
Torture prevalent, effective in popular movies, study finds - Shivetya
https://www.ua.edu/news/2020/01/torture-prevalent-effective-in-popular-movies-study-finds/
======
ljm
24 was notorious for this, it practically celebrated it. It's so celebrated in
film and TV that it even has tropes, like with the classic 'opening the bag of
surgical instruments' kind of scene, if not the pure brutality of punching an
answer out of someone strapped to a chair. Never mind the pure torture porn
films like Saw and Hostel.

Torture should be depicted for the pure atrocity that it is, not as an
entertaining plot piece to imagine doing nasty things to a Russian/Middle
eastern person.

~~~
ijidak
Recently, cops have been getting in trouble for shooting suspects as they run
"away" from the police.

Interestingly, cops shooting at fleeing suspects is very common in TV shows
and movies, but generally considered unacceptable in real life.

I've sometimes wondered if the cops who grew up watching these scenes over and
over again as children, might be inadvertently bringing that same behavior
into their real life jobs.

Of course the challenge of proving this, is well stated in this quote:

"Does TV viewing really contribute to all those reactions? ...At the heart of
the debate is the difficulty of proving that one thing causes
another...Similarly, it has been difficult to prove that the violence shown on
television causes crime and antisocial behavior...A Canadian psychologist
wrote: “The scientific evidence simply does not show that watching violence
either produces violence in people or desensitizes them to it.” However, the
American Psychological Association Committee on Media and Society said: “There
is absolutely no doubt that higher levels of viewing violence on television
are correlated with increased acceptance of aggressive attitudes and increased
aggressive behavior.”"

Taken from:
[https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/102006362#h=13](https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/102006362#h=13)

However, among past social circles of mine, I can definitely say TV helped
normalize behaviors that at one time weren't as common.

For example, I saw gangster rap, and all of the forms of entertainment that
accompanied it's rise in the 90's, dramatically normalize arrogant and
aggressive behavior among my peers in suburbia.

So to me, it's logical that TV and movies are one part of the cultural fabric
that can indoctrinate new behaviors in the real world. Some of them really
unfortunate.

~~~
XorNot
You're going to have to give me some examples of cops shooting fleeing
suspects being common in TV and movies.

I can't think of a single one off the top of my head.

~~~
throwaway010718
How about this scene from It's a Wonderful Life. Is this movie still popular
at Christmas time ?

[https://youtu.be/6SLDMMGzkyI?t=61](https://youtu.be/6SLDMMGzkyI?t=61)

But regarding torture, in the 70's Christian/Roman era themed movie were
commonly shown on TV. As a child I concluded that every man eventually gets
tortured. While we were watching a particularly brutal scene I asked my dad if
he was ever tortured and didn't believe him when he said "no". But if TV
weren't enough, we had a crucifix in every room and I found the normalization
and ubiquity of depictions of torture depressing and confusing, leaving me
convinced I was born on the wrong planet.

~~~
daniel-cussen
The reason the crucifix is the symbol of Christianity is related to what
you're talking about, but the idea is that the normalization is to remind us
we are not to fear torture. In particular, that we can be like Jesus and sell
people out, even if under torture or the threat of torture, because we really
do have free will. After all, Jesus could have cooperated with his denouncers
and sold out the apostles, but instead he kept his silence and resolve and was
tortured to death on the cross.

Supposedly the patron saint of the tortured is Epipodius (just looked it up),
but in my faith I actually believe there is no patron saint of the tortured.
If you're tortured that's a cut above every other predicament and the only
saint for you is the patron saint of all patron saints, Jesus, because he was
the original Christian to get tortured for his faith.

------
anon84598
I've taken to calling this phenomenon (for a lack of a better word)
"Popaganda" \-- beliefs that are spread and mutually reinforced throughout
popular media and the general population. If something seems believable, it
makes its way into popular media and is therefore made more believable in an
endless feedback loop, regardless of how inaccurate it is and regardless of
how damaging it is for society to believe such a falsehood. The reason for
singling these concepts out, and lumping it together with something as
insidious as propaganda is that, similar to propaganda, once someone believes
one of these concepts and sees it repeated around them so many times, it is
almost impossible to convince them otherwise.

