This review of empirical research into the effects of media violence examines what has been learned from evidence and to what extent the evidence can be accepted at face value. This article reexamines debates about different data types, different methodologies, theoretical and explanatory models, directions of effect, and value of aggregated data sets. Limitations and weaknesses are identified in relation to the various methodological approaches and sources of evidence that have been featured in academic discussions and debates about media policy and content regulation. Although not dismissing the empirical research on this subject as valueless, this critique advises caution in accepting blanket conclusions about harmful effects of media violence, instead calling for a targeted approach that recognizes that some media consumers may be more susceptible than others to media effects and that media depictions of violence can vary in the risks they represent as potential triggers of unpleasant or harmful reactions among media consumers.