Satirizing Social Issues in The Name of Family Guy Exploring TVs Impact On Young Viewers

SATIRIZING SOCIAL ISSUES IN THE NAME OF FAMILY GUY: EXPLORING
TVS IMPACT ON YOUNG VIEWERS

by
Amelia D. Awalt
Thesis
submitted in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the Degree of
Bachelor of Arts with
Honours in Sociology
Acadia University
September, 2009
Copyright by Amelia D. Awalt, 2009
This thesis by Amelia D. Awalt

is accepted in its present form by the
Department of Sociology
as satisfying the thesis requirements for the degree of
Bachelor of Arts with Honours
Approved by the Thesis Supervisor
__________________________ ____________________
(Anthony Thomson)
Date
Approved by the Head of the Department
__________________________ ____________________
(R. James Sacouman)
Date
Approved by the Honours Committee
_____________________ ____________________
(Matthew Durant)
Date
I, Amelia D. Awalt, grant permission to the University Librarian at Acadia University to

reproduce, loan or distribute copies of my thesis in microform, paper or electronic
formats on a non-profit basis. I however, retain the copyright in my thesis.
_________________________________
Signature of Author
_________________________________
Date
ii
Acknowledgments
My thesis supervisor, Tony Thomson, is the first person I want to thank for
believing in me and motivating me to take on this challenge. Without your encouraging
support and assistance on this project, I would not have had the courage to commence
and complete this work. I also thank the Sociology department faculty and staff who
helped to make this process of writing a thesis as smooth as possible. To my boyfriend,
my closest friends, and loved ones, I wish to say thank you for believing in me in times
when I did not believe in myself. Finally, to the wonderful group of people in the
Sociology honors program of 2009, thank you for giving me the reassurance of feeling
that I was not alone. Your support kept me grounded.
iii
Table of Contents
Acknowledgments.............................................................................................................. iii
Abstract .............................................................................................................................. vi
CHAPTER ONE ................................................................................................................. 1
Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 1
CHAPTER TWO ................................................................................................................ 6
Literature Review............................................................................................................ 6
Contemporary Knowledge of the Medias Impact on Youth...................................... 6
Speculations of the Effects of TV on Young viewers................................................. 9
Common Negative Depictions of Social Issues in the Media and on TV ................ 10
Prevalent Social Problems ........................................................................................ 12
Suggested Solutions to the Media/Television Influence on Youth ........................... 13
CHAPTER THREE .......................................................................................................... 15
Theoretical Framework ................................................................................................. 15
Feminist Theory ........................................................................................................ 15
Social Learning Theory............................................................................................. 16
Social Cognitive Theory ........................................................................................... 19
CHAPTER FOUR ............................................................................................................. 23
Methodology ................................................................................................................. 23
CHAPTER FIVE .............................................................................................................. 26
iv
Results ........................................................................................................................... 26
Content Analysis ....................................................................................................... 26
Focus Group .............................................................................................................. 33
CHAPTER SIX ................................................................................................................. 38
Discussion and Conclusion ........................................................................................... 38
References ......................................................................................................................... 42
Appendix 1Content Analysis ........................................................................................ 45
Appendix 10Content Analysis ...................................................................................... 54
Appendix 11Content Analysis ...................................................................................... 55
Appendix 12Semi-structured/Open Ended Questions-Focus Group ............................ 56
Abstract
It is arguable, when considering social problems and ways in which social
awareness occurs, that satire is not always a useful strategy for acknowledging and
encouraging awareness of social issues, especially among young viewers whose critical
and analytical skills may not be fully developed. Very little research has specifically
explored the level of awareness of and stance on social problems that youth may have as
a result of the media they mundanely encounter. The purpose of this study was to use the
animated TV series, Family Guy, to understand the type and nature of the satirical content
that is presented in animated comedies and provide insight into how this content may
affect young viewers. A content analysis of ten randomly selected episodes of Family
Guy was employed. The episodes were coded according to content that may be defined as
objectionable, such as being derogatory to an identifiable group or demonstrating sexual
harassment. The most common form of content coded involved the denigration of
women. In addition, I conducted a focus group to gain additional insights into the issue of
social apathy among youth in relation to the satirical content found in Family Guy.
Members questioned whether young teens and pre-teens would be able to place the satire
in context and understand the social nature of the issues being presented. Further research
should be conducted with adolescent participants to apply the theoretical speculations of
this study to determine whether or not social apathy could be measured and is related to
watching social issues satirized in television shows.
vi
CHAPTER ONE
Introduction
Through the use of satire, comedic media have the ability to acknowledge and
encourage awareness of societal issues that may be controversial and/or political in
nature. It is arguable, however, when considering social problems and ways in which
social awareness occurs, that satire may not be a useful strategy for acknowledging and
encouraging awareness of social issues. This is especially relevant because some
individuals have yet to develop the critical and analytical skills needed to perceive the
satire non-literally. Best and Kellner point out that many youth have not developed these
social skills (1998). The purpose of this study is to explore the possible effects of crude
and satirical content on television, in relation to young viewers. The popular animated
TV series, Family Guy will be used to identify specific content that is not meant for
young audiences but is, nevertheless, often viewed by young people. By reflecting on
previous research of the effects of media on youth, I will speculate about the way TV
might shape attitudes and behaviours concerning social issues and human rights.
A further intention of this thesis is to spark interest for future research in the area
of youth awareness of and attitudes to prevalent social issues. This thesis will examine
media depictions of issues such as violence against women, discrimination, social
inequality, and respect for diversity, in relation to the types of media consumption in
which youth engage. From a human rights and social problems perspective, the
motivation for studying this area arises from the realization that youth are the up and
coming future in every generation, and for positive social change to occur, youth have to
be made aware of the social problems of yesterday and today. Educating youth on how to
be critical of the content with which they are being inundated through the media is one
way to start that process (Sealey, 2008).
My initial approach to this topic is to review a variety of literature concerned with
the theme of media and youth, specifically examining the area of media effects on youth.
Knowing that TV plays an influential role in socialization and learning among youth
(Arnett, 1995), there is a parallel concern to utilize screen media to engage youth in
education about both the popular culture they consume and the social issues they often
confront, if only virtually (Sealey, 2008). It is relevant to this study that parents and
educators play an important role in guiding youth through their viewing experiences of
how and what they are viewing (Anonymous, 2007). Valkenburg (2004) suggests ways to
deal with the undesirable effects of some media consumption among youth, focusing on
adult intervention and guidance to lessen the negative impact. The importance of parental
and adult participation in helping youth become more critical of their media
entertainment will be emphasized throughout this thesis.
The effects of TV and the media have been researched by many other analysts.
Some of the most common studies have focused on violence and aggression in television
as having one of the most influential consequences on youth. More specifically, it has
been found that frequent television use among youth is positively correlated with
aggressiveness and bullying tendencies (Kuntsche et al., 2006).
In addition, studies that focuses on television content, demonstrating jokes and
depictions of women that are sexually denigrating, show that attitudes derived from this
type of content reflect a negative impact on attitudes among youth towards women as sex
objects (Montemurro, 2003; Peter and Valkenburg, 2007; and Dill, Brown, and Collins,
2008). Feminist perspectives, such as gender resistance feminism, are discussed below in
relation to the sexual exploitation of women and its dominant place in the media as part
of a patriarchal society (Lorber, 2005). In addition to feminist theory, other frameworks
will be used to support ways in which the media socialize and inform young viewers,
including Albert Banduras social learning theory (Bandura, 1977) and social cognitive
theory (Entman & Rojecki, 1966; Piaget, 1970).
In addition to the media-effects literature, I also examine the reflection in the
media of violence against women, one particularly serious social issue that is endemic in
society. It is important to acknowledge societys most serious and prevalent social
problems. The background literature reviewed in this thesis is necessary to form a
foundation for understanding some of the ways television has influenced youth in the past
and present. Additionally, the literature that discusses issues of violence and sexual
denigration is reinforced by the content that is commonly found in the reference show,
Family Guy. A content analysis of Family Guy is employed in this thesis to provide
specific examples of social problems that are commonly satirized in the show. Family
Guy, like the well known Simpsons, is a satirical animated comedy featuring crude humor
that parodies a typically dysfunctional American family. Family Guy frequently and
crudely satirizes violence, sexuality, race/ethnicity, gender, age, religion, and a whole
variety of other demographic minorities and social issues. Family Guy is said to be
intended for a mature audience, adult as one would assume; yet many young viewers tune
in frequently. Although this study does not reveal any hard data about who and how
many people of specific demographics are watching the show, information from many
discussions with fans of the show and reviews of online Family Guy forums suggests that
children younger than 12-years old are tuning in to Family Guy.
The literature I have chosen to exemplify social problems is related to forms of
violence, as the issue of violence is important in society and images of violence are
highly prevalent on television. I reflect on issues of sexual harassment, which are also
highly gender driven forms of violence. The examples of sexual harassment are both
commonly found on the screen and in reality.
We live in a world where many injustices are done to humankind. Social
problems have been around for centuries, such as various forms of discrimination,
harassment, and other inequities that are fueled by the colour of ones skin, a persons
gender, sexuality, age, and cultural and ethnic background. Fortunately, we have made
some progress in delivering justice to those who have been wronged by discrimination
and inequity. From the trials and tribulations of slavery in the late 1800s (Davis, n.d.), to
the election of the first African American president in 2008 (Results, 2008), we can see
that some progress has been made, and society is changing. Individuals have made a
difference by revealing the injustices and raising their voices to create greater awareness
of social problems, with a goal to achieve peace among all. Individuals such as Martin
Luther King Jr. (Nobel Lectures, 1951-1970), Rosa Parks (Academy, n.d.) and many
others used their voices and their bodies to break down the walls of racism. Although
racism still exists today in a more implicit fashion, some progress has been made as a
consequence of inspirational leaders and mass movements.
We live in an ever-changing world, but some things have stayed the same. Just as
racism still exists in various ways today, sexism, ageism, and many other forms of
discrimination and injustices persist around us. All of the issues mentioned in this
introduction are found throughout many aspects of society, and they are still reflected in
the media and television. The fundamental reason for writing this thesis is the fact that
television has the ability to be powerful and efficient in communicating messages to the
viewers, especially to youth (Fisherkeller, 2002). If television has the ability to educate,
persuade, communicate, and inform us as viewers, it can have either a positive or
negative outcome. In the case of this study, I regard negative impacts of television in
relation to youth as perpetuating negative social stereotypes and reinforcing attitudes of
apathy towards human rights and social issues. Positive impacts of television reflect a
theme of education and awareness, in addition to the factor of pure enjoyment. Through
reviewing the literature and conducting a content analysis and focus group, it is hoped
that I will gain a more comprehensive understanding of youth and social apathy in the
context of the consumption of media and TV.
CHAPTER TWO
Literature Review
Contemporary Knowledge of the Medias Impact on Youth
Previous research of television and medias influence on youth has suggested that
TV and media significantly affect social development and socialization of youth (Arnett,
1995). Montemurro (2003) acknowledges that television content that uses gender
stereotypes and harassment as comedic material can reflect and reinforce the realities of
gender stereotypes in society and further prolong serious issues by trivializing them.
Studies of media and television have also addressed concerns about apparently
heightened violence and aggression among young viewers in relation to their exposure to
adult-oriented content (Kuntsche et al., 2006), negative attitudes towards women and
body image (Fouts & Buggraf, 2000), and degrading attitudes about women as sexual
objects (Peter & Valkenburg, 2007).
Very little research has specifically explored the level of awareness of, and stance
on social problems that youth may develop as a result of the media they commonly
encounter. Given the scarcity of this particular literature, this thesis will explore findings
specific to the effects that media have on youth.
This thesis focuses on social issues that are addressed from a satirical perspective
and may be viewed by young adolescents in the animated television show, Family Guy.
Knowing the popularity of this particular show through many discussions with viewers
and the shows ratings and history, it is clear that many young individuals tune-in to view
the animated comedy. The show is obliged to forewarn adult viewers to use their
6
discretion when allowing younger audiences to view the show, because it is intended for
an adult audience. Despite the mature comedic nature of the show, anecdotal evidence
suggests that the age demographics of viewers of the show includes a surprisingly high
number of young people, considering the mature content and age of the intended
audience, as implied by the obligatory warning. This leads to the question of the kinds of
perceptions youth may be learning from the show given how influential television can be.
Despite televisions compulsory attempt to intervene in the viewing of specific
adult content in the name of discretion or age appropriate television, a warning about
content might make the show more desirable for young viewers. Family Guy, for
example, can daringly put a comedic spin on almost any social problem or issue and has
included incidences of rape, other forms of violence against women, as well as raciallydiscriminative undertones, to name a few. The show is seen by both adults and children,
as noted by Media Weeks TV industry analyst Marc Berman in the New York Post
(DeLeon, 2007). DeLeon (2007) reported that, according to Berman, Family Guy has
Dual appeal, meaning that it can Play to adults in late night and to kids in what he
termed the access/early fringe. Berman was unconcerned about the nature of the
specific content of the show, which is why I feel there is a continued need for researching
media and TVs affect on youth. The fact that a TV analyst sees only the advantages of
an expanded market for television shows such as Family Guy and appears willing to
promote the show to all ages, even though it is designated as not intended for children,
demonstrates the continued need to explore the content that is viewed by youth rather
than ignoring the research that tells us about the potential risks of TVs impact on youths
attitudes and perceptions.
Family Guy has a history of cancellations, first in 2000 and again in 2002
subsequent to its return. It is now in its third reincarnation and is still the subject of
dispute because of what some claim to be its derogatory nature. Not only has the show
made a triumphant comeback on TV and expanded its audience through its successful
DVD sales, it has recently surpassed The Simpsons in ratings, reaching nineteen percent
more viewers than its animated rival in 2007 (DeLeon, 2007). The popularity of the show
coupled with its controversial content make it interesting and important to study because
it includes a wide variety of social issues in its story-line, which can be explored in
relation to viewers perceptions.
One of the important issues that must be addressed in this thesis is the satirical
nature of the content. Satire has a long history in critical literature. It exposes to ridicule
through exaggeration and caricature the taken-for-granted wrongs and abuses in society,
thereby raising consciousness about and critiquing these wrongs. Satire has been used to
address social problems such as violence and discrimination in a controversial way, but it
may also be an ineffective means of raising awareness if the consumers, in this case
youth, lack the critical and analytical skills to decode the meaning and find the real
problem that the content is presenting. The use of satire to represent social issues in
Family Guy may not just be ineffective in raising awareness about important social
concerns in relation to young viewers; it may induce acceptance and apathy. It might be
part of the social construction of social wrongs as normal and even as exemplary.
In addition to the popularity of comedic TV shows like Family Guy and The
Simpsons (DeLeon, 2007), it is my intention to speculate on and to provide insight to
theorize about how the crude content found in Family Guy might affect the attitudes and
awareness of youth, towards social issues such as violence against women and forms of
discrimination, and whether the content found in crude comedy exemplified by Family
Guy, may induce apathy in young viewers.
Speculations of the Effects of TV on Young viewers
Valkenburg (2004) highlights a study of nine-year old children that reveals
eighty-seven percent of boys and eighty percent of girls prefer television shows that are
intended for adults, such as situational comedies and soaps (Rosengren and Windahl,
1989). Similarly, Fisherkeller (2002) found that, when asked to describe television
program preferences, young adolescents between the ages of eleven and fourteen years
demonstrated a high preference towards adult-oriented situation comedies and similar
types of comedic programming. Significantly, most of this viewing took place during
prime time viewing between seven to ten oclock at night and frequently later during the
weekends. Given compulsory day-time schooling, it is reasonable that, Children watch
television during prime time more than any other time of the day (Berry, 2003). Also
mentioned by Berry (2003) were the findings of one study conducted by the research and
action organization of the TV show, Children Now, that on average, over ten-million
children watch television during the height of prime time, which is said to be eight to
nine oclock (Diversity on Television, 2002).
In relation to the present study and despite not having raw data on the specific age
of viewers of Family Guy, the above research suggests that adolescents as young as nine
years old prefer to watch adult-intended shows (Rosengren and Windahl, 1989). These
findings suggest a connection to Family Guy as a possibly preferred show among youth,
because Family Guy is a comedy, which was found to be one of the most preferred types
of entertainment by youth (Fisherkeller, 2002). It is also a show that is frequently aired