Some examples, both specific and general:

    
    
      * Smart people always immediately know solutions to problems and are  100% confident about these solutions
      * If someone's heart stops beating, just use a defibrillator
      * Hacking is an active activity
      * Modern medicine is "white box" -- just scan your body, see the problem and get meds that fix it
      * "Someone" (a government, a company, an evil mastermind etc.) is always in control of any given situation involving a large number of people, regardless of how chaotic the situation is and how many stakeholders are involved
    

(not a great list, but you get the idea)

~~~
frosted-flakes
FYI, prose inside code blocks is hard to read on mobile because it doesn't
wrap. It's generally better to just make each list item its own paragraph.

~~~
tsherr
Agreed. I wasn't sure what caused the lines to be truncated.

------
_bxg1
Interesting. The prevalence in even lighter films makes me think maybe the
phenomenon is driven more by its utility as a plot device, or something along
those lines.

For example (just taking a wild guess), if we assume:

\- There is an antagonist (individual or organization)

\- The characters need to stop whatever the antagonist's plan is, but lack
some necessary information

\- The antagonist sends some type of minion to stop them from stopping the
plan

Defining "torture" as broadly as it seems to be defined here, it would be a
very natural plot mechanism for enabling the main characters to accomplish
their goal in this scenario. And this scenario, really, is incredibly common.
Almost _more_ common in children's movies compared to other movies, because of
its simplicity.

 _Also_ , it seems even more appealing in this scenario if we assume the
characters aren't going to kill anybody (again, for children's movies). If
there's a big fight or chase which ends with the protagonists having captured
the minion, what do they do with him/her? They can't just let them go, that
would be anticlimactic. They can't kill them. Squeezing information out of
them before letting them go is satisfying and purposeful and progresses the
plot, while still being merciful and family-friendly.

~~~
npunt
The medium of film in general is just much more prone to using violence as a
plot device - it’s a cheap & easy way to create conflict. Whereas books can
describe inner emotional state more readily and thus cheap conflict can be
emotional.

Skilled directors and writers in movies can of course create conflict in all
sorts of ways but all the hacks out there are just going to reach for the gun.

------
kybernetikos
And in my opinion, it's had a noticeable effect on public opinion.

Maybe I'm wrong, but it felt to me like everyone knew that torture was wrong
before the first series of 24 came out, and then a few years later, everyone
thought it was often the right thing to do.

~~~
revicon
24 premiered on November 6, 2001, 56 days after the 9/11 attacks. My un-
informed opinion is torture got a whole lot more popular because of that than
the show

~~~
krapp
I remember it the other way around - I first heard about 24 from neo-cons
saying the next 9/11 would never have happened if the government had more Jack
Bauers willing to "do what needed to be done." Torture was already popular
with the administration, at least.

Americans, meanwhile, were angry and many just wanted Muslims to suffer, and
their government was telling them that torture (sorry, "enhanced
interrogation") was not only just, but necessary and effective, and that
opposing it was not only cowardice but borderline treason, and would lead to
the next 9/11.

------
njarboe
Link to the study, "Wait, There's Torture in Zootopia?: Examining the
Prevalence of Torture in Popular Movies"[1].

[1][https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3342908](https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3342908)

------
Uhhrrr
This would be fine and dandy and all part of an exciting narrative if not for
the fact that torture in the real world is incredibly unreliable. Top Google
results are mostly politicized so here's Wikipedia on it:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effectiveness_of_torture_for_i...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effectiveness_of_torture_for_interrogation)

~~~
Ididntdothis
Even if torture worked it still is immoral. It really doesn’t matter how
effective it is.

~~~
tyre
immoral now, but not so definitively unethical.

If one person were tortured to save the lives of 100, is that unethical.
Possibly, but also possibly not.

The classic thought experiment around this is the trolley problem, where
murdering innocents can save more lives than non-action.

~~~
anigbrowl
The problem with trolley problems (and utilitarianism in general) is that they
assume a degree of foresight that rarely exists in the real world. You _know_
there are more lives at risk on path A than path B, and you _know_ that
pressing a button will reliably allow you to choose between them.

None of this obtains in the torture case. Suppose you learn with certainty
there is a bomb somewhere on Main Street, and you capture X, the evil bomber,
with only 10 minutes to go. You want X to give you the exact location, because
you don't have time to evacuate the whole street.

