Drinking and Smoking on Television, 1950-1982 Author(s): Warren Breed and James R.

De Foe Source: Journal of Public Health Policy, Vol. 5, No. 2 (Jun., 1984), pp. 257-270 Published by: Palgrave Macmillan Journals Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3342343 . Accessed: 13/11/2013 18:46
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Palgrave Macmillan Journals is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Public Health Policy.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 64.131.126.14 on Wed, 13 Nov 2013 18:46:00 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Drinking and Smokingon Television, I950-i982

WARREN BREED and JAMES R. DE FOE

and scholarstoday doubtthatthe EW media researchers mass media have "effects"on human behavior.This is S of empirical studieswhich havefailed truedespitedecades to pinpoint specific and powerful effects. This failure, many scholarsbelieve, is due to severalthings:the com,5eo plexity of the communication process; the crudity of availablemethodologies-mainly laboratoryexperimentsandsamplesurveys; and the presence of alternativeand related influenceslike family, church,schools and peers (1,2). The pro-effectsconsensusis strengthened by the historicalfact that campaignsto influence the public have been known in the United Statesfor more than 200 years. One of these was the Federalist Papers,publishedin serialform in New York newspapers. Another, more germane to the present report, was begun by Benjamin Rush with his 1784 tract entitled "Inquiry into the Effects of Spiritous Liquorson the Mind and Body" (3). Media today retain this role, with the marketingand public relationsindustriesplaying a large part in "the informationsociety." Therearenumerousstudiesof mediainfluence.More than 1000 research reports appear annually on communication effects on attitudes and actions (4). More impact on knowledge and attitudesare reportedthan on behavior (5). Many studiesfocus on health, the successin campaignsdeparticularly the quality of planning and pending on many circumstances, implementingof the design (6,7). Mediahave played an importantrole in the anti-smoking campaign of the last three decadeswhich can claim a measureof success(8,9). In the alcohol area, an interview survey with a large sample-mostly youths between the ages of 12 and 22-concluded that consistentcorrelations suggested that alcohol ads influenced drinking orientations (io). Evaluationsof media campaignson drinkinghave recognizedthe difficulties of the work but have also found potential in raisingrecognition and interest (11). A short film on drinking and driving showed positive re257

This content downloaded from 64.131.126.14 on Wed, 13 Nov 2013 18:46:00 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

258

JOURNAL

OF PUBLIC

HEALTH POLICY

* JUNE

1984

to tailored foundthatbeeradvertisements andan experiment of eachtype (13). with members wereeffective types" four"personality with particular used in alcoholeducation, The mediaare increasingly of youth. to the socialization reference hasshifted In the lastlo or 15 yearsthe olderquestto "proveeffects" context,norThesedealwithprocess, andcomplexquestions. to specific (14). effects cumulative andlong-run influences andorganizational mative 16 difTheseissues a theoretical base;McGuire require (4) hasreviewed muchof the work. whichunderlie ferentsetsof theories media doinfluence make theassumption that Mostofthenewapproaches norms andvalues butalsothesocietal human behavior not onlyindividual (using The new optimism thisbehavior. thatstand behindandreinforce by two leading forcefully asthemajor hasbeenstated medium) television is the central society.. cultural armof American scholars:"Television of mostpeopleinto standardTelevision is a medium of the socialization is, in a word,enculturation" Itsfunction izedrolesandbehaviors. (15). alcohol we do not in ourstudyof how themedia present Accordingly andCol.Potter thatwhentheviewerseesHawkeye forexample, assume, We do assume in M*A*S*H theviewer rushes to geta drink. sipa martini, a themedia play roleinhowpeople thatasa dailypartof theenvironment As an illustrabehavior. anddisapproved formnotionsaboutapproved holdthatif youngpeople theories andmodeling tion, thesociallearning andsmoking, theyaremore see television heroesandheroines drinking as favorable to thesebeenvironment likely to perceivethe cultural haviors(16). thatalcoholabuseand Sincethereis virtually unanimous agreement to findhow it is important aremajor national problems, smoking cigarette in the media.Ourapproach is to study"unplanned" theyareportrayed citedabove.Thuswe campaigns rather thantheplanned mediamaterials the storieswhich have been cited watchTV entertainment programs, via "incicommunication eversincePlatoas majorformsof influential dental learning" (17). on TV andsmoking wereportrayed Thisreport how drinking describes The"hisovera period of somethirty-two years. entertainment programs in our ongoingstudyof as we realized torical" was suggested approach Recollections weresmoking. alcohol thatfew characters how TV presents commonhad been us movies reminded that older and of shows smoking the thischange, whilealsocounting times. We couldtrace placein earlier data that likecoffee. We wanted andcomparison useof alcohol beverages
suIts (12),

