Violence in the media has been an important topic over the last few decades, as many academic studies have suggested a correlation between early childhood exposure and later violent tendencies. As such, many politicians and activist groups have been working on solutions to the problem. Often, these solutions are simple to become involved with or implement, even from home.
Petitions are forms signed by individuals. The documents state a unified interest in promoting change. In the case of media violence, petitions have been used to contact government officials and media corporations to encourage them to censor portrayals of violence.
A boycott is an active decision to refrain from actions that support--on some level--the workings of a business, government or individual. In the case of media violence, boycotts help citizens communicate with media companies to convey that unless the companies make changes to programming, they will lose viewers. As media companies aim to generate revenue based on advertising dollars, losing viewers is a problem they take seriously.
Rather than addressing the media companies themselves, people often look to government to create legislation that would help control the amount of violence on television. If and when laws are passed to this effect, it is assumed that violence in the media will decrease significantly. One of the main hurdles for this issue, however, is concern over media censorship and free speech laws.
Much like boycotting, one solution to media violence is taking an active role to educate children and citizens to avoid violent behavior. As national tastes for entertainment evolve, media companies will reassess their approach to programming in a way that better addresses what viewers are interested in watching.