So you torture X...but what if he just gives you the wrong location? It will
take you several minutes to check it out, and while you're doing so, the bomb
goes off. You've failed. _Even when you know for sure that the torture subject
has the information you want_ there is delay between getting an answer and
verifying it. In any ticking clock scenario the original malefactor can build
in a plan for a diversion or the equivalent o a warrant canary to warn co-
conspirators.

So what do you do? Send someone to check but act like you don't believe them
and keep torturing X anyway? X _knows_ it will take non-zero time to validate
any answer and can structure the evil plot to take account of that. If you
keep torturing X, you might just get a second decoy, plus there's now a strong
argument that you're just doing it because you like it, and have picked a job
which provides you with the excuse of necessity.

And ticking-clock-with-captured-terrorist scenarios are so rare in reality as
to be nonexistent. Almost invariably torture is deployed either to terrorize
people or to fish for information which the subject might or might not have.
Generally, if prisoners won't supply the information an interrogator desires,
they don't have it; and if they do have it, they're sufficiently strong-willed
to withstand the torture. In a good many cases, the fact of torture
_motivates_ them to hold out, because it validates their moral opposition to a
power that tortures people in the first place.

------
eindiran
Here is a copy of the paper:
[https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3342908](https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3342908)

------
dahdum
I’m always shocked at how many people will argue that torture is always
ineffective. I’m 100% sure I’d cave under torture, providing a mix of
everything I know and what I think they want to hear. They just need to look
for falsifiable statements. Rubber-hose cryptanalysis comes up as a topic here
often and is a perfect example.

It may be an immoral human rights violation, and not the best first line
interrogation tactic, but I see it as undeniably effective. It seems like
wishful thinking to believe otherwise.

~~~
naasking
> I’m always shocked at how many people will argue that torture is always
> ineffective.

It's effective at getting the victim to say whatever they think will make the
torture stop. People aren't stupid though, they know the truth won't
necessarily achieve that goal. Sometimes the truth will simply encourage more
torture.

Falsfiable statements then require verification, presumably against a more
reliable source of information. But if you have a more reliable source of
information, what additional confidence did the torture provide? And if you
don't have a more reliable source of info for verification, then the torture
still provided no confidence in the information.

The best interrogators know that befriending your captives provides
considerably better information, and it doesn't produce more enemies or
escalate the conflict. Imagine if torture had been routine during the Cold
War.

~~~
Supermancho
> It's effective at getting the victim to say whatever they think will make
> the torture stop.

Having been awake during some particularly excrutiating medical procedures, my
mind was not creative or clear or able to access memories in any meaningful
context (being in a panic state). If I was being tortured and what they wanted
to hear was the truth, I can be assured to tell it to them in broken english
under the right duress. So this "be friendly" approach is typical social
engineering. Ok, thats nice.

~~~
naasking
> If I was being tortured and what they wanted to hear was the truth, I can be
> assured to tell it to them in broken english under the right duress.

Except you also just said that you weren't able to access memories in any
meaningful context, so how are certain you would or even could be truthful?

And even if you were truthful, they would then torture you more to "be sure"
you were being honest, which they can never be sure of, so where does it end?

And then your information might conflict with information they obtianed
elsewhere, so they torture you some more to ascertain the truth, but there's
no end point at which uncertainty disappears.

Ultimately, your panic-addled brain realizes that the truth isn't actually
useful in this context and grasps at any straws thus diluting the signal to
noise ratio. This progression is simply inevitable. The confidence in anything
the victim says is basically nil.

"We got more information out of a German general with a game of chess or Ping-
Pong than they do today, with their torture," said Henry Kolm, 90, an MIT
physicist who had been assigned to play chess in Germany with Hitler's deputy,
Rudolf Hess.

------
domador
I was particularly upset, after watching Zero Dark Thirty, to find out that it
was nominated for various Academy Awards, given its justification of torture.
Portraying torture positively is particularly more troublesome than on "24",
for instance, since Zero Dark Thirty claims to be based on history and thus is
more likely to affect people's perception of reality and the justifiability of
torture.

------
WilsonPaige
What real evidence do we have that torture is ineffective?

The only claims I have read are of limited tortures (e.g., waterboarding,
freezing, isolation, playing bad music, etc.) that are allowed by Western
democracies sometimes.

I simply cannot believe that more intense torture techniques (say, those used
by criminal elements) will not result in an individual revealing whatever he
knows (or dying).

------
ekianjo
Every simple solution is effective in popular movies.

------
oh_sigh
I just started watching Better Call Saul, and I was happy to see that when
they tortured a character, he told them what they wanted to hear, but then
others were like "You had wirecutters to him...he would have said anything".

------
pyuser583
Torture makes for a convenient plot device. It allows a way for an antagonist
to help the protagonist without lessening tension or creating any sort of
reconciliation.

A lot of writers are faced with “so how does the good guy get the bad guys
minions to turn on him in a short amount of time?”

A common trope in movies is “working your way up the food chain” ... getting
low level guys to flip on their bosses.

There aren’t many ways to do that, and the alternatives create distraction.