This content downloaded from 64.131.126.14 on Wed, 13 Nov 2013 18:46:00 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

BREED

& DE FOE * DRINKING

& SMOKING

ON TELEVISION

259

abouthow television could permitan informedestimate reproducers spondedto the new knowledgeand publicitycoming from the antismoking campaigns.
METHOD

Selection How to structure the time dimension? of the A fourtime periods.

baseline the1981-1982 television contemporary wasalready established:

seasonhad alreadybeen coveredin our study, for both smokingand A literature reviewindicated that the anti-smoking drinking. campaign in the first Surgeongot underway in the earlyl950S but culminated

General's report ofJanuary, 1964

(18).

other events but Many occurred,

for our purposes the congressionally-imposed ban on televised cigarette commercials starting January 2, 1971, was takenas the secondcrucial event.In thisway fourtimeperiods werestaked out:beforeandafterthe Surgeon-General's report,before and after the ad ban, and the more
contemporaryseasonof 1981-82. Since no complete universeof all televisionprogramsexists, Sampling. the universewas definedin termsof availabilityto contemporaryviewers. This took the form of "re-runs."Severalrestrictions were applied. Only two types of entertainmentshows were studied:dramas(typicallyof the crime, adventureand medical genre) and situation comedies. These are generallythe most popularseriesand occupy somethingunderone-halfof all prime-timehours. To maximize reflectionsof contemporarylife-and thereforeto highlight the normative "modeling"hypothesisof media influence-only programswith settingsin the United Statessince 1940 were included. To representthe broadestrange of productionfactors,a maximum of five episodesof any serieswas imposed and for each time period and type of show, minima of 10 series,20 hours and 30 episodes. These minima were readily achieved for sitcoms. Since fewer dramas were being rerun,severaldramasfrom the televisionarchivesat U.C.L.A. and in Berkeley were added. To minimize the possible bias of program selection, all eligible programsobservedwere placed in the sample. Four researchers coded programsfrom 11 stationsin the San Francisco Bay area and 13 stations in five other communities between July 1982 and September of 1983. Details as to construction of recording instruments, coder training, studies of intercoderreliability and sampling for the 1981-82 seasonare given in earlierreports (19,20). Selection The task of describing"drinking on TV" turns of Categories. out to be many-sided.Terms such as "events," "incidents,""occasions,"

This content downloaded from 64.131.126.14 on Wed, 13 Nov 2013 18:46:00 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

260

JOURNAL

OF PUBLIC

HEALTH

POLICY

* JUNE

1984

lack denotativequality.The problembest known and "alcohol-relevant" is infrequently found in thesestories. to the generalpublic, "alcoholism," After many hours of observationwe decidedto use severalmeasures. on screen.When A basicmeasure was the act of drinkingby a character a character ingestedfrom glass,cup, can or bottle, this was recorded.Imhas glass in mediately, however, a problem arose. Supposea character hand, or on the tablebeforehim, but is not seen to ingest?Shouldthis be tallied?Our decision was to record it-the intent was fairly clear-but from actualingestions.Whenever a character ordered,accepted, separate a him but not seen to ingest, a was or poured drink, or had one before to drink"was recorded. were Ingestionplus "prepared" tally of "prepared acts."Identical were instructions groupedas the largercategory"drinking followed for other beverages,and similarones for smoking. A secondmeasurewas to use the sceneas the unit of concern.A scene, (not essentially, changedwhen the location changedor when a character a nonpersonlike a waiter) enteredor exited (21). Any and all indications of alcohol activity were included,and were given the summatorylabel All drinkingacts were included;added were oc"alcoholappearances." was seen to staggeror slurhis or her speech, casionsin which a character all talking with jokes), and drinking (a large category,particularly about any other indicationof alcohol relevance,includingbottles prominently andthe like. placedon tableor shelfandsignssaying"beer,""cocktails," of alcohol designedto show the dispersion Also recordedwas a measure appearances throughoutthe sample.This would be a possiblecorrective for the measureof "drinkingacts" in the event that many acts were bunchedin a smallnumberof programs.To obtain this measurealcohol activity was recordedfor each series (e.g., "Dallas"or "PerryMason") and each episode (one airingof 30 or 6o minutes). Becauseof Virtuallyall of the datadescribedabove were quantitative. the complexity of drinkingand its functionsin Americansociety, further reportswere written where drinkingfigured prominentlyin the plot or and where materialsdeemed "significant"to drinking characterization will be described below. were observed.Thesepatterns
RESULTS

