Middlesex University Research Repository An open access repository of Middlesex University research http://eprints.mdx.ac.uk Barratt, Alexander James Bligh (1998) An investigation into the notion of "parental responsibility" as it features in the home-based regulation of children's video viewing habits. PhD thesis, Middlesex University. Accepted Version Available from Middlesex University’s Research Repository at http://eprints.mdx.ac.uk/13626/ Copyright: Middlesex University Research Repository makes the University’s research available electronically. Copyright and moral rights to this thesis/research project are retained by the author and/or other copyright owners. The work is supplied on the understanding that any use for commercial gain is strictly forbidden. A copy may be downloaded for personal, non- commercial, research or study without prior permission and without charge. Any use of the thesis/research project for private study or research must be properly acknowledged with reference to the work’s full bibliographic details. This thesis/research project may not be reproduced in any format or medium, or extensive quotations taken from it, or its content changed in any way, without first obtaining permission in writing from the copyright holder(s). If you believe that any material held in the repository infringes copyright law, please contact the Repository Team at Middlesex University via the following email address: [email protected] The item will be removed from the repository while any claim is being investigated. Mi~dles.ex Un iversity London " Middlesex University Research Repository: an open access repository of Middlesex University research http://eprints.mdx.ac.uk Barratt, Alexander James Bligh, 1998. An investigation into the notion of "parental responsibility" as it features in the home-based regulation of children's video viewing habits. Available from Middlesex University's Research Repository. • Copyright: Middlesex University Research Repository makes the University's research available electronically. Copyright and moral rights to this thesis/research project are retained by the author and/or other copyright owners. The work is supplied on the understanding that any use for commercial gain is strictly forbidden. A copy may be downloaded for personal, non-commercial , research or study without prior permission and without charge. Any use of the thesis/research project for private study or research must be properly acknowledged with reference to the work's full bibliographic details. This thesis/research project may not be reproduced in any format or medium, or extensive quotations taken from it, or its content changed in any way, without first obtaining permission in writing from the copyright holder( s) . If you believe that any material held in the repository infringes copyright law, please contact the Repository Team at Middlesex University via the following email address: [email protected] The item will be removed from the repository while any claim is being investigated. An investigation into the notion of "parental responsibility" as it features in the home-based regulation of children's video viewing habits. A thesis submitted to Middlesex University in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Alexander James Bligh Barratt BA (Hons), MA. Middlesex University April 1998 Abstract This thesis focuses on the notion of "parental responsibility" which characterises contemporary concerns over the regulation of children's video viewing in the UK. Previous studies of horne-based regulation have tended to concentrate on television at the expense of video viewing, and most studies employ quantitative methods. This thesis expands the research agenda, challenging the findings of previous research, through the employment of qualitative methods to examine family relationships at the heart of the horne-based regulation of video viewing. The work is based upon interviews with ten families from North London. This analysis is accompanied by an examination of the demands made of parents by agencies outside of the family home who are concerned with video regulation (Parliament, the print news media, the British Board of Film Classification and the video software industry). These expectations have remained unexplored by previous authors. This inquiry is located within an account of teenagers' video viewing habits, derived from a questionnaire survey of approximately five hundred year nine pupils. Central to the theoretical project of the thesis is a distinction between the concept and conceptions of "parental responsibility". It is argued that there is a broad consensus around the concept of "parental responsibility" (the notion that parents ought to have ultimate authority over their children's video viewing habits in the home). However, there is much less agreement about what constitutes responsible action in this