during prime-time television and through seemingly endless re-runs of old shows. The
speculation that youth are not watching shows such as Family Guy because they are
intended for an adult audience, would likely be wrong. Consequently, the content of
shows such as Family Guy, which appeals to viewers at a young age, should be examined
in relation to the potential of this content to affect attitudes negatively.
To exemplify the types of attitudes that can be cultivated among adolescents
through the influence of television, previous research by Peter and Valkenburg (2007)
has shown that the pervasiveness of sexually denigrating content aimed at women can
translate into an acceptance of the notion that women are sex objects. These attitudes
towards women are echoed by the pervasiveness of sexual objectification of women in
the media, and further in the pornography industry and its monopolies like Girls Gone
Wild and Playboy (Levy, 2005). Guided by the framework of objectification theory,
Fredrickson and Roberts (1997) argue that the sexual objectification of women places a
value on women's outer appearance in relation to their sex appeal and further objectifies
them as servants for men's sexual desires. Peter and Valkenburg (2007) discuss in their
survey of 745 Dutch adolescents ages 13 to 18, in relation to objectification of women,
that repeated exposure to sexual content reinforced a stronger belief among adolescents
that women are sex objects.
Common Negative Depictions of Social Issues in the Media and on TV
One of the main points in the research on televisions influence on youth is the
question of the potential power of television and the media in general to reinforce
negative stereotypes and perpetuate social problems. Instances of gender harassment and
10
sexual violence towards women can be found in many films and television programs
including Family Guy, as well as situational comedies where the issue of sexual
harassment and sexual violence has been used for comedic material. Montemurro (2003)
comments on the suggestions of feminist author, Catherine MacKinnon, that making light
of a serious issue such as sexual violence and/or gender-based violence, trivializes the
issue. Furthermore, such trivialization allows the issues to persist in society through the
manifestation of approval for attitudes among viewers that are in agreement with the
messages being presented. It could be argued that the point of this comedic material is to
hold objectionable attitudes up to ridicule, thereby undermining rather than reinforcing
them. In the conclusion of some shows, for example, less socially-objectionable views
prevail. If the viewers are relatively immature, however, especially in the absence of an
alternative interpretation provided by an adult viewer, the lesson learned may be the
amusement provided by sexual objectification rather than the opposite lessonthat it is
serious and not funny.
The prevalence of sexual harassment and violence against women found
commonly in prime-time television was noted by Peter and Valkenburg (2007). Their
content analysis of prime-time television indicated that 84% of various episodes of shows
they analyzed contained at least one account of sexual harassment targeting women
(Grauerholz & King, 1997). In addition to the prevalence of sexual harassment and
sexual objectification of women in television, other forms of media such as video games
have been found to be influential in the level of tolerance towards sexual harassment of
women. Indeed, a very commonly played game by young American boys under the age
of seventeen, known as Grand Theft Auto entails scenarios that strongly reinforce
11
acceptance of violence against women (Dill et al., 2008). Dill et al. (2008) highlight a
situation where a male character has sex with a prostitute and kills her afterwards, and is
rewarded by taking his money back. In the same video game, a similar act is observed
where a male character punches a female prostitute and she responds with, I like it
rough, (Dill et al., 2008). Knowing that video games of this nature and other forms of
media are popular with youth desperately warrants public concern about the
consequences of this content.
It has also been demonstrated that viewing violence in general as well as sexual
violence on television is correlated with increased levels of violence and aggression
(Kuntsche et al, 2006) and negative attitudes towards women (Dill et al., 2008). Applying
the theoretical knowledge that the media and television provide tools for learning and
socialization among youth (Bandura, 1977), it is up to society as a whole, including
educators and parents, to become engaged in helping youth to distinguish between the
messages sent out by the media about social issues and the realities of society.
Valkenburg (2004) argued that parental interaction, including censorship, is needed in
order to prevent youth from being affected negatively by some of the misleading
messages that are sent through television programs about certain individuals and groups.
Prevalent Social Problems
The Pan American Health Organization (Velzeboer, Ellsberg, Clavel Arcas,
Garcia-Moreno, 2003) has noted that, Gender-based violence is one of the most
widespread human rights abuses and public health problems in the world today, affecting
as many as one out of every three women. Crawford and Ungers (2004) study on sexual
harassment found that 40-50% of women and girls who were surveyed from high schools,
12
colleges, and various workplaces lived the experience of sexual harassment in some form,
from verbal to physical sexual harassment (also see Dill et. al., 2008).
Violence against women is used as an example in this thesis to speak on behalf of
the tireless work social organizations such as the White Ribbon Campaign (a campaign
developed by men to put an end towards mens violence against women) devote to
creating awareness of, and solutions to, the problem of violence against women. Yet
these awareness efforts are challenged by the media, which frequently offer contradictory
messages. Situational and satirical comedies sometimes appear insensitive to social issues
through the use of crude humor. Issues like violence against women are commonly found
satirized in the reference show, Family Guy. Montemurro (2003) has suggested that
comedic shows such as sitcoms and other forms of comedy can trivialize such serious
issues as rape, sexual harassment, and other forms of violence against women. She argues
that the media act as a vehicle in perpetuating these social problems.
Violence, sexual assault, harassment, and negative gender stereotypes are all
prevalent social problems and are commonly depicted in shows such as Family Guy and
other situation comedies. Many researchers (Fouts and Burggraf, 2000; Montemurro,
2003; Peter and Valkenburg, 2007) have found that media images about these social
concerns are mirrored portrayals of reality, a conclusion that seems worthy of concern.
Suggested Solutions to the Media/Television Influence on Youth
It has been found throughout the literature review that concerned researchers have
called for intervention as the way to provide solutions to the problem of negative media
effects on youth. Many researchers analyzing the effects of media and television on youth
state that, in order to lessen the negative impact on youth, a parental or other authority
13
figure, should intervene and help youth interpret the television content or provide
censorship when it is deemed necessary. I argue that given the amount of free access
youth have to a variety of content not suited for a young audience via the internet, the
most efficient way to deal with the effects of television and media from an authority or
parental perspective would be to take a proactive approach and discuss with youth in
detail the realities and severity of the issues being presented before them, so that they can
develop a set of critical and analytical skills to relate to the realities of society.
Examples that have been suggested by contemporary literature, such as the twelve
tips for parents prepared by the Media Violence Coalition through the Ontario Public
School Boards Association, highlight ways for parents to become educated on the media
content their youth are accessing, and then to talk with their youth about the content,
drawing boundaries of what and why certain content should not be accessed. Relative to
the concern of this thesis regarding satire and social issues, it would be important to help
youth develop critical thinking skills (Anonymous, 2007.)
14
CHAPTER THREE
Theoretical Framework
Feminist Theory
Considering the themes that arose from the previous literature and the findings of
the content analysis of Family Guy that are later discussed in this thesis, a theme of
gender and the oppression of women commonly occurs. Lorber (2005: 13) highlights
gender resistance feminism as representing the oppressive sources of gender inequality
in the exploitation of womens bodies, sexuality, and emotions. According to Lorber
(2005), gender resistance feminism recognizes the influence of patriarchy and the male
dominance over women in society and also states that, in order for positive change to
occur and equity to be sought for women, womens voices need to be heard. Lorber
(2005) notes that the notion that womens voices must become part of the solution to
inequity among men and women is also raised in feminist standpoint theory, which looks
at society from the point of view and in the interest of women.
Given the examples I have discussed throughout the literature review regarding
the medias depiction of women and the often oppressive types of content, it is unlikely,
that women are a part of the problem as much as they are not a part of the solution. In
other words, following gender resistance feminism, women would not be creating and
promoting content that portrays their gender in a negative or denigrating fashion, as this
would be deemed a theoretical contradiction. Furthermore, according to feminist
standpoint theory, in order for oppressive content towards women to decease or at least
have less of an influence on audience attitudes, and for young viewers to be educated and
become more critical of the content they encounter, the voices of women would have to
15
become the major influence in the process. Gender resistance feminism and feminist
standpoint theory argue that women are being oppressed and sexually objectified by men.
In providing a solution to the oppressive messages sent via the media and television, both
types of feminist theory acknowledge the need for women to be a part of the solution in
lessening the perpetuation of oppression and negative stereotypes of women in society.
Lorber (2005) discusses feminist theory in relation to contemporary studies of
men and the focus on hegemony as reflecting the interest and point of view of the
individual members of the group at the top of the pyramid of social status. Lorber (2005)
refers to the hegemonic male or hegemonic masculinity as the most privileged male in
society who is the least oppressed. The characteristics that make up the hegemonic male
are Caucasian, heterosexual, to some extent middle age (over thirty), non disabled, and
upper-middle class. As it will be discussed later in the results section of this thesis, the
characteristics mirroring male hegemony as referred to by Lorber (2005), were
predominately found in the instigator characters of oppression in the content analysis of
Family Guy.
Social Learning Theory
When considering the media effects on youth, it is useful to incorporate Albert
Banduras psychological Social Learning Theory as one of the main theoretical
frameworks that support the idea that youth learn from their environment (Bandura,
1977). According to social learning theory, as children develop psychologically, they
engage in continual observation of the world, which they occupy. It is through this
observation that children begin to imitate and model the behaviors that they see being
exemplified on a frequent basis.
16
Bandura (1977) and other proponents of social learning theory assert that children
learn from the behaviors they see in their family and friends, and also as presented by
characters on TV programs. Learning and imitation, however, are not direct and
unmediated processes. For social learning to take place, Bandura alluded to four
chronological processes. First, in order to learn, the individual must be paying attention to
something that is interesting enough to maintain full attention even in the face of palpable
distractions. If the individuals attention is intermittingly diverted elsewhere, then
learning through observation is more unlikely. Second, the observed behavior must be
retained. The ability to store information is enhanced when the behaviors observed are
repeated frequently and are brought up in later conversation. Third, the individual must
be able to effectively model the observed behavior. The more the behavior is reproduced
by the individual, the better it is learned. Finally, in order for the behavior to be entirely
learned, the individual must be motivated to imitate the behavior. Through reinforcement
and punishment, the individual learns whether or not the behavior is acceptable and worth
imitating. Such reinforcement or punishment for a particular behavior can be learned
either through experience by the individual first hand or by observing someone else being
rewarded or punished for her or his behavior. As Peter and Valkenburg (2007) found,
once they are formed, repeated exposure to a specific content can lead to reinforcement
of ones beliefs.
As Valkenburg (2004) notes when reflecting on the theoretical ideas of Bandura,
it is imperative to highlight the circumstances in which youth learn from television to
understand the effect of the media on youth, as it is dependent on the media message,
the child, and the environment (2004:10). Indeed, youth do not watch TV in a passive
17
manner as some have thought (Berry, 2003). For example, if youth are thoroughly
enjoying a television show depicting discriminatory behaviors towards women or a
cultural or racial group, and those behaviors are displayed on the show as acceptable and
perhaps rewarded, then according to social learning theory, they are more likely to learn
and imitate such negative behaviors. Berry found that several TV programs portray a
balance of strong cultural diversity; however, such programs run mostly throughout the
day while many children have been found to watch more TV during prime time (Berry,
2003).
Social learning theory supports the argument that, since imitation is one the
indicators of social learning, when a rewarded behaviour is observed on television, a
form of acceptance of the behaviour being presented is demonstrated, which reinforces
imitation and the acceptance of the underlying social issue as unproblematic. However,
acceptance of an issue does not exactly imply adopting an apathetic position towards the
given issue. If a viewer imitates, for example, a sexist joke that denigrates a particular sex
and the behaviour is rewarded by peers laughing at the joke, the behavior is being
rewarded and, arguably, the underlying attitude towards the denigrated group is being
reinforced. The individual may be more likely to continue to behave in a sexist manner
and be less likely to develop feelings of empathy for the group that is the target of the
sexism; otherwise the sexist behaviour would not exist. Furthermore, if one lacks
empathy, it is arguable that this lack of empathy for the group they are targeting with the
sexist behavior may lead eventually to adopting an apathetic position towards the
existence of issues such as sexual harassment. The connection among repeated images of
behavior, the imitation of this behavior, and the adoption of underlying attitudes
18
consistent with the behavior, is a complex and mediated process. I can only speculate
theoretically about the development of apathy and whether or not a socially apathetic
disposition could be fostered from imitating behavior referring to a social issue such as
sexism. The notion of social apathy would need further and more detailed exploration to
assess the stances of adolescent participants on social issues in relation to the types of
television content they consume. Social learning theory at least suggests the possibility
of a causal connection.
Social Cognitive Theory
When studying television and its effects on the social development of youth, a
second psychological perspective, social cognitive theory, must be incorporated in the
explanation of why so many studies find that television plays a prominent role in shaping
behaviour. Berry (2003) notes that social cognitive theory says that children learn from
attractive models (Entman & Rojecki, 1998), which are understood by this theory as
shaping the development of a childs mental or cognitive schemas and reinforcing how
they act and perceive ideas about themselves and others (Berry & Asamen, 2001;
Murray, 1993). Berry (2003) discusses four conditions that were previously developed by
Himmelweit, Oppenheim and Vince (1966) in which youth were said to be most affected
by the content they view. The conditions are as follows: 1) if the values or views are
consistently reiterated from program to program (the consistency of re-occurring values
being presented in the shows that youth watch); 2) if the values are presented in a
dramatic fashion so as to elicit emotional reactions from the viewers; 3) if they coincide
with the youths immediate needs and interests; and 4) if through family, friends, or the
immediate environment, the viewer is not already armed with a set of values that would
19
provide a standard with which to assess the views offered via television. When
considering whether or not youth may adopt imitative behaviours and/or a socially
apathetic perspective from the content they are viewing, the above conditions of social
cognitive theory would have to be considered. Dramatic, frequent reiteration in the
context of comedic entertainment is precisely the situation that young viewers of shows
such as Family Guy encounter, often in the absence of a counter-interpretation.
Social cognitive theory makes use of schemas to explain how children learn and
develop their beliefs (Piaget, 1970). These schemas are viewed as categories of
knowledge that enable one to interpret his or her surroundings in a particular way.
According to Piaget (1970), at a young age, children begin to develop schemas through
observation and learning from their environment (Piaget, 1970). To some degree, the
schemas children develop are periodically modified through processes of assimilation
where new information fits into an existing schema and with accommodation whereby
children take in new knowledge that alters one or more of their schemas.
However, schemas maintain some consistency over time such that, once a schema
is formed, information drastically incongruent with that schema is not easily assimilated
or accommodated. For example, if a child continually watched TV programs throughout
her or his childhood that portrayed sexist attitudes towards women where women were
viewed as nagging housewives and were subordinate to their husbands, the child would
be more likely to develop a schema of women that involves them being constantly
irritable and inferior to their male counterparts. Because schemas maintain some
continuity over time and actually incorporate resistance to schema-incongruent material
(Piaget, 1970), it may be assumed that youth could have difficulty accepting women as
20
different from their portrayal on TV programs they had seen throughout their childhood.
Similarly, a study conducted by Children Now (1998) of 1,200 boys and girls across
many demographics associated White television characters with having a lot of money,
being well-educated, showing leadership, doing well in school, and having intellectual
competency. On the other hand, the boys and girls in this sample saw characters
belonging to a racial minority more often as breaking the law or rules, having it hard
financially, being lazy, and acting goofy. Thus, the children in this sample developed
schemata of the characters they commonly saw on TV, which they could possibly have
transferred to people of similar ethnicities they encountered in real life situations. It
follows that, if youth are able to adopt a mindset that they see represented through
television programs, in the case of Family Guy, where a whole host of social issues are
being trivialized, as Montemurro (2003) would put it, it is likely that youth could adopt
an apathetic and essentially accepting position towards social problems presented in
Family Guy. They would be learning from the content that it is acceptable to laugh at and
take lightly issues such as sexual harassment and discrimination, rather than realizing the
severity of these problems in real life. Arguably, such content in commonly-viewed TV
programming primes young viewers to adopt a socially apathetic stance to the issues of
real life.
It follows from both social learning theory and social cognitive theory that it
appears that youth, when misled by television, can be at risk of developing beliefs, which
are inconsistent with reality and that could negatively affect their attitudes and behaviors.
It is important to note that both theories view the process of learning as complex and
mediated. It is important to recall the last condition mentioned by Berry (2003) who
21
raised the question of whether or not the youths social and familial networks have
provided a set of values to assess the messages being sent by the content in the shows
they are watching. The solutions and techniques to prevent or minimize the unfavorable
potential effects of television would be the intervention by parents to help children
develop a set of values and critical thinking skills that allow them to weigh right from
wrong in the content consumed by youth. If parental intervention is not forthcoming, it
may be learned that it is the messages, which are being sent through television that are
adequate truths, and here lies the problem and risk of creating and reinforcing social
apathy.
22
CHAPTER FOUR
Methodology
The purpose of this study was to assess the potentially problematic types of content that
exist in satirical comedies such as Family Guy and provide insight on how it may affect
young viewers. By reviewing previous literature that speaks to the potential effects of TV
and the media on youth, it became evident that issues of violence, negative stereotypes
and negative depictions of women in the media have the ability to impact the way some
young audiences behave and think about these issues. To provide an in-depth look at the
kinds of social issues that are portrayed in the reference show, Family Guy, I undertook a
content analysis and conducted a focus group of viewers and parents.
For the content analysis, I selected ten randomly selected episodes of Family Guy
from seasons 2007, 2006, and 2002. The choice of year was arbitrary and occasioned by
convenience. I selected Family Guy for analysis for convenience because I was familiar
with the amount of potentially problematic content the show presents. Additionally, this
show was selected because of its popularity and ratings as mentioned by DeLeon (2007)
in comparison to the long running animated TV show The Simpsons. The purpose of the
content analysis was to provide specific examples of social issues and negative
stereotypes that are commonly satirized in the show, to emphasize the type of content that
youth may be viewing from this show. Issues such as violence against women, including
rape and sexual harassment, racial discrimination, religious discrimination,
underprivileged/disabled discrimination, sexual orientation and gender-based stereotypes
were all frequently noted in the content analysis.
23
A self-designed observation scheme was developed to categorize specific