trendin the findingsis the steadydropin the use of cigarettes The clearest the indicator"prein the three-decade span.While drinking(particularly to was moving up, smokingby prime-timetelevisioncharpared" drink) acterswas reducedby a factorof 6 in the sitcomsand by more than 12 in

This content downloaded from 64.131.126.14 on Wed, 13 Nov 2013 18:46:00 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

BREED

& DE FOE * DRINKING

& SMOKING

ON TELEVISION

261

used therewereninetimesmorecigarettes the dramas (Table1). Overall, reportthanfor the season18 per hourbeforethe firstSurgeon-General's the ratestarted at 4.52 andendedat 0.35. yearslater.In dramas indicators are used when the dispersion Thesefindingsare reinforced series andby presence of smoking by individual (Table 2), thoseshowing thedeclining of cigarettes wascontinuous With dramas presence episodes. overthefourperiods. With sitcoms, therewasso littlesmokingby Time so thata slightincrease was registo sustain, 3 thatthe level was difficult the teredin Time4. Whilethedirection is thesameusingtheseindicators, of decrease is not as striking figures. as foundin the per-hour magnitude andepisodes, not in a few series What is clearis thatthe dropoccurred, but in mostof them.Thesignificance of thescientific studies on cigarettes
TABLE 1

Acts on Prime-Time Alcoholand Cigarette Television Programs, 195o-1982 (perhour) Situation Comedies
TimePeriod 1 2 3 4 19641971- 1981195S1963 1970 1977 1982
0.42 o.87 1.28 0.78 33.5 1.34 2.55 3.89 o.26 2.52 3.72 6.24 o.o8 1.88 6.37 8.25 0.13 30
12

Dramas
1 2 4 3 19641971- 1981195So1963 1970 1977 1982
1.91 3.02 4.93 4.52 23.5 13 34 2.13 2.40 1.74
2.00

Alcohol: Ingested Prepared to drink(a) TotalActs Cigarette Acts (b) Numberof Hours Numberof Series Numberof Episodes

2.78

4.53
2.43 30 11 36

3.74
0.70 34.5 10

6.17 8.95
0.35 6o
12

38

25
12

15
67

16
76

50

6o

35

6o

to drink"includesacts of accepting,pouring, ordering or holding a drink (a) "Prepared without ingesting on screen. actsinvolvedignition;the restwere "prepared" to smoke. (b) All but 6.i percentof cigarette Due to a largersampleused in the presentpaper,the figuresdifferslightly from datagiven in an earlierreport (26). The samplesize in the earlierreportwas 250. 5, not 280.5 hours.

This content downloaded from 64.131.126.14 on Wed, 13 Nov 2013 18:46:00 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

262

JOURNAL

OF PUBLIC

HEALTH

POLICY

* JUNE

1984

andtheir andhealthseemsto havebeennotedwidelyby the producers in theseveral studios. staffs fredrinking use also displayed serieswith high cigarette In general, toward them)hadvery youngpeople(ortargeted casting Series quently. like of both.Thiswas trueevenin Time 1, when series low incidences had and"OurMissBrooks" "OzzieandHarriet," "Leave It to Beaver," to the parallelism: Therewere two exceptions none of eithersubstance. of Time1 showedcigaepisodes andCostello" eachof thefive "Abbott (Time2) averHeroes" and"Hogan's but only one haddrinking; rettes at all. no cigarettes agedsome7 alcoholactsperhourbut displayed ban-had or the ad report outside event-the Surgeon-General's Which A conservative answer wouldaffirm impacton thechange? the stronger andthatdifferevents, of related thatthesewereonly two amonga series does Analysis messages. by different wereaffected entkindsof individuals reportseemed the Surgeon-General's show,however,thatwith sitcoms on the other whilethe impacts with cigarettes," as to "episodes decisive in smoking the reductions two criteria wereabouteven.Forthe dramas, a socioFrom were greater followingthe ad ban,on all threecriteria.
TABLE 2