regard. There are a variety of conceptions of parental responsibility across the accounts examined. Thus, it is impossible to draw clear distinctions between "responsible" and "irresponsible" parents, although participants in public debates frequently make such judgements. In an attempt to move beyond this impasse, the thesis provides a reconceptualisation of the "problem" of "under-age" video viewing, one which takes into account the ways in which parents currently approach the regulation of their children's video viewing habits in the home. Contents Abstract List of Tables List of Figures Acknowledgments Abbreviations Chapter One: Introduction 1 1.1 Taking video seriously 2 1.2 The political context 5 1.3 Structure 10 Chapter Two: Literature review 14 2.1 Introduction 14 2.2 Characteristics of the research literature 14 2.3 Research questions and substantive findings 22 2.4 Concluding discussion 46 Chapter Three: Teenagers' video viewing habits 49 3.1 Introduction 49 3.2 Methods 52 3.3 Data analysis 64 3.4 Results 65 3.5 Concluding discussion 79 Chapter Four: Document analysis 82 4.1 Introduction 82 4.2 Terminology and methodology 83 4.3 The national Press 87 4.4 Parliament 99 4.5 British Board of Film Classification 111 4.6 The video software industry 118 4.7 Concluding discussion 122 Chapter Five: Family case studies 126 5.1 Introduction 126 5.2 Methods 127 5.3 Transcipt analysis 137 5.4 The extent of home-based regulation 138 5.5 Patterns of home-based regulation 142 5.6 Socio-demographic "predictor" variables 157 5.7 Concluding discussion 169 Chapter Six: Suitability 172 6.1 Introduction 172 6.2 The video cover exercise 172 6.3 Suitability, content and context 174 6.4 Suitability, maturity and childhood 197 6.5 Concluding discussion 205 Chapter Seven: Parents and parental responsibility 208 7.1 Introduction 208 7.2 Parents and the concept of parental responsibility 209 7.3 Conceptions of parental responsibility 213 7.4 Concluding discussion 219 Chapter Eight: Conclusion 221 8.1 Main arguments 221 8.2 Methodology re-considered 227 Appendix I: Videowatch questionnaire 235 Appendix II: Family case studies 252 Appendix III: Relevant publications 293 Bibliography 304 List of Tables Table 3.1: Questionnaire design 52 Table 3.2: Ethnicity 55 Table 3.3: Religion 55 Table 3.4: Additional languages spoken at home 56 Table 3.5: Examples of written comments 61 Table 3.6: How many times have you watched a movie on video in the last 2 weeks? 65 Table 3.7: Do you ever watch videos... 69 Table 3.8: At what time do you usually watch videos on a school day? 70 Table 3.9: At what time do you usually watch videos at the weekend? 71 Table 3.10: At what time do you usually watch videos during the school-holidays? 71 Table 3.11: What is the latest time that you have stayed up to watch a video? 72 Table 3.12: Where did you watch this video? 72 Table 3.13: What are the names of your favourite movies on video? 74 Table 3.14: What is yourfavourtite type of movie? 74 Table 3.15: If you do, what was the last video you borrowed? 77 Table 3.16: Who normally goes with you? 77 Table 3.17: How do you find out which movies to see on video? 78 Table 4.1: News values and "video violence" 92 Table 5.1: Selection variables 128 Table 5.2: Family profiles 134 Table 5.3: Categories 137 Table 5.4: Transcription key 138 List of Figures Figure 1.1: Television viewing controls 28 Figure 5.1: Pupil profile form 130 Figure 5.2: Friendship and family relationships within the family case-study 133 selection Acknowledgements First and foremost, thanks are due to the parents and young people who were prepared to share with me something of their experiences. I hope I have done justice to their accounts. I also owe a debt of gratitude to the teachers who provided me with access to their classrooms and showed me every kindness while I conducted the my research. I am indebted to my Director of Studies at Middlesex University, Professor Lola Young, whose insightful comments and amiable support have helped in countless ways. Thanks also to Professor Alan Durant at Middlesex University and Philip Dodd, both of whom have been responsible, one way or another, for the successful course of this project. Along the way a number of people have provided practical advice and materials, including Annette Hill, David Oswell, David Gauntlett, Michael Bor of the British Board of Film Classification, Lavinia Carey of the British Video Association and Laurie Hall of the Video Standards Council. My thanks to them, and to others who have assisted with the administration of this project. A special vote of thanks is due to Hannah Davies for conducting the data input for the Videowatch questionnaire survey. I would also like to thank my friends and colleagues at the British Film Institute and Middlesex University, and fellow members of the Children and Media Network, for their encouragement and support.