examples of the satirized social problems or negative stereotypes. The observation
scheme highlighted five categories of areas to be observed. Each observation category
had sub-categories to reveal what aspect of each category was being satirized. The five
categories were as follows: 1) Aggression (subdivided into verbal, threatened physical,
and body language); 2)Violence (including sexual assault); 3) Acts of discrimination; 4)
Sexually explicit content/suggestive messages; and 5)Negative portrayals of/or reference
to body image (either female or male). The categories for aggression and discrimination
were coded on the basis of whether they were gender based, racially based, or based on
culture, sexual orientation, underprivileged or religion. Category 4, sexually-explicit
content, included subcategories of objectification (female and male), pornographic
content or reference, and terminology or slang. See Appendix 1 for a full description.
In addition to the content analysis, I brought together a focus group to gain
additional perspectives on the issue of social apathy among youth in relation to the
satirical content found in Family Guy. The focus group consisted of eight participants.
Five were university students, including three females and two males. Two other
participants, both male, were youth workers who worked with adolescents and teens in a
youth development centre. The eighth participant was a mother of two adolescent boys
who were fans of Family Guy. All of the participants were required to be familiar with
the show so that they would be able to contribute to the discussion with some background
knowledge of the show, in addition to making sure that no participants would be shocked
by the type of content being presented. At the beginning of the focus group, I showed an
episode of Family Guy titled Brians Movin Out. This episode was chosen from a
24
randomly selected season. I previewed some of the episodes on the season before the
focus group and identified a controversial scene that I wanted to exemplify and talk about
in the focus group. The scene was a rape encounter between a male character and a
female character and I wanted to see what the participants reactions would be.
Surprisingly, when I asked the focus group to tell me if anyone thought there was any
shocking material in this episode, or anything that stood out in their mind that would not
be sending a good message to youth, the rape scene was not initially discussed. Their
response gave me reason to question whether or not the trivialization of rape on television
shows has made viewers impervious to the issue, since in this focus group it seemed to be
almost overlooked.
Following the viewing in the focus group, a fifty minute discussion was recorded
where semi-structured questions were posed to the group and left open-ended for
participants to respond. The discussion was later transcribed and analyzed thematically.
The relevant and most popular themes that were identified during the focus group
included violence against women; forms of religious discrimination, gender denigration,
and objectification of women. The contribution of the focus group assisted in supporting
my theoretical speculations of satirizing social issues and the possibility of social apathy
as a consequence. See Appendix 12 for the open-ended questions used to structure the
discussion in the focus group.
25
CHAPTER FIVE
Results
Content Analysis
Overall, 220 incidents were coded in the 10 episodes, with the number of coded
instances in each episode ranging from a minimum of 15 to a maximum of 28, or
approximately one per minute of the shows duration. Half of the incidents coded
(51.4%) targeted only one type of content. The remainder contained, simultaneously,
more than one type of content. For example, an incident could begin with a verbal insult
about body-type and escalate to violence, or the behaviours depicted might target several
groups at once. When each of these multiple targets is coded as a separate incident, there
were a total of 362 incidents of objectionable content in the ten shows.
Thirty-five types of observations were coded, as detailed in Appendix 1, from
gender-based verbal aggression to negative references to body image. Table 1 below
illustrates the frequency and percent for which each of the thirty-five classified
observations occurred throughout the duration of the ten episodes. The top sub-category
of common observations was sexually-specific content with 121 observations (33.4%).
The highest single category, also within sexually-explicit content, was the objectification
of females observed 64 times or 17.7% of the total coded content in all of the ten
episodes. Objectification of females was coded, for example, where a female character
was being portrayed as a desirable object of a man or group of men, while wearing scanty
clothing. More specifically, in the episode Airport 07 (see Appendix 7), one of the
male characters named Quagmire is found with over a dozen Asian women locked in his
26
Table 1 Types of Coded Observations