Acts andCigarette of Alcohol Dispersion Series and Episodes by

1 1950-

TimePeriod

Comedies Situation 2 3 4 1964- 1971- 19811970

62

1 1950-

Dramas 4 3 1964- 1971- 19812

1963

1977
92

1982
92

1963 77
92

1970
82

1977
100

1982
100

Series with
Alcohol Acts 47 47 18
22

Series with Acts Cigarette with Episodes AlcoholActs with Episodes Acts Cigarette Numberof Series
Number of Episodes

25

9 72 2

17

85

60 71 26

58 8o
20

30 7

53
8

62
76

61
64 11

15 67

16 76

12

12

13

10

12

50

6o

34

36

35

6o

This content downloaded from 64.131.126.14 on Wed, 13 Nov 2013 18:46:00 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

BREED

& DE FOE * DRINKING

& SMOKING

ON TELEVISION

263

cultural point of view, it seemslikelythatthe entireanti-smoking camto the extentof paignhada cumulative effect,shifting publicperceptions a basicchangein the normative creating environment dealing with cigarettesmoking. A possible indicator of thisnormative shiftwastheemergence in Time4 of scenes A comiccharacter parodying cigarettes. undernervoustension would light a secondcigarette anddiscover he was smokingtwo simulin his ear,and a thirdwould Anotherwould put a cigarette taneously. parodythe "romantic" smokingof earlier times. (Contemporary audienceslaughwhen Paul Henreidlights two cigarettes and gives one to BetteDavisin "Now Voyager.") The cultural climate hadchanged from assophisticated andunhealthy. to seeing themasunclean viewingcigarettes Identifying someof the smokers in thefourperiods maybe illustrative. In Time 1 all kindsof adults-heroesand heroines as well as villainswereseensmoking. Theyincluded PerryMasonandthedistrict attorney, Ann Peter Bud Abbott Rod Serling, RalphBellamy, Lawford, Sothern, (LouCostello's partner), Desi Arnazin "ILove Lucy,"andmanyother doctors,lawyers,executives, and otherleadingplayers. Therewere still in Time2: Susanne somestars smoking Pleshette, Robert Culpin "ISpy," in "Mission fourof the detectives andseveral Impossible," athletes young roles.By Time 3, however,only Peter women, all playingsympathetic in "Mission Graves in "TheOddCouple" Impossible" andJack Klugman In wereobserved was the only starusing smoking. Time4,JamesGarner in Times3 and4 werevillains The typicalsmokers orinsecure cigarettes. characters. Therewas a dramatic changein smokingamongdoctors.In a 1961 episodeof "Dr.Kildare," bothDr. Kildare andhismentor, Dr. Gillespie, smoked.In contrast, not a singlecigarette was seenin ten hoursof two 1971-1977 hospital dramas, "Medical Center" and"Marcus Welby,M.D.
Findingsfor AlcoholAppearances

actsincreased Overallthe two formsof drinking over the four time periods(Table1). The risewasstrongandcontinuous in the sitcoms, lessso in the dramas. Ratesof actual of alcoholbeverages ingestion movedgenbut the biggest to erallyupward, jumpswere in the category"prepared in Time4, andtrebled in drink."Thisfigurealmostdoubledfor sitcoms the sameperiodfor dramas. Most of the markedgain from Time 1 to Time4 took theformof morefrequent acts.Thereweresev"prepared" eralreversals: sitcomingesting wasactually lowerin Time4 thanin Time

This content downloaded from 64.131.126.14 on Wed, 13 Nov 2013 18:46:00 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