~~~
Synaesthesia
When you look at Hollywood plot lines, they’re often with a singular hero, who
goes nuts, breaks laws to do what’s necessary. You rarely see communal action
or a society standing together. There are exceptions, like Selma.

They definitely have a certain political agenda

------
qwerty456127
I find it curious there even are people who would consider torturing someone.
I wonder what's the difference between people who would and who wouldn't. I.e.
I would certainly prefer to die peacefully than to attack anybody, let alone
hurt somebody just to achieve a minor goal.

~~~
antepodius
Are you saying you wouldn't defend yourself if someone attacked you? You have
that strong an aversion to committing violence?

------
Ericson2314
[https://nplusonemag.com/issue-34/essays/special-journey-
to-o...](https://nplusonemag.com/issue-34/essays/special-journey-to-our-
bottom-line/)

------
gentleman11
Famously, in the past, in popular media, only bad guys used torture. After
9/11 and the show 24, the good guys started doing it more and more frequently.
It’s an awful societal norm

~~~
jobigoud
I'm pretty sure this is recency bias. Remember the TV show "The pretender"?
(1996-2000). It was fairly formulaic and every single episode ended up with
Jarod, the protagonist, finding out the bad guy and putting him in a
convoluted setup of psychological torture (usually threatening their life or
their family in the same way they had killed the innocent person) until they
admitted the crime.

------
antepodius
I'm somewhat surprised at how many censor-happy people I see in this thread.
I'd be interested to see a survey of the ages of the people here...

------
econcon
There is also arms race between police and criminals who can run grams of
steroid and look more jacked. Steroid use is very common in police

------
padseeker
This reads exactly like an Onion headline

~~~
TaylorAlexander
The onion is surprisingly accurate actually.

------
lacker
I think this study is misleading. They are classifying a huge variety of
situations as "torture".

From their paper, they describe one example in Zootopia:

 _Officer Hopps needs to find the drop-off location for "night howler" flowers
(a poisonous flower that has been weaponized to turn animals "feral"). She
turns to an organized crime boss to extract information from a lackey of the
antagonists. The crime boss's polar bear enforcers hold the lackey over a hole
in iced-over water, threatening to throw him in (and ostensibly kill him) if
he doesn't give up the location. "Ice him," says the crime boss. The lackey
quickly gives up the desired information and our heroes go on to (spoiler
alert) save the day._

Cartoon animals were threatening to throw someone into the water. Is that
really "torture"?

Later in the paper, they describe that they include any "threat of pain" to be
torture, as long as it isn't self-defense. So a schoolyard bully saying "I'll
punch you unless you give me your lunch money" is considered to be torture.

Naturally, with this sort of definition of torture, they discover that most
movies contain torture.

~~~
jessriedel
Yea, under this definition, every time someone points a gun at someone it's
torture. This sort of re-definition of terms reduces the public's trust in
academics on an important topic.

~~~
throwaway4220
From article:

“As citizens of a democracy, our suggestion here is certainly not to constrain
how media depict interrogations and torture .... Rather, our aim is to draw
attention to the prevalence of this trope and hope that screenwriters will
exercise more caution in using torture as a plot device.”

IMO this is not different from shocking a flatlining patient; it does not
work, and {may be a missed public education opportunity, may lose some
credibility points}

[http://www.aed.com/blog/tv-myth-shocking-a-flatline-heart-
rh...](http://www.aed.com/blog/tv-myth-shocking-a-flatline-heart-rhythm-will-
revive-patient/)

[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4258134/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4258134/)

