudes and Functions for Low Income and
Middle Class Teenagers," Michigan State University,
November 1968.

Greenberg, Bradley 8., "Mass Media Behavior and
Attitudes of the Urban Poor", Testimony to the
President's Commission on the Causes and Preventions
of Violence, Washington, D. C.: October 15, 1968.

Gerson. W. M., “Mass Media Socialization Behavior:
Negro-White Differences", Social Forces,
September, 1966.

Robson, Dick, "Who Watches What?" 31 Guide, July 17, 1968.

Hyde, Rosel H., "Address before the National Association
of Broadcasters", Chicago, April 2, 1968.

Johnson, Nicholas, "America's Greatest Single Need:
Broadcasting's Commitment to Racial Understanding,"
Paper delivered to the National Association of
Broadcasters, Chicago, November 21, 1967.

Kilham, Peter and Klopfer, P. H., "The Construct Race
and the Innate Differential", In Science and the
Concept of Race, Margaret Mead (ed), New York—
and London: Columbia University Press,1968.

Klapper, Joseph T., "Statement before the National
Commission on the Causes and Prevention of
Violence", October 16, 1968.

McLaughlin, Barry, "The WAI Dictionary and Self-Perceived
Identity in College Students", In Stone, Dunphy,
Smith, and Ogilvie, (eds), The General Inquirer,
Cambridge Massachusetts and Lonaon, Em land:

The M. I. T. Press, 1966.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

310

32.

33.

3“.

90

Moore, Marvin H., "Aggression Themes in a Binocular
Rivalry Situation", Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 3(6), 1966?

Monroe, William B., Jr., "Television: The Chosen
Instrument of the Revolution", In Fisher, P. L.,
and Lowenstein, R. L., (eds.), Race and the News
Media, New York: F. A. Praeger, Publishers, 1967.

Moskal, Jerry, "Negro Identity Vital", The State
Journal, May 9, 1968.

Reif, Thomas F.. "The perception of Violence as a
Function of Historical and Current Behavior",
Unpublished Master's Thesis, Psychology Department,
Michigan State University, 1967.

Report Lf the National Advisory Commission Ln Civil
Disorders, New York: Bantam Books, Inc.. 1968.

Schlesinger, Arthur, Jr., Violence: America.$p the
Sixties, New York: Signet Books, 19

Silberman, Charles E., Crisis in Black and White,
New York: Random House,1964.

Singer, Benjamin D., The Detroit Riot Lf Ju uly 1 6 :
A Ps chological, Social, and Economic Profi
Lf ‘O_Arrestees, A Report Prepared for tfiee
U. S. Department of Labor-Manpower Administration,
University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario,
Canada.

Supplemental Studies for the National Advisory Commission
Ln Civil Disorders, U. S. Government Printing
Office, Washington, D. 0., (July) 1968.

Toch, H. H., "The Stereoscope: A New Frontier in
Psychological Research", Research Newsletter,
September, 196i-December, 1961, Vol. 3, No's.

3-1.}.

Toch, H.H., and Schulte, W. H., "Readiness to Perceive
Violence as a Result of Police Training", British
Journal 2: Psychology, 52, 1961.

"Violence on Television", Medialscope, Vol. 12, No. 8
(August) 1968.

Wertham, Fredric, "Why Violence Has Become Our Way
of Life", National Enquirer, June 30, 1968.

flICHIGRN STQTE UNIV. LIBRQRIES

 

31293107060109