264

JOURNAL

OF PUBLIC

HEALTH

POLICY

- JUNE

1984

3; in dramas,both ingestingand "prepared to drink"droppedoff in the middle periods.At the startof the 195os, the dramashad more drinking than the sitcoms, but this evened out by Time 2; drinkingwas actually more prevalentin the sitcoms during Time 3. Using the dispersion measurethe increasewas much less marked.This was true for sitcomsboth in the seriesand in the episodes,although the rise was more appreciable among the episodes.In dramaseries,not only was the gain in alcohol acts smallerthan in Table 1, but the curve itself takesa differentshape.The gain from Time 1 to Time 4, however, is still evident.In neitherthe sitcomsnor the dramas, for eitherseriesor episodes, is the greatjump between Time 3 and Time 4 seen. What Table 2 shows is that the risein alcohol actsover time was not confinedto a smallnumber of programsor producers,but was industry-wide. The comparisons in beverageuse shown in Table3 indicatethatalcohol was clearlythe drinkmost frequentlyseenin theseprograms,and that the preference was nrsing. In Time 1 alcohol comprised48 percentof all beverage use, comparedto 34 percentfor coffee/tea. (Coffee and tea were difficultto distinguish on screen,andwere combined.)By Time 4 the figureswere 62 and 31 percent,respectively.Soft drinksand water were far behind by 1981-82. It is also noteworthy that both coffee/tea and soft drinksalso recordedincreases over the years.
TABLE 3

Actson Prime-Time Comparative Beverage Television Programs (perhour)

Situation Comedies 2 3 4 ig9o- 1964- 1971- 19811963 1970 1977 1982 1.28 3.89 6.24 8.25 1 2.99 o.18 1.64 33.5 2.63 0.11 0.55 38 2.16 0.52 o.88
25

TimePeriod Alcohol Acts

Dramas 2 3 4 190S- 1964- 1971- 19811963 1970 1977 1982 4.93 4.53 3.74 8.95 1 1.36 0.01 0.51 23-5 1.50 0.17
0.53 30

Coffee/Tea
Acts 5.25 0.92 0.30
30

2.29 0.00 0.20 34.5

3.45 0.17 o.s8 6o

SoftDrink
Acts Water Acts

Numberof
Hours

This content downloaded from 64.131.126.14 on Wed, 13 Nov 2013 18:46:00 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

BREED

& DE FOE - DRINKING

& SMOKING

ON TELEVISION

265

of alcoholon television Still anotherway to assessthe presentation shows is to count the numberof sceneswhich containany alcoholor canbe as minoras a signsaying Theseappearances drinking appearances. Againthe firstvisitto anAA meeting. "beer" or asmajor asanalcoholic's with somedeclines although overtheyears, showincreases trends general jumpin the 4-A).Thesharp (Table in the middleyears amongthedramas data. in the "scene" dramas in Time 4 is reaffirmed
TABLE 4

on Television AlcoholPrevalence Comparing

Using Two Different Measures SituationComedies 1 2 3 4 1971- 1981196419S01963 1970 1977 1982 Dramas 1 2 3 4 1950- 1964- 1971- 19811963 1970 1977 1982

TimePeriod A.

Alcohol Acts
Per Hour 1.28 3.89 6.24 8.2S 4-93 4.s3 3-74 8.95

Alcohol "Scenes"
Per Hour 2.48 2.90 5.80 6.55 3.83
4.00

3.48

6.32

with Alcohol,Percent B. Episodes By "Alcohol

Acts" By "Scenes" 17.9 38.8 30.3 38.2 72.0 84.0 53.3 70.0 61.8 70.6 61.1 65.7 71.4 74.3 8o.o 95.0

C. Series with Alcohol,Percent By "Alcohol

Acts" By "Scenes" 46.7 8o.o 62.5
75.0

91.7 100

91.7 100

76.9 84.6

81.8
90.9

100 100

100 100

drop In PartB of Table4, sitcomfiguresfor Time4 revealan unusual of alcoholactsperhourwas We know thatthenumber in bothmeasures. in drinking theremusthavebeen therefore episodes high in thiscategory; alAs before,thedramas involvedin the drinking. manymorecharacters alcoholappearances thanthe containing most alwayshad moreepisodes series usedalcoholwidelyeven in PartC tellsus thatthe drama sitcoms. totalby Time3. Thesitcoms wereslower became Time1 andthetendency

This content downloaded from 64.131.126.14 on Wed, 13 Nov 2013 18:46:00 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

