In the first essay I examine parental perceptions and mediation of violent commercials that come up during their child's TV viewing. In the first phase, data are collected from the internet and in the second phase data are collected through in-depth interviews with parents and children. It emerges that parents can be divided into four segments based on two dimensions- beliefs about the impact of TV viewing and views on harm from exposure to violent commercials. Manager parents are likely to control and restrict their child's media environment while educating their child about the effects of violent commercials. Co-viewer parents are likely to spend a lot of time co-viewing prime time TV while engaging their child in conversations on violence but not specifically on violent commercials. In order to maintain harmony in the household, harmonizer parents merely restrict viewing of violent commercials without educating their child about their effects. Finally, non-believer parents are likely to co-view violent commercials without discussing it with their child. By focusing on the triad of parents, children and advertisements, this study will help researchers and marketers identify the reasons why parents object to violent commercials and when it is likely to be resented and resisted the most. Further, policy makers can develop effective intervention strategies.

Violent commercials have been associated with aggressive cognitions, increased arousal and aggressive tendencies in viewers. However, little is known about the influence of violent-humorous commercials. The aim of the second essay is to understand the influence of violent-humorous commercials on a young viewer's psychological responses. Using the General Aggression Model (GAM) as a theoretical foundation, I find that violent-humorous commercials lead to higher levels of aggressive cognitions and aggressive affect in young viewers. Further, active parental mediation has a `boomerang' effect on aggressive affect from exposure to violent-humorous commercials.