People equate regulation of media entertainment with censorship. Let’s face it: Entertainment is a high priority and the lines between reality and fiction are often blurred. So it’s not surprising that when research shows that media violence poses health risks, we tend to avoid greater consideration of video game, television, and movie content. I think a call for “voluntary restitution” would help everyone.

The CDC reports that we have approximately 50,000 violent deaths in the U.S. per year (mostly suicides). It’s time we not only consider the effects of media violence but search for media contributed solutions. Few people realize that social scientists around the world have published media violence research for decades.

Similar to Big Tobacco’s historical attempts to discredit lung cancer research, rebuttals lacking credible analysis claim that decades of media research is somehow exaggerated. As with secondhand smoke, guns, and alcohol we’ve seen that you don’t have to be the one using the products to be harmed.

Family life, unrecognized or untreated mental health issues, drug problems, and financial situations profoundly impact people’s lives. I’m not talking about having Homeland Security study people’s frontal lobes in airports as recently suggested by the media. According to CDC figures (see the National Violent Death Reporting System), the horrific Newtown shootings account for less than 3% of violent deaths each week in America. Incidentally, violent TV programming broke viewership ratings a week after the massacre (see ‘Dexter’ and ‘Homeland’ finales). Of course the connection between media violence and real-world violence will be debated. However, denying any link exists is irresponsible.

President Obama’s “Newtown Policy Response” should have required companies to publicly report what they’ll volunteer to pay in restitution as a function of their violence themed entertainment revenues. The reporting could leverage our existing rating systems. Imperfect yet socially responsible rating systems (such as "R", “NC-17”, and “Unrated”) continue to evolve as labels used to warn people about content. With voluntary restitution, media companies would still focus on maximizing digital growth, greater realism, and bigger margins. However, their progress would not be without acknowledgement of an entire scientific community.

Violence themed entertainment profits could help pay for our fragile and depleted mental health treatment programs and assist families impacted by violence and abuse. Volunteering 1% or less of the violence themed revenues from the “Big 5” media conglomerates would greatly benefit society and do so without censorship. Not a tall order given the Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement of 1998 obtained a 25 year payout exceeding $200 billion from “Big Tobacco” (the “Big 3”).

Unfortunately, we’ve seen that media lobbyists are often corporate representatives that are not focused on the societal effects of media violence. Furthermore, the government’s recent public pledges to save lives are largely ineffective, not because gun regulation won’t help, but rather because our government knows that gun regulation is not a substitute for addressing media violence and other real socio-economic factors.

Former Senator Chris Dodd (CEO and Chairman of The Motion Picture Association of America) stated in response to Newtown “We stand ready to be part of the national conversation”. In the meantime, Dodd succeeded in lobbying for an estimated $430 million in Hollywood tax breaks as part of the “fiscal cliff” deal stating this will protect Hollywood jobs. Hopefully, there's something more in plan to give back rather than to take.

Some say that entertainment excise taxes would be taking a step further. In my opinion, forcing consumers to pay more is not a solution. Excise taxes would not provide incentives for companies to improve public relations. I think the media industry needs meaningful health and safety reporting measures as already imposed on the Food, Health, Energy, and Tobacco, Firearms, and Alcohol industries for decades.

Concerned citizens should struggle to make research more accessible and get involved in online forums that are available to raise awareness. The “Institute for Social Research” in Michigan published “The Role of Media Violence in Violent Behavior”. It reports that when compared with 10 public health threats, the correlation of media violence and aggression ranks 2nd highest (only below the correlation of smoking and lung cancer). Research published by the American Psychological Association (PsycINFO database), American Academy of Pediatrics, International Society for Research on Aggression, and other institutions, show that violence themed entertainment causes serious harm to children.

We’ll need to look beyond the scope of the 2013 “Newtown Policy Response” for effective strategies that begin to raise awareness about media violence research.