266

JOURNAL

OF PUBLIC

HEALTH POLICY

* JUNE

1984

to reachthis figure.Again,alcoholis shown to be an industry-wide pattern. in TV prime-time andgrowingphenomenon If drinking is a frequent is it?Table formof alcohol some indicates that shows, justhow frequent 5
in from 6 to 16 percentof all scenes. was present,over the threedecades,
TABLE 5

asPercent of TotalScenes AlcoholScenes

in Television Programs,1950-1982
1 2

TimePeriod 19501963 6.i Sitcoms 9.3 Dramas

19641970

3 19711977

4 19811982

6.i
10.4

16.7
9.1

16.2
13.2

As noted earlier, The findings given so far have all been quantitative. the complexity of the drinkingprocessrecommendsthat the qualitative are element-the mannerin which the more detailedalcohol appearances presented-be studiedas well. In this areaseveralpatternswere discerned as being of dubiousmeritto the publichealth.Sevenof them, takenfrom our work, were recognizedas such by the Hollywood-basedCaucusof Producers,Writers and Directors (22), which advisedindustrymembers to avoid certainpatternsand reinforceothers. the high alcoholuse (reflecting avoiding:gratuitous They recommended frequencies reportedabove); glamorizingdrinking;showing miraculous recoveriesfrom alcoholism;showing excessivedrinkingwithout conseand showing that heavy drinking quencesor only pleasantconsequences; is a way to prove one's manhood. On the other hand, programsshould show characters decliningdrinksand criticizingalcohol abuse. Severalother patternsinimical to intelligent drinkinghave also been noted. They are:showing young people yearningfor the day when they too can drink;showing adultscoping with stressby drinking;punishing regularcastmemberslessfor alcoholabusethanguestplayersfor the same behavior;excusingheavy drinkingwith a joke; and showing people entering autos afterheavy drinkingand not signalingrisk.
DISCUSSION

hasdropped The evidenceis clear.Cigarette programs smokingon televised of the since first report.The Surgeon-General's dramatically publication

This content downloaded from 64.131.126.14 on Wed, 13 Nov 2013 18:46:00 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

BREED

& DE FOE

DRINKING

& SMOKING

ON TELEVISION

267

evidence took the formof connecting cigarette smokingandlung cancer a near-absolute In recognizing consensus thesefindings amongscientists. and moving to reducesmokingon camera,it appears that television executives actedresponsibly. be noted,at littlecost They didso, it should to themselves, sincesmokinglacksthe dramatic potentialthat drinking gives (seefurther discussion below). Concerning verdictfromscience drinking, however,a similar was absent.MostAmericans aboutalcohol. drink,but areambivalent Drinking butnot alcohol is accepted, abuse. anabsolute faces Smoking warncaveat; are ingson drinking conditional. Media personnel share thisamprobably bivalence. a consensus like the one on smoking,theirprogram Lacking
output on alcohol rose. It is true that much of the increasetook the form not of ingesting but of being "prepared"to drink, and that most of it was not abusivedrinking. As to why the frequencyof alcohol acts rose there is much speculation but no firm answer. One prominent source of the rise came in several Time 4 programsfeaturinggroups of people in settingswhere drinking would be expected ("Dallas,""Love Boat," and "ArchieBunker'sPlace" are examples). There are more centralquestions.Are these frequenciesand the other patternsaccurateand appropriate ways to presentdrinkingon television? What kind of symbolic environment is being fostered?Is the material helpful or damagingin the attemptsto dealwith the nation'salcoholproblem?Which kindsof scenesarequestionable, andwhich canbe applauded? What kinds of changesshouldbe made, and how can they be made? The large and rising frequenciesof alcohol appearances are a questionable contributionto the alcohol problem, fosteringa normativeenvironment that distortsreality.In reallife, one-thirdof Americanadultsdo not drink and another third drinksonly occasionally;more than half of the
alcohol is consumed by lo to 1i percent of the drinkers (23). On tele-

vision, our datafind alcohol the preferred beverageof characters, whereas alcohol consumptionin reallife ranksbelow water, soft drinks,and coffee and tea. These are significantdistortions.If the modeling and sociallearning theoriesare borne out and if TV starscontinue this rate of drinking, the normative climate could be accompaniedby rising alcohol consumption and the problems that follow. Similarstricturescan be made about the several"patterns" observed in these programs. In fairness,televisionhas presentedoccasionalprogramsin the last 10 to 1S years dramatizingproblem drinking in a realisticand moving way.