Observed Coded Content
Percent
Verbal Aggression, General

Verbal Aggression, Racial
Physical Aggression General
Physical Aggression, Racial
Physical Aggression, Sexual Orientation
Physical Aggression, Disability
Sub-Total: Aggression
Violence
Violence Gender Based
Violence Racial Based
Violence, Disability/Religion Based
Violence, Sexual Assault
Child Abuse
Sub-Total: Violence
Times
Observed
18
1
34
1
1
1
56
14
14
1
1
9
2
41
Negative Stereotypes
Negative Stereotypes, General
Negative Stereotypes, Racially Based
Negative Stereotypes Culturally Based
Negative Stereotypes Sexual Orientation Based
Negative Stereotypes Disability Based
Negative Stereotypes Religion Based
Sub-Totals: Stereotypes
12
32
9
10
14
2
4
83
3.3
8.8
2.5
2.8
3.9
.6
1.1
23.0
Discrimination General
Discrimination Racially Based
Discrimination Culturally Based
Discrimination Sexual Orientation Based
Discrimination disability based
Discrimination Religion
Sub-Total: Discrimination
14
8
2
2
9
2
37
3.9
2.2
.6
.6
2.5
.6
10.4
Sexually Explicit Content - Objectification of females
64
17.7
Sexually Explicit Content - Objectification of Males

Sexually Explicit Content Pornography
Sexually Explicit Content Terminology
7
16
23
1.9
4.4
6.4
27
5
.3
9.4
.3
.3
.3
15,6
3.9
3.9
.3
.3
2.5
.6
11.5
Sexually Explicit Content (Other)

Sub-Total: Sexually Explicit
11
121
3.0
33.4
Negative Body Image Content Female

Negative Body Image Content Male
Negative Body Image Content
Sub-Total: Body Image
15
5
1
21
4.1
1.4
.3
5.8
Other
Total
3
362
.8
100
garage and house. When his neighbor, Peter, accidentally backs into his garage, it opens
an escape route for the women to get away, wearing nothing but their under-garments.
Peter apologizes to Quagmire and Quagmire says in a frustrated and hasty voice, Dont
worry theyre tagged, theyre tagged.
The second most common observations were negative stereotypes, coded 83 times
(23%). Within this category, general stereotypes were observed 32 times overall (8.8%).
Since there was a considerable amount of subtle humour that did not always make it easy
to specifically classify the observations, a general classification was needed during
instances where the observation scheme did not account for a particular sub-category
such as race, culture, or gender. Negative stereotypes in the general category accounted
for depictions about a group of people that played on a common negative social
stereotype. An example of this, taken from the same episode, Airport 07 (Appendix 7),
was when Peter, the dysfunctional Family Guy father, decides to live the life of a
redneck and decides to insinuate incestuous rape upon his daughter.
Fifty-six (15.6%) of the observations involved aggression. General physical
aggressionwithout a specific identifiable targetwas coded 34 timed (9.4%). The
fourth most common single-category observation that was noted and that usually
28
accompanied another form of problematic content was sexually explicit language usually
in the form of slang or terminology. This was coded 23 times throughout the total
observations (6.4%). An example occurred in the episode Mother Tucker (Appendix 3),
where the term butt-slammed was used to refer to a character who was insulted by a
shut down remark that another character had made. The term butt-slammed was one
example of sexually explicit language commonly used throughout the many episodes I
viewed.
Table 2 below presents the coded issues used in the content analysis that were
targeted throughout the ten episodes. In the ten episodes, 84 or 23.3% of targeted issues
were unidentifiable in terms of how it related to the observation scheme that I developed.
For example, situations where an issues target was unidentifiable occurred when a
character portrayed an aggressive act but there was no clear sub-category being targeted,
such as racially-based or gender-based; rather, it was a general form of aggression such
as a character hitting his fist into a wall. The sub-total of 278 is representative of the
identifiable targeted observations.
Table 2 Issue Targeted
Issue Targeted
Gender
Race
Culture
Sexual Orientation
Disability
Religion
Body Image
(Unidentified)
Total
Times Observed
189
20
12
17
13
6
21
84
278
29
Percent
52.2
5.5
3.3
4.7
3.6
1.7
5.8
23.3
76.8
The results from the content analysis recognized a broad range of satirized social
issues. However, gender was the most predominant category of observed content out of
all other categories at 52.2% of all observations, identified and unidentified. The other
categories observed included race, culture, sexual orientation, disability, religion, and
body image.
The predominant instigator character in the observations was male (72.4%) In the
instances coded, only 6.9% of the instigators were female. In many cases, it was difficult
to classify the instigator of an observation thus I had to categorize the instigator as
unknown. A situation where the instigator could not be described was usually if the
family or other characters of Family Guy were listening to the radio, or watching a
television show that depicted characters either making a sexually discriminating
comment, or being physically or verbally aggressive towards another character. This
made it difficult to categorize the instigators specifically in these scenarios.
Table 3 Instigator Character
Instigator
Times Observed Percentage
Sex
Male
262
72.4
Female
25
6.9
Unknown
75
20.7
Ethnicity
Caucasian
273
75.4
African
7
1.9
Unknown
82
22.7
Sexual Orientation Heterosexual
226
62.4
Homosexual
6
1.7
Unknown
130
35.9
Age
0-12
24
6.6
13-19
15
4.1
20-65
232
64.1
65+
7
1.9
Unknown
84
23.2
30
In the majority of instances the instigator was Caucasian (75.4%), heterosexual

(62.4%), and an adult within the age range of 20-65 (64.1%). On only one occasion was a
noticeable disability noted in the instigator character.
The recipient character in all known observations was predominately female
(32.6%) in comparison to males at 26.0%. The sex of the predominant recipient character
was unknown at 41.4%. The recipient characters ethnicity was predominately Caucasian
at 51.4%, and sexual orientation was unknown at 61.0% with the next common being
heterosexual at 39.0%. The age category was unknown at 43.6% with the next common
being 20-65 years at 38.1%. The majority of recipient characters were not disabled
(96.4)%.
Table 4 Recipient Character
Recipient
Times Observed Percentage

