Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Agents of Socialization in 2014
Agents of socialization Assignment
Media Violence: Does media violence cause violent behavior
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Agents of Socialization in 2014
Introductory Paragraph
This essay will explore the ways in which media violence affects our culture and in particular the changes it causes in behavior of children today. It will use references from in-class lectures, John Macionis’ Society: The Basics, and Carl Honoré’s In Praise of Slowness: Challenging the Cult of Speed to make points that support or oppose the idea that violence on television in our society is affecting our youth, and therefore, our future.
Limits on Our Choices
Nature versus nurture has always been a significant debate in society. Do a person’s choices reflect the make up of their genes or the sum of their surroundings? For the sake of this section, we will assume that the majority of people are more greatly affected by the society that surrounds them. The process in which people grow based on their environment is called socialization. Sociologists believe that there are four major agents of socialization, that is, the groups people are apart of that influence their decisions and their role within society. These agents are family, school, peers, and mass media (Lecture notes, Chapter 2). Growing up, children all over the country are told that they can do, be, and achieve whatever they want. In reality, this is not always true. Each of these agents of socialization creates limits on the choices we make. For example, a teenager living in the South might want to dress in all black and draw violent cartoons for a living. If this teenager is a member of a family who disagrees with things associated with this lifestyle, he is not as free as he could be to make the choices he wants. His school might also implement a dress code policy that does not support such a pessimistic portrayal of their students. Overtime, ...
... middle of paper ...
...he entire group forever.
Impact of the Video on You?
The Mean World Syndrome opened my eyes to a world that I have been living in my whole life. Before seeing this video, I was just like the fish, knowing nothing but a violent culture. Even in the short time since first viewing the film, I have been far more conscious of the way television affects me. Though I do not have the means to change the way certain people and ideas are portrayed to me, I do have the choice to limit my own exposure to violence. Merely being aware of the phenomenon that is the cultivation of fear has played a part in possibly reversing the damage this mean world has had on my psyche. I now feel the need to protect myself and those I love from being sucked into the vortex of violence in America, because it is a slippery slope and none of us would want to be on the wrong end of the judgement.
Gina Marchetti, in her essay "Action-Adventure as Ideology," argues that action- adventure films implicitly convey complex cultural messages regarding American values and the "white American status quo." She continues to say that all action-adventure movies have the same basic structure, including plot, theme, characterization, and iconography. As ideology, this film genre tacitly expresses social norms, values, and morals of its time. Marchetti's essay, written in 1989, applies to films such as Raiders of the Lost Ark and Rambo: First Blood II. However, action-adventure films today seem to be straying farther away from