This content downloaded from 64.131.126.14 on Wed, 13 Nov 2013 18:46:00 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

268

JOURNAL

OF PUBLIC

HEALTH POLICY

* JUNE

1984

With the exception of a few classic moviere-runs like "Lost Weekend" days.More and"Daysof Wine andRoses," thiswasnot donein earlier driver, thegrowthof alcorecent programs havedealtwith thedrinking holismandits denial andthe dangers of drinking among by the drinker, drinking to the pointof adyouth.The lattertypically showa teenager and counselors (contrasted diction,but with the help of family,friends with theill-advised of others), beginning to learn valuable lessons "help" Otherprograms aboutdrinking. havefocused on the taskof gettingthe andseethathelpis availproblem drinker to enddenial, facetheproblem, playingrolesas unofficial counselors. able,usingknowledgeable friends andsuggestthe wide Theseshowsaredoneas drama, withoutlectures, as well as good alcohol rangeof topicsavailable as good entertainment, education. on the tube are Unquestionably, however,inost alcoholappearances to theplot,butareincidental andunplanned. Thisunplanned not central hasa bearing on potential Whenmediapersonnel characteristic change. hadnot anddirectors aretold aboutthis,theyaresurprised. The writers Af"whattheyweredoing"withrespect to alcohol. realized consciously this information, ter receiving they tend to modify theirperformance fewerof the alongtheselines (24). In the sameway, we haveobserved in the programs of the Caucus sincepublication problematic "patterns" whitepaper. in alcohol thattotalpessimism about These change apfindings suggest the industry thatto somedegree is unwarranted, maymoveas pearances But thereis also muchbasisfor skepticism, as they did with cigarettes. somethreedecades the continued useof violenceon TV despite witness must Media asbusiness ventures of anti-violence organizations campaigns. makea profit.To do thistheymustattract largeaudiences by presenting of increasing notonlyfrom ina situation competition appealing programs, butfromthenew television sources technologies. Specifically, traditional include hasseveral thataddappeal to a program. These alcohol properties in thestory;changing a character frombenignto threattension creating arise as a character complications ening;aidingtheplot whenbelievable andperhidden truths abouta character; becomes intoxicated; revealing in to humorous oftenresulting mittinga drinker go "outof character," In thislightit is simplistic to expect, or evento desire, theeradbehavior. areno placefortextbooks of alcohol fromTV stories; these stories ication on alcoholeducation. stated a reasonable Whatseems by goal,onenot farfromtheprinciples

This content downloaded from 64.131.126.14 on Wed, 13 Nov 2013 18:46:00 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

BREED

& DE FOE * DRINKING

& SMOKING

ON TELEVISION

269

the Caucus, is avoidance of the deleterious patterns andgreater useof the in gratuitous recommended patterns. The reduction is only the drinking firstof thepatterns to be moderated. Thelarger of drinking merits process greater attention, particularly the risksas well as the advantages of alcohol, andthe consequences of excessive drinking. Somestepsin thisdirection havebeentakenandcanbe continued. No form of censorship, of course,canbe countenanced, but thereareprecedentsforgreater in media citizen participation policyandproduction (24). Consumer groups wereeffective in the anti-cigarette campaign (25),and in thealcohol theircounterparts field,workingon thenetworks andgovernment bodies,have similar potential. The process of cooperative consultation(24) has been foundeffective, media with a goal of educating to makeinformeddecisions personnel aboutalcoholmaterials without in the damagingentertainment values.Other mediashouldparticipate campaign as well.
Acknowledgments: Partial fundingfor this studycamefrom a grantby the NationalInstitute for AlcoholAbuseand Alcoholism while the authors were researchassociates at the Institute for Scientific Analysisin San Francisco. The authors thankLawrence A. Breedfor assistance. WallackandLawrence REFERENCES De Fleur, M. L., and S. Ball-Rokeach. Theories of MassCommunication. New York: David McKay, 1975. 2. Hochheimer,J.L. "Reducing Alcohol Abuse: A CriticalReview of Educational Strategies,"in Moore, M. H. and D. R. Gerstein, eds. Alcohol and PublicPolicy. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1981. Paisley, W. J."Public Communication Campaigns:The American Experi3. in ence," Rice, R. E. and W. J.Paisley, eds. PublicCommunication Campaigns. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications,1981. 4. McGuire, W. J."TheoreticalFoundationsof Campaigns," in Rice, R. E., and W. J. Paisley. Public Communications Campaigns. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications, 1981. s. Roberts,D. F., and C. M. Bachen. "MassCommunication Effects,"Annual Rev. Psych.32 (1981): 307-57. 6. Farquhar, J. M., et al. "Community Educationfor Cardiovascular Health," TheLancetJune 4, 1977): 1192-95. Evidence on MassMediatedHealth Communication 7. Atkin, C. K. "Research Campaigns,"in Nimmo, D., ed. Communication Yearbook Three. New Brunswick: TransactionBooks, 1980.
i.