Sex
Male
94
26.0
Female
118
32.6
Unknown
150
41.4
Ethnicity
Caucasian
186
51.4
African
11
3.0
Asian
3
.8
Hispanic
3
.8
Other
2
.6
Unknown
157
43.4
Sexual Orientation Heterosexual
141
39.0
Unknown
221
61.0
Age
0-12
13
3.6
13-19
43
11.9
20-65
138
38.1
65+
10
2.8
Unknown
158
43.6
Out of the 182 known times that men instigated problematic content in the
observations, they targeted women 60.4% of the time and men 39.5% of the time, and out
31
of the 22 known times that women instigated in the observations, they targeted men
81.8% of the time and targeted women 18.1% of the time.
Table 5 Target of Instigator
Instigator Sex
Male
Female
Unknown
Total
Recipient Sex
Male
72
18
4
94
Female
110
4
4
118
Total
Unknown
80
3
67
150
262
25
75
362
From a feminist perspective, these results reflect the demographics and

characteristics not only of a patriarchal society but what Lorber terms a patriarchal
dividend (2005:196). On average, the most privileged individual in society, who is leastlikely a target of oppressive behaviours, is a Caucasian, heterosexual, adult male, and is
not disabled. Family Guy reflects the point of view of the hegemonic male or hegemonic
masculinity (Lorber 2005:220).
There were no instances of observations from the ten selected shows of characters
who were disabled targeting any particular age group or ethnic group. In only one case
was there an instance of a character who was disabled targeting a particular sex, and that
was a male targeting a female. In fact, this one observation consisted of a sexist remark
that objectified females as sex objects. Another interesting finding was exhibited by the
lack of targeting homosexuality. I expected to find more examples of issues pertaining to
sexual orientation. Although sexual orientation existed along with other issues such as
race, culture, physical disability, and religion, gender-related issues in the form of sexism
remained the most prevalent result, where women were more often the targets. This sends
32
a message that it is more socially acceptable to feature discriminatory content towards

women as opposed to other groups, based on the findings of this content analysis.
Focus Group
All of the focus group participants offered valuable insights on the topic of social
apathy among youth, in relation to the content found in Family Guy. Although the
message remains unclear in this study whether the satirical content found in Family Guy
has the ability to influence a socially apathetic stance towards social issues such as
violence against women and various forms of discrimination, the focus group allowed
outside perspectives from various backgrounds to contribute to this exploration of the
effects of viewing Family Guy in relation to social apathy.
After viewing the episode Brians Movin Out, I asked the participants if they
were shocked by any of the content viewed during the episode; no one responded with a
yes. This was not the response I was expecting to hear from everyone. One particular
example I had thought might elicit a reaction, was one scene insinuating an off-screen
rape of a female character (Marge Simpson) from another television show (The
Simpsons). This incident was initiated by one of the male characters (Quagmire) on
Family Guy. The scene is set up where Marge walks onto the very bottom of the screen
during the episode of Family Guy and waves to the audience while a banner is displayed
behind her advertising when the next episode of The Simpsons would air. Suddenly,
Quagmire comes running onto the bottom of the screen with his pants down and jumps
on top of Marge. They wrestle around while Quagmire remains on top of her with his
pants down until Marge escapes his hold and runs off the screen.
33
Next, the script implies that Marge was coerced into having sex and, in fact, that
she actually enjoyed having sex with Quagmire. The two characters walk back onto the
bottom of the screen and Marge says, Oh Quagmire, and Quagmire says See that
wasnt so bad. This sends a message that being sexually coerced can be enjoyable, and
further, that rape is not actually a punishable act, especially where the female is portrayed
as having enjoyed the sexual encounter. No definitely does not mean no in these
animated series. This particular incident is continued into the following scene. Marge
Simpson returns to her television show, The Simpsons, and The Simpsons family home is
the only image in the scene. Quagmire follows Marge into her home and her husband
Homer says, You slept with my wife! The script insinuates that Quagmire pulls out a
gun and shoots Homer as Marge screams, You shot my Homie! At this point another
gunshot is fired and Marge is targeted. The rest of the Simpsons family, including the
two elementary-aged children Bart and Lisa and the baby Maggie, are shot as well,
presumably by Quagmire.
After holding some discussion around the episode, I brought up this example for
discussion, and received comments from one university student who recognized in
relation to the rape scene, that adults are able to laugh during scenes satirizing violence
and rape for example, but are also able to realize that such content in reality is not funny.
The same participant also mentioned that an adolescent or pre-teen watching the same
scenario might laugh without realizing the actual reference to something as severe as
rape.
The above description of the enjoyable-rape scenario demonstrates the kind of
humour that is commonly found throughout Family Guy. When the participants of the
34
focus group were asked what they thought of the entire episode, and if they found
anything shocking, not one participant referred to this scene (the insinuated rape of
Marge Simpson) in the initial questioning. Later during the discussion in the focus group,
I referred to this example to start a discussion about violence against women and how it
becomes trivialized in this particular scene. Some of the participants, including one
youth worker and a couple of students, at first focused on the observation that Family
Guy, in this scene, was actually making a jab at the ratings of the other show, The
Simpsons, rather than looking at the issue of trivializing violence against women and
violence in general. However, this scene was later discussed as the major example of
objectionable content in the entire episode.
As speculated earlier in the theory section, a behavior is likely to be mimicked
from a television show when the issue that is being presented is trivialized and the act is
not punished or portrayed as wrongful. This perspective would be supported by
researchers such as Montemurro (2003), who says that content that is denigrating towards
women becomes trivial when presented in a comedic light.
When asked, the majority of participants thought that youth would not be
equipped with the right skills to deconstruct the meanings of the content found in Family
Guy. When participants of the focus group were asked what the possible social
consequence(s) might be for youth watching this content , one response from the parent
of the focus group suggested that young viewers of shows like Family Guy, would
probably adopt the attitude that they dont care. Other participants agreed with this
notion and considered the consequences of an apathetic standpoint. Having included a
parent in the focus group helped to bring about a more insightful perspective that was
35
relevant to the everyday lives and realities of youth and television. In addition, it helped
to enlighten the rest of the group and open up discussion around issues that a parent
would deal with in relation to the effects of television on youth. This leads me to one
example the parent discussed about mimicking television content.
While the parent in the focus group asserted that the content of the show is not
appropriate for kids to be watching, she felt that youth mimic what they see on television
as they do not always realize the severity of what they are mimicking. The point about
mimicking was based on her personal experience as a parent and is reflective of social
cognitive theory, which argues that youth learn to mimic what they admire and see as
rewarded or non punishable behaviour as depicted on the television and in other sources
of media.
Many of the student participants raised the fact that young viewers will still find a
way to watch it whether or not their parent tells them they are not allowed to watch the
show. The students spoke from their experience. When they were growing up, they were
not allowed to watch shows such as The Simpsons, or South Park, but many did watch
these shows regardless of their parents wishes. Some students in the focus group
expressed that because the shows they were secretly watching (i.e. The Simpsons and
South Park) were forbidden by their parents, it made the show more desirable for them to
watch. In addressing this issue of easy access to television shows that youth are formally
forbidden to watch, I asked the group what could be done to intervene in the potential
social consequences of apathy, given that the accessibility of the content is inevitable
despite parental wishes. The parent in the focus group noted that this kind of content is
not for kids, but also acknowledged the fact that youth will find ways to watch the
36
content regardless if they are allowed or not. She suggested, as a counter-tactic, that the
parents sit down with the child or teen and ruin it for them. Further implying that the
parent should talk to their children about the reality of the show, the messages it might be
sending, and the severity of the issues as they occur in reality. Other participants
suggested that parents need to discuss with their children that there are social
consequences in real life for the things that are being portrayed in the television shows
they watch. This discussion would help youth to decide what is right from wrong and
enhance their analytical skills.
37
CHAPTER SIX
Discussion and Conclusion
Participants in the focus group stated that adolescents will always find ways to
access prohibited television shows that are not intended for them, such as Family Guy
and South Park. Television shows of this nature satirize political and controversial issues
and utilize crudeness and profanity to entertain. In the process, they also help to shape
attitudes and responses to the social problems they exploit. Family Guy in particular has
been found to portray negative social stereotypes and social problems like violence
against women, forms of discrimination and negative social stereotypes.
With all that we know from previous studies on the effects of television on youth,
it would not be shocking to speculate that the content in Family Guy would have similar
negative effects on a young audience. In order to avoid youth reaping the negative
impacts of television and the media, it is essential that parents and other adults play an
important role in helping youth develop critical and analytical skills to understand
adequately satirical and crude content. Furthermore, youth should be educated to realize
the severity of the social problems being portrayed in the media and television.
The limitations of the present study are substantial and provide lessons for future
research on this topic. Since I could obtain no measure for the numbers of adolescent
youth who watch shows such as Family Guy, it made the speculations of this paper even
more tentative. The literature that was found to be most relevant in this study pointed to
the fact that television and the media can embrace negative stereotypes about gender
(Montemurro 2003; Peter and Valkenburg, 2007; and Dill, Brown, and Collins, 2008), in
addition to increasing violent behaviours among youth (Kuntsche et al, 2006) . In
38
researching literature however, little material was found that specifically identified the
issue of social apathy in connection to youth and the media. As a result, speculations on
the issue of apathy as a consequence on youth of viewing the trivialization of social
issues had limited background support. However, despite these limitations, an important
issue regarding youth consumption of media and television that has not been explored
thoroughly has hopefully been identified as an area for future research.
One aspect that was not taken into consideration before beginning the content
analysis was the types of humour that were found in the show. After watching a couple of
episodes, I noticed a distinct difference in the way jokes were being made. The first type
of jokes presented only a suggestive or subtle message, while the second type involved
overt or blatant messages. This made the task of classifying the content more difficult.
This was especially true for the more subtle types of humour because I had to remain
objective while classifying the information into a specific category. The framework from
which I based my observations was a human-rights perspective. Any content that
touched on a human rights issue or presented a social stereotype, whether subtle or not, I
noted accordingly. The more blatant examples were much easier to code because the
category they would fit under was more obvious. I did not anticipate how difficult it
would be to devise an appropriate coding scheme and then apply it objectively and
consistently. In hindsight, a possible solution to this might have been to watch a couple of
episodes without commencing any analysis, and then figure out the types of humour the
show uses to form their jokes. Consideration of types of humour is important because the
concern of the thesis is with younger viewers and the likelihood that they have not
developed a critical, analytical framework within which to view stereotypes and
39
trivialized issues. However, it is equally likely that the more subtle references might pass
unnoticed by them.
Future research in the area of social apathy among youth relative to television
should attempt to gain direct access to young adolescent participants, and include more
parents and educators, but research each group separately. It might be possible to
measure apathy among youth in relation to media and social issues mentioned throughout
this using a questionnaire asking young participants to identify the shows they watch on a
regular basis (listing Family Guy as a possible choice) and then asking their opinions of
social issues in relation to how serious, prevalent and how changeable the issue may be.
In conclusion, the purpose of this thesis was to begin a preliminary analysis of a
major concern about media effects on youth. The literature on negative effects of
television viewing suggests possible links among watching violence, learning violent
behaviours, and developing longer-term negative cognitive structures. While these
connections are never unmediated, I wanted to examine the possible consequences of
watching one controversial show, Family Guy, which has a great deal of problematic
content and is watched by young audiences. Furthermore, I wanted to speculate about the
possible effect of inducing social apathy among youth in the face of serious social issues.
If social problems are trivialized or merely made laughable, and young people learn to
treat them as either natural or unproblematic, then finding solutions to problems becomes
more difficult. In this thesis, social apathy was viewed as being a possible consequence of
consumption of television content that satirizes social issues like violence, harassment,
and/or discrimination. Previous research has demonstrated that the attitudes and beliefs of
40
adolescent viewers can be largely affected by the nature of the media that they encounter
on a regular basis.
Overall, with regards to satirizing social issues in the name of Family Guy,
referring back to the content analysis, the most commonly found problematic content
involved issues of gender and sexist attitudes towards women. The majority of instances
targeted women. Given that women are commonly objectified in the media, this translates
into the potential for youth to adopt a negative attitude towards women, where women
are seen as sexual objects rather than human beings, as discussed by researchers such as
Peter and Valkenburg (2007). A lack of concern for issues like sexual harassment of
women is likely to develop among young viewers who view content that is trivialized, as
mentioned by Montemurro (2003). When issues such as sexual harassment are trivialized
by comedy, young viewers may learn to perceive those social problems as non
punishable, possibly helping them to adopt similar attitudes, as discussed by social
cognitive theory (Piaget, 1970). Given the support of theory, previous literature and
perspectives derived through the content analysis and the focus group, the potential for
possible harm clearly exists when young viewers view content, in the absence of adult
intervention that satirizes social issues such as violence against women.
41
References
Academy of Achievement. n.d. (http://www.achievement.org/autodoc/page/par0bio-1)
Established 1961-Museum of Living History, Washington D.C. Retrieved on
February 23, 2009.
Anonymous. 2007. Tips for Parents: Media Violence What Parents Can Do. Education Today,
19(2):8.
Arnett, Jeffrey Jensen. 1995. Adolescents Uses of Media for Self-Socialization. Journal of
Youth and Adolescence 24(5): 519-533.
Bandura, Albert. 1977. Social Learning Theory. Englewood Cliffs, N.J: Prentice-Hall.
Berry, G. L., & Asamen. J. K. 2001. Television, Children, and Multicultural Awareness:
Comprehending the Medium in a Complex Multi-media Society. Pp. 359-373 in
Handbook of Children and the Media, edited by D.G. Singer, & J.L. Singer. Thousands
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Berry, Gordon L. 2003. Developing Children and Multicultural Attitudes: The Systemic
Psychosocial Influences of Television Portrayals in a Multimedia Society. Cultural
Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology 9(4):360-366.
Best, Steven, and Douglas Kellner. 1998. Beavis and Butt-Head: No Future for Postmodern
Youth. Pp. 74-99 in Youth Culture: Identity in a Postmodern World, edited by Jonathan
S. Epstein. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers.
Crawford, M., & Unger, R. (2004). Women and Gender: A Feminist Psychology. Boston:
McGraw-Hill.
Davis, Ronald L. F. n.d. Slavery in America: Historical Overview. (Slavery in America).
(http://www.slaveryinamerica.org/history/hs_es_ overview.htm). Retrieved on February
23, 2009.
DeLeon, Kris. 2007. Family Guy: Reaping High Ratings. Buddy TV. Retrieved January 27,
2009 (http://www.buddytv.com/articles/family-guy/family-guy-reaping-high-rating12331.aspx)
Dill, Karen E, Brian P. Brown, and Michael A. Collins. 2008. Effects of Exposure to SexStereotyped Video Game Characters on Tolerance of Sexual Harassment. Journal of
Experimental Social Psychology 44:1402-1408.
Diversity on Television. 2002. Media Now: A Children Now Newsletter, 1-5.
42
Entman, R. M., & Rojecki, A. 1998. Minorities in Mass Media: A Status Report. Pp. 67-85 in
Investing in Diversity: Advancing Opportunities for Minorities and Media, edited by S.K.
Garmer. Washington, DC: Aspen Institute.
Fisherkeller, JoEllen. 2002. Growing Up With Television: Everyday Learning Among Young
Adolescents. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Fouts, Gregory and Kimberley Burggraf. 2000. Television Situation Comedies: Female
Weight, Male Negative Comments, and Audience Reactions. Sex Roles 42(9/10):925932.
Frederickson, B. L., & Roberts, T-A. 1997. Objectification Theory: Toward Understanding
Womens Lived Experiences and Mental Health Risks. Psychology of Women Quarterly
21:173-206.
Grauerholz, E., & King, A. 1997. Prime Time Sexual Harassment. Violence Against
Women 3:129-148.
Himmelweit, H. T., Oppenheim, A.N., Vince, P. 1966. Television and the Child: An Empirical
Study of the Effect of Television on the Young. London: Oxford Universty Press.
Kuntsche, Emmanuel, William Pickett, Mary Overpeck, Wendy Craig, William Boyce, and
Margarida Gaspar de Matos. 2006. Television Viewing and Forms of Bullying Among
Adolescents from Eight Countries. Journal of Adolescent Health 39:908-915.
Levy, Ariel. 2005. Female Chauvinist Pigs: Women and the Rise of Raunch Culture. New York,
NY: Free Press.
Lorber, Judith. 2005. Gender Inequality: Feminist Theories and Politics. 3rd ed. Los Angeles,
CA: Roxbury Publishing Co.
Montemurro, Beth. 2003. Not a Laughing Matter: Sexual Harassment as Material on
Workplace-Based Situational Comedies. Sex Roles 48(9/10):433-445.
Murray, J.P. 1993. The Developing Child in a Multimedia Society. Pp. 9-22 in Children and
Television: Images in a Changing Sociocultural World, edited by G.L. Berry & J.K.
Asamen. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Nobel Lectures, Peace 1951-1970,
(http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1964/king-bio.html) EditorFrederick
W. Haberman, Elsevier Publishing Company, Amsterdam, 1972.Source: The Nobel
Foundation 1964. Retrieved on February 23, 2009.
Peter, Jochen and Patti M. Valkenburg, 2007. Adolescents Exposure to a Sexualized Media
Environment and Their Notions of Women as Sex Objects. Sex Roles 56:381-395.
43
Piaget, J. 1970. Piagets Theory. In Carmichaels Manual of Child Psychology. edited by P. H.

Mussen. New York: Wiley
Results of Presidential Election. 2008. CNN Politics.com.
(http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/ president/) Retrieve on February 23,
2009.
Rosengren, K. E., andWindahl, S. 1989. Media Matter: TV Use in Childhood and Adolescence.
Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Sealey, Kelvin S., ed. 2008. Film, Politics, & Education: Cinematic Pedagogy Across the
Disciplines. New York, NY: Peter Lang Publishing.
Valkenburg, Patti M. 2004. Childrens Responses to the Screen: A Media Psychological
Approach. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
Velzeboer, Marike, Mary Ellsberg, Carmen Clavel Arcas, and Claudia Garcia-Moreno, eds.
2003. Violence Against Women: The Health Sector Responds. Washington, D.C: PAHO.
44
Appendix 1Content Analysis

Coding Defined:
Character coding:
F-(Female), M-(Male)
R-(Race): 1 (Caucasian), 2 (African descent), 3 (Asian), 4 (Aboriginal), 5 (Arabic), 6
(Other)
A-(Age): 1 (Child/Infant-12 yrs), 2 (Teen 13-19yrs), 3 (Adult 20-65yrs), 4 (Senior 65yrs
plus)
S-(Sexual orientation displayed): 1 (Heterosexual), 2 (Homosexual), 3 (Bisexual), 4
(Transgendered)
D-(Disabled-i.e. physically, psychologically disabled)
Coded Content Observed:

1Aggression
(A) Verbal (B) Physical (C) Body Language
(i) Gender based (ii) Racially based, (iii) Cultural based, (iv) Sexual Orientation based
(v) Disabled, (vi) Religion based
2Violence
(A) Gender based, (B) Racially based, (C) Cultural based, (D) Sexual Orientation based,
(E) Disabled, (F) Religion based (G) Sexual Assault
3 Prejudice ANegative Stereotypes BActs of Discrimination
(i) Gender based, (ii) Racially based, (iii) Cultural based, (iv) Sexual Orientation based,
(v) Disabled, (vi) Religion based
4Sexually Explicit Content/Suggestive Messages
(A) Objectification (i) Female (ii) Male, (B) Pornographic content, reference, (C)
Terminology/Slang
5Negative Portrayals of Body Image
(A) Female (B) Male
45

Episode: Hell Comes to Quahog Airdate: 9/24/06
Instigator/Initiator Character
Recipient Character
1) M,
Coded Content Observed
R1, A3, S1
N/A
4a(i), c
2) M, R1, A3, S1
N/A
3a(iii)
3) M, R1, A3, S1
N/A
3a(vi)
4) M, R1, A3, S1
N/A
3a, 4a(i)
5) M, R1, A3, S1
N/A
5a
6) M, R1, A3, S1
N/A
3a
7) M, R1, A3, S1
N/A
3a(iv)
8) M, R1, A3, S1
F,R1, A3, S1
1a(i), 2a
9) M, R1, A3, S1
F,R1, A3, S1
1a, b(i), 2a, 3a
10) M, R1, A3, S1
N/A
3a, 4a(i)
11) M, R1, A3, S1
F, R1 , A2, S1
3a, 4a(i), 5a
12) M, R1, A3, S1
F, R1 , A2, S1
1b
13) M, R1, A3, S1
N/A
3a(iv)
14) M, R1, A3, S1
M, R3, A1, S (n/a)
3b(ii), (iii)
15) M, R1, A3, S1
N/A
4a(i), b
16) M, R1, A3, S1
M, R1, A3, S1, D
1b(v), 2e
17) N/A
N/A
4a(i)
18) M, R1, A3, S1
N/A
1b
19) M, R1, A1, S (n/a)
N/A
3a(iv), (vi)
20) F, R1, A3, S1
N/A
3a
Additional Notes: Other observations were noted in addition to the above: substance use
(alcohol), public intoxication and drinking and driving. Profane and vulgar language was
also used on a regular basis. References of eating disorders and self-destructive behaviour
were also referenced in relation to one particular character, a teenage girl who was
purchasing her first vehicle and exclaimed that she wanted a car to match her personality.
Her younger brother then referenced the eating disorder and self-destructive behaviour at
this point.
46

Episode Mother Tucker Airdate: 9/17/06
Time
Observed
1:11
1:46
1:49
1:54
2:27
3:25
Instigator/Initiator
Character
21) M, R1, A3, S (n/a)
22) M, R1, A3, S1
23) M, R1, A3, S1
24) M, R1, A3, S1
25) M, R1, A3, S1
26) M, R1, A3, S (n/a)
Recipient Character
Coded Content
Observed
M, R1, A3, S (n/a)
1b, 2
N/A
2a, 4a(i)
N/A
2a, 4a(i)
N/A
2a, 3a(i), 4a(i), 5a
M, R1, A3, S1
3a(i)
N/A
4c (Thats what she
said, whoa you got
Butt Slammed)
3:32
27) M, R1, A3, S (n/a)
N/A
4c (Thats what she
said whoa you got
Butt Slammed)
5:29
28) M, R1, A2, S (n/a)
M, R1, A2, S (n/a)
1b, 2
6:04
29) M, R1, A2, S1
F, R1, A2, S1
1a(i), 2a, 3a(i), 4c
8:33
30) M, R1, A3, S1
F, R1, A4, S1
4a(i), 5a (Relative to
age)
8:49
31) N/A
N/A
1a(i)
8:57
32) M, R1, A3, S1
N/A
1a(i), 3a(i)
9:13
33) M, R1, A3, S1
F, R1, A4, S1
3b, 4a(i)
9:20
34) M, R1, A3, S1
F, R1, A3, S1
1a(i), 3a(i)
10:03
35) M, R2, A3, S (n/a)
F, R1, A4, S1
3b, 4a(i)
10:15
36) M, R1, A1, S (n/a)
F, R1, A4, S1
4a(i), b, 5a
11:04
37) F, R1, A4, S1
N/A
3b(v)
12:50
38) F, R1, A3, S1
M, R1, A3, S1
1b, 2
14:25
39) M
N/A
3a(v)
15:38
40) N/A
N/A
4c
16:37
41) F, R1, A4, S1
M, R1, A3, S1
4c
18:20
42) M
N/A
4a(i)
18:40
43) M
N/A
4a(i)
19:47
44) M, R1, A3, S1
M, R1, A3, S1
1b
19:53
45) N/A
N/A
4a(i), b, 5a
20:21
46) N/A
N/A
4b
21:13
47) M, R1, A3, S1
M, R1, A1, S (n/a)
3b(v)
21:58
48) N/A
N/A
4c
Additional Notes: Other observations not directly fitting into the categories above were
issues of ageism, drug use and child neglect. In addition specific stereotypes in relation
to female body image and alcohol use from a males perspective was referenced, in order
for that male to have sexual relations with a particular female, it was deemed necessary to
be intoxicated to see past the females unattractiveness. Patriarchy was also noted as an
undertone of the episode, by depicting female submissiveness towards male characters.
47

Episode Prick Up Your Ears Airdate: 11/19/06
Time
Recipient Character
Coded Content
Observed
Character
Observed
:40
49) F, R1, A3, S1
M, R2, A3, S1
1b, 2
1:18
50) N/A
N/A
4a(i), b
2:00
51) N/A
N/A
4a(i), b, c
2:10
52) N/A
N/A
4a(i), b
2:35
53) N/A
N/A
3a(iv), b
4:25
54) M, R1, A3, S1
N/A
2a
5:18
55) M, R1, A2, S1
M, R1, A1, S (n/a)
1b, 2
7:45
56) N/A
N/A
3a(vi)
10:11
57) M, R1, A1, S (n/a)
N/A
5a
11:13
58) N/A
N/A
3a(i)
11:30
59) M, R1, A3, S1
F, R1, A2, S1
3a(i), 4a(i)
11:50
60) M, R1, A3, S1
F, R3, A3, S (n/a)
3a(ii)
13:24
61) M, R1, A3, S1
N/A
3a(ii), (iv)
16:03
62) M
N/A
3a(i), 5a
16:45
63) M, R1, A1, S (n/a)
F, R1, A2, S1
5a
17:39
64) F, R1, A3, S1
M, R1, A3, S1
2g
18:28
65) M, R1, A3, S (n/a)
N/A
3b(vi)
18:34
66) M, R1, A1, S (n/a)
N/A
1a(i)
19:18
67) M, R1, A3, S1
F, R1, A3, S1
1a(i)
20:08
68) M, R1, A3, S (n/a)
N/A
3a(iii), b(iii)
20:58
69) N/A
N/A
5a
Additional Notes: Observations of eating disorders such as Bulimia were noted, drug
use, female submissiveness in relation to partriarchal undertones. Frequent vulgar
language in relation to sex in particular.
48

Episode Peters Two Dads Airdate: 2/11/07
Time
Observed
5:05
6:45
7:36
9:00
9:49
10:34
11:06
11:18
11:31
12:41
14:38
16:06
16:21
20:05
21:07
21:45
21:49
21:55
Character
70) M, R1, A3, S1
71) N/A
72) M,
R1, A4, S2
73) M
74) M,
R1, A3, S1
R1, A1, S (n/a)
76) F, R1, A3, S1
77) N/A
78) M, R1, A3, S2
79) F, R1, A3, S1
80) F, R1, A3, S1
81) N/A
82) N/A
83) N/A
84) M, R1, A3, S1
85) M, R1, A3, S (n/a)
86) M, R1, A (n/a), S1,
D
87) M(x2), R1, A3, S1
75) M,
Recipient Character
*(x3) F, R1, A2, S
(n/a)
N/A
M, R1, A2, S1
F, R1, A3, S1
N/A
N/A
M, R1, A3, S (n/a)
N/A
N/A
M, R1, A1, S (n/a)
M, R1, A1, S (n/a)
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
M, R1, A3, S (n/a)
F
Coded Content
Observed
Other (ex. Pedophilia)
3a(ii)
3a(iv), Other (ex.
Pedophilia)
2g
3a(ii)
4a(i), c
1b, 2
3b(i), (vi)
3a(iv)
1b, 2 (ex. Child abuse)
4a(ii), b
3a(iii)
3a(iii)
3a(iii)
3a(i), 4a(i), c
1b, 2, 3a(iii)
4a(i)
(x3), M, R1, A3, S

1b, 2, 3a(iii)
(n/a)
Additional Comments: Child neglect and abuse was noted in this episode in addition to
profane language. Pedophilia was also noted as subtle reference. Drug and alcohol use
was also noted. Themes of blaming the victim were also noted. Incestuous insinuations
were also noted at one point in the show.
49

Episode Tan Aquatic with Steve Zissou Airdate: 2/18/07
Time
Observed
00:53
1:21
1:44
2:25
3:04
3:50
4:20
6:09
6:20
8:50-:56
9:47
9:58
12:22
13:58
14:02
14:11
14:13
15:35
15:45
16:03
18:28
18:45
21:00
Character
88) (x2), M, R1, A3, S
(n/a)
89) M, R1, A3, S1
90) M, R2, A3, S1
91) M, R1, A4, S2
92) N/A
93) M, R1, A3, S1
94) N/A
95) M, R1, A2, S (n/a)
96) M, R1, A4, S2
97) N/A
98) M,
R1, A2, S (n/a)

R1, A3, S1
100) M
101) M, R1, A3, S1
102) M, R1, A3, S1
103) M, R1, A1, S
(n/a)
104) M, R1, A3, S1
105) M, R1, A3, S1
99) M,
Recipient Character
M, R2, A3, S1
Observed Coded
Content
1a(ii), 3b(ii)
M, R1, A3, S1, D

M, R1, A3, S1
M, R1, A2, S (n/a)
N/A
F, R1, A3, S (n/a)
N/A
M, R1, A2, S1
(x5), M, R1, A2, S
(n/a)
N/A
M, R1, A3, S1
M, R1, A2, S, (n/a)
M, R1, A1, S (n/a)
F, R1, A3, S1
F, R1, A3, S1
F, R1, A3, S1
3b(v)
3a(ii), b(ii)
4a(ii) (Pedophilia)
3a(iii)
1b, 2
4
1a,b, 5b (Bullying)
3a(iv), 4a(ii)
M, R1, A1, S (n/a)

M, R1, A2, S1
1a, b, 2
1b, 2 (ex. Bullying and
Child Abuse)
3a(i), (iii), 4a(i)
1b
1b(Bullying), 3b(v)
1b (Bullying)
1a
106) M,
R1, A3, S1
107) M, R1, A3, S1
108) M, R1, A3, S1
109) M, R1, A3, S1
110) M, R1, A3, S1
3a(iv), b(iv)
1a (Fat comment)
1b, 2
4, Other
1b, 2a
1b, 2a
1a
N/A
F, R1, A2, S1
M, R1, A3, S1, D
M, R2, A3, S1, D
M, R1, A3, S (n/a),
D
21:19
111) M, R1, A2, S1
M, R1, A3, S1
1b, 2
22:00
112) M, R1, A3, S1
N/A
1a(i)
Additional Comments: Child abuse and neglect were noted, in addition to themes of
bullying (specifically related to fat jokes). Examples of domestic violence included the
husband of the family throwing hot contents of a frying pan at the wife, and taking her
hands and using them against her to punch herself in the face. Also, there were times
when serious illnesses were satirized. Profanity was also common throughout the
episode.
50

Episode Airport 07 Airdate: 3/4/07
Time
Observed
2:35
Character
113) M, R1, A3, S1
Recipient Character
3:05
3:28
3:31
114) N/A
N/A
N/A
M (dog-Brian)
3:54
4:05
4:28
8:19
8:32
9:00
9:20
10:26
10:48
11:16
12:59
13:36
14:03
15:08
15:43
16:37
16:45
17:07
115) N/A
116) M,
R1, A1, S
(n/a)
117) M, R1, A3, S1
118) N/A
119) M, R1, A3, S1
120) N/A
121) M, R1, A3, S1
122) N/A
123) F, R1, A3, S1
124) N/A
125) N/A
126) M, R1, A3, S1
127) M, R1, A3, S1
128) M, R1, A3, S1
129) M, R1, A3, S1
130) N/A
131) M, R1, A3, S1
132) N/A
133) M, R1, A3, S1
134) M, R1, A3, S1
F, R1, A2, S1
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
F, R1, A3, S1
M, R1, A3, S1
M, R1, A3, S1
N/A
N/A
F, R1, A2, S1
F, R1, A3, S1
M, R1, A3, S1, D
F, R2, A3, S1
N/A
N/A
N/A
F, R1, A3, S1
F, R1, A2, S1
Observed Coded
Content
2g, 3a (Other Incest,
Rape, Redneck)
3a(vi)
3a(iii)
1b, 2
3a(iii)
2a,g, 4a(i)
2a,g, 4a(i)
2a, 3a(i)
1b(i), 2a, 3a(i)
4a(ii)
1a, 3a(iv)
4c
4a(i)
2g
3a(i)
3a, b(v)
4a(i)
4 Other (Prostitution)
3a(i), 4a(i)
4 (Sexual Relations)
4a(i), 1b(i)
2a,g, 4a(i) (Statutory
Rape-minor girl,
deceased)
17:34
135) M, R1, A3, S1
F, R1, A3, S1
4a(i)
19:28
136) M, R1, A3, S1
M, R1, A3, S1
4b
20:25
137) M, R1, A3, S1
N/A
3a(iv) (Homophobic
Comment)
Additional Comments: Pedophilia was noted in this episode in addition to stalking, and
suicide. Depictions of plane crashes and children on fire were also noted. A scene of wife
beating was noted. Profanity was common throughout the episode. Another scene
portrayed sexual slavery along with racial dehumanization. This was noted when one of
the male characters (Quagmire) had locked up a dozen Asian women in his garage and
house, and they had fled when the neighbor (Peter) backed into the garage where some of
the Asian women were locked up. This caused a ruckus, and the women ran away while
dressed in nothing but under-garments. The male character Quagmire reassured his
neighbor Peter not to worry about letting the Asian women get away by saying Dont
worry, theyre tagged, theyre tagged.
51

Episode Bill and Peters Bogus Journey Airdate: 3/11/07
Time
Observed
00:48
1:26
1:40
2:43
6:03
6:42
8:40
Character
138) N/A
139) N/A
140) N/A
141) N/A
142) N/A
143) M, R1, A3, S1
144) M, R1, A3, S1
Recipient Character
Observed Coded
Content
M, R2, A3, S1
3b(ii)
N/A
4a(i), b
N/A
3a(i), 4a(i), b
N/A
3a(i), 5a
M, R1, A3, S1, D
3a(v)
N/A
3a(i), 4a(i), 5a
F, R1, A2, S1
3a(i), 4a(i), 5a (Sex
with a Minor)
10:11
145) M, R1, A3, S1
F?
1b(i), 2 (Other- Prank
calling Bitch)
11:34
146) M, R1, A3, S1
F?
3a(i), b(i), 5a
13:05
147) N/A
N/A
4c
14:36
148) M, R1, A3, S1
F, R1, A3, S1
4a(i), c Infidelity
15:47
149) M, R1, A3, S1
F, R1, A3, S1
4c
15:56
150) N/A
N/A
4
16:10
151) M, R1, A3, S1
M, R1, A3, S1
3a(i), 4a(i), c
16:45
152) M, R1, A3, S1
F, R1, A3, S1
4c
Additional Comments: Pedophilia was noted in this episode, along with drug use and
sexually transmitted diseases.
52

Episode Model Misbehaviour Vol. 3, 2002
Time
Observed
1:37
1:50
2:55
3:01
3:26
4:43
5:05
5:22
5:45
6:21
7:21
Character
153) M, R1, A1, S
(n/a)
154) M, R1, A3, S1
155) M, R1, A3, S1
156) M, R1, A1, S
(n/a)
157) M, R1, A1, S
(n/a)
158) M, R1, A3, S1
159) N/A
160) M, R1, A3, S1
Recipient Character
N/A
Observed Coded
Content
5b
F, R1, A2, S1
M, R1, A3, S1
F, R6, A3, S (n/a)
4a(i)
1b, 5b
3a, b(ii)
M, R1, A3, S (n/a)
1b
M, R1, A3, S1
N/A
F, R1, A2, S1
3a(iv), 4c
4a(i)
4a(i) (Pedophilia-sex
with minor)
5b
3a(i), (iv)
5a
161) M,
R1, A3, S1
M, R1, A3, S1
162) F, R1, A3, S (n/a)
M, R1, A3, S (n/a)
163) M, R1, A3, S
F, R1, A2, S1
(n/a)
8:36
164) M, R1, A3, S1
F, R1, A3, S1
4a(i)
8:47
165) M, R1, A3, S1
F, R1, A2, S1
1a
9:09
166) M, R1, A3, S
M, R1, A3, S (n/a),
1b(v), 3a, b(v)
(n/a)
D
9:33
167) N/A
N/A
4a(i)
11:15
168) M, R1, A3, S1
F, R1, A4, S (n/a)
4 (Sexual acts)
12:37
169) M, R1, A3, S1
F, R1, A3, S1
3b(i), 4a(i), c
12:50
170) N/A
F, R1, A3, S1
4a(i), b
13:50
171) N/A
N/A
4a(i)
14:22
172) M, R1, A3, S1
F, R1, A3, S1
4a(i)
14:31
173) M, R1, A3, S1
F, R1, A3, S1
3b(i), 4a(i)
14:35
174) M, R1, A3, S1
F, R1, A3, S1
3b(i), 4a(i)
14:41
175) M, R2, A3, S1
F, R1, A3, S1
3b(i), 4a(i)
15:41
176) N/A
(R2?)
3a(ii)
15:50
177) F, R1, A3, S1
M, R1, A3, S1
4c
19:00
178) F, R1, A3, S1
F, R1, A3, S1
4a(i), 5a
21:00
179) N/A
N/A
1b, 4 (Sexual relations)
Additional Comments: Religious mockery was noted, along with female submissiveness,
eating disorders and drug use.
53

Episode Peters Got Woods Vol. 3, 2002
Time
Observed
1:42
2:25
3:08
3:27
4:33
4:54
5:21
5:26
7:06
7:58-8:20
8:51
10:18
11:04
12:31
15:00
17:08
17:17
17:26
17:47
Character
180) M, R1, A3, S1
181) M, R1?
182) M, R1, A1, S
(n/a)
183) M, R1, A1, S
(n/a)
184) M, R1, A3, S1
185) M, R1, A3, S1
186) M, R1, A1, S
(n/a)
187) F, R1, A3, S1
188) F, R1, A2, S1
189) M, R1, A3, S1
190) N/A
191) M, R1, A3, S1
192) N/A
193) M, R1, A3, S1
194) N/A
195) M, R1, A3, S1
196) M, R1, A3, S1
197) M, R1, A1, S1
198) M,
R1, A3, S1
Recipient Character
N/A
F, R2, A3, S1
M, R1, A3, S1
Observed Coded
Content
4a(i)
3a(ii)
3a(iv)
F, R1, A3, S (n/a), D
3a, b(v)
F, R2, A3, S1
F, R2, A3, S1
F, R1, A3, S1
3a(ii)
3a(ii)
3a(i)
N/A
M, R1, A3, S1
N/A
F, R1, A2, S1
F, R1, A3, S (n/a)
F, R1, A2, S (n/a)
N/A
N/A
F, R1, A3, S (n/a)
F, R1, A3, S (n/a)
(x2), F, R1, A3, S
(n/a)
M, R1, A3, S1
3a(i)
5b
3b(ii) (Mockery)
3a(i)
4a(i), c
4a(i)
3a(i)
3a(i), 4a(i)
1a, 3b(i), 4a(i), 5a
1b, 3b(i), 4a(i)
1b, 3a(i), 4a(i)
3b(i), 4a(i), c
Additional Comments: Drug use was noted along with drinking and driving and
profanity.
54

Episode Perfect Castaway Vol. 3, 2002
Time
Observed
00:53
4:44
5:35
6:26
6:39
7:23
8:21
8:40
10:16
10:19
10:38
10:46
11:14
11:28
12:47
13:04
13:37
14:05
14:47
15:32
Character
199) M, R1, A3, S1
200) M,
R2, A3, S1
201) N/A
202) N/A
203) N/A
204) M,
R1, A3, S1
205) N/A
206) M,
R1, A3, S1
207) M, R1, A3, S1
208) M, R1, A3, S1
209) M, R1, A3, S1
210) M, R1, A3, S1
211) N/A
212) N/A
213) M, R1, A3, S1
214) (x4), M, R1, A3,
S1
215) M, R1, A3, S1
216) M, R1, A3, S1
217) M, R1, A3, S1
218) M, R1, A3, S1
Recipient Character
(x2), M,
R6(Hispanic), A3, S
(n/a)
M, R1, A3, S1
M, R1, A3, S1, D *
M, R1, A3, S1
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
M, R1, A3, S1, D
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
F, R1, A2, S1
F, R1, A3, S (n/a)
F, R1, A3, S1
F, R1, A3, S1
N/A
F, R1, A3, S1
Observed Coded
Content
1b(ii), 2b, 3b(ii)
4a(i)
4a(ii)
3b,f
2g, 3b(i)
3b(vi)
4a(i), c
3b(v)
3b(v)
3a(i), 4a(i)
3b(ii), (v)
3a(i), 4a(i), b, c
3a, b(iv)
1a
4a(i)
4a(i)
3a(i)
2g, 4a(i)
4a(ii), b
2g, 4 (Forced sex on a
woman)
18:14
219) M, R1, A3, S1
F, R1, A3, S1
4 (Sex)
20:29
220) F, R1, A3, S1
M, R1, A3, S1
3a(i), 4a(ii)
Additional Comments: Pedophilia and profanity was noted in addition to the other
observations fitting with the categories above.
55
Appendix 12Semi-structured/Open Ended Questions-Focus Group
1)
Was there anything shocking to you in this particular episode or anything that was
unusual? For anyone who watches it on a regular basis was this something that you
would see on a normal night of Family Guy? What about some of you who dont watch it
on a regular basis, was there any particular aspect of the episode that you thought was a
bit surprising?
2)
By the use of satire in the rape scene near the beginning of the episode, do you
think that scene is sending any kind of message? Why or why not?
3)
Would you say that there is a difference in the way we would watch the show and
the way a younger population watches the show?
4)
[By commenting on the success of Family Guy and a remark by a TV analyst on
the positives of Family Guys easy access to kids on early evening television, I probed
the participants to see whether or not there was an oblivious mindset among some TV
analysts with regards to defining the level of age-appropriate television.]
5)
[In relation to a discussion about youth mimicking television content I asked:]
Does mimicking the television content have any further social implication relative to
youth?
6)
[In response to a discussion about trivializing and mainstreaming issues of sexual
harassment and violence on television I asked:] Do you think this trivialization or
mainstreaming of social issues becomes engrained in our culture and society as just the
norm, making it easy to joke about?
7)
[In response to a discussion on talking about television content with youth I
asked:] Would being a little more critical while watching television with youth be a way
to intervene in the youths interpretation of the content? Why or why not?
8)
Do you think satire has a way of raising consciousness, or our awareness of
certain issues?
9)
If there is no awareness being created for young viewers through satire what other
implications might take place?
10)
What do you think of the issues of acceptance and apathy as a possible stance to
be taken by youth, in interpreting the show if the satire is not raising their awareness of
the social issues being presented in the content?
56
Semi-structured/Open Ended Questions-Focus Group Continued

11)
Is satire an effective way of bringing about awareness for certain issues like
violence against women, discrimination, and/or a lack of respect for cultural diversity?
Why or why not?
12)
Does the material that Family Guy uses and the type of content that can be viewed
in Family Guy become less shocking after a while? How so?
13)
Does the rape scene get overlooked in this episode by the simultaneous
conversation in the background between three other characters? Why or why not?
14)
If there are issues that we are less likely to be concerned about right now, like
violence, and if for instance violence is statistically not as significant in society as it once
was in the past decade or so, what are the chances of it occurring or increasing in the
future based on the generation of youth who were fans of shows like Family Guy. Do you
think there is any connection to how mindsets might change in the future about violence?
15)
If censorship is not a useful tool to intervene in what youth are watching, what
kinds of things could be done to intervene in how youth are watching and interpreting the
content?
57

Satirizing Social Issues in The Name of Family Guy Exploring TVs Impact On Young Viewers

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Satirizing Social Issues in The Name of Family Guy Exploring TVs Impact On Young Viewers

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SATIRIZING SOCIAL ISSUES IN THE NAME OF FAMILY GUY: EXPLORING

TVS IMPACT ON YOUNG VIEWERS

This thesis by Amelia D. Awalt

Approved by the Thesis Supervisor

Approved by the Head of the Department

Approved by the Honours Committee

I, Amelia D. Awalt, grant permission to the University Librarian at Acadia University to

of entertainment by youth (Fisherkeller, 2002). It is also a show that is frequently aired

A self-designed observation scheme was developed to categorize specific

Table 1 Types of Coded Observations

Verbal Aggression, General

Sexually Explicit Content - Objectification of females

Sexually Explicit Content - Objectification of Males

Sexually Explicit Content (Other)

Negative Body Image Content Female

In the majority of instances the instigator was Caucasian (75.4%), heterosexual

Times Observed Percentage

From a feminist perspective, these results reflect the demographics and

a message that it is more socially acceptable to feature discriminatory content towards

Piaget, J. 1970. Piagets Theory. In Carmichaels Manual of Child Psychology. edited by P. H.

Appendix 1Content Analysis

Coded Content Observed:

Appendix 2Content Analysis

Coded Content Observed

Appendix 3Content Analysis

Appendix 4Content Analysis

Appendix 5Content Analysis

(x3), M, R1, A3, S

Appendix 6Content Analysis

R1, A2, S (n/a)

M, R1, A3, S1, D

M, R1, A1, S (n/a)

Appendix 7Content Analysis

Appendix 8Content Analysis

Appendix 9Content Analysis

M, R1, A3, S (n/a)

Appendix 10Content Analysis

F, R1, A3, S (n/a), D

Appendix 11Content Analysis

Appendix 12Semi-structured/Open Ended Questions-Focus Group

Semi-structured/Open Ended Questions-Focus Group Continued

You might also like