This content downloaded from 64.131.126.14 on Wed, 13 Nov 2013 18:46:00 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

270

JOURNAL

OF PUBLIC

HEALTH POLICY

* JUNE

1984

8. Warner,K. E., and H. A. Murt. "Impactof the AntismokingCampaignon Smoking Prevalence:A Cohort Analysis,"J. Pub. HealthPolicy 3 (1982):
374-90.

in Rice, R. E., andW.J. Paisley. 9. McAlister,A. "Anti-SmokingCampaigns," Beverly Hills: Sage Publications,1981. Cattmpaigns. PublicCommunication Report Advertising. of Alcohol andEffects 10. Atkin, C. K., and M. Block. Content EastLansing:MichiganStateUniversity, 1: Overview andSummary ofProject. 1980. Demonstration Evaluation: Prevention Program ii. Wallack, L. M. The California Berkeley: Social ResearchGroup, 1979. Findings. Methods, Description, 12. Mendelsohn, H. "Some Reasons Why Information CampaignsCan Succeed," Pub. Op. Quart.37 (1973): 50-61. 13. Ackoff, R. L., and J. R. Emshoff. "Advertising Research at AnheuserRev. 16 (1975): 1-15. Busch," SloanManagement 14. Lang, K., and G. E. Lang. "The 'New' Rhetoric of Mass Communication 33 (1983): 128-40. See also articles A LongerView,"J. Communic. Research: in same issue by Rogers and Chaffee,Comstock, Katz and Pool. 15. Gerbner,G., and L. Gross."Livingwith Television:The Violence Profile,"
J. Communic.26 (1976): 172-99.

Theory. Englewood Cliffs:Prentice-Hall,1977. 16. Bandura,A. SocialLearning Learningfrom Television 17. Comstock, G. "Trendsin the Study of Incidental Viewing," ERIC Clearinghouseon InformationResources,SyracuseUniversity, 1978. to theSurgeon General of Committee andHealth:Report of theAdvisory 18. Smoking Washington, D.C.: U.S. D. H.E.W., 1964. the PublicHealthService. 19. Breed, W., and J. R. De Foe. "The Portrayalof the Drinking Process on 31 (1981): 58-67. Prime-Time Television,"J. Communic. 20. Breed, W., andj. R. De Foe. "Drinkingon Television:A Five-YearStudy," 13 (1983): 25-38. J. DrugEduc. 21. Gerbner,G. "Violence in Television Drama: Trends and Symbolic FuncandSocial tions," in Comstock, G. A., and E. A. Rubinstein,eds. Television vol. 1. Rockville, MD: NationalInstituteof MentalHealth, 1972. Behavior, 22. Caucus for Producers,Writers and Directors. We'veDone Some Thinking. Los Angeles, 1983. 23. Room, R. "Concentrationof Consumption," Drinkingand Drug Practices 2 (1970): 1. Surveyor 24. Breed, W., andJ. R. De Foe. "EffectingMedia Change:The Role of Coop32 (1982): 88-99. erative Consultationon Alcohol Topics,"J. Communic. New Over The Battle G. E. Markle. Smoking. and R. Cigarettes: 25. Troyer, J., Brunswick:Rutgers University Press,1983. 26. Breed, W., and J. R. De Foe. "Cigarette Smoking on Television, 19501982," New Eng.J. Med. 309 (1983): 617.

This content downloaded from 64.131.126.14 on Wed, 13 Nov 2013 18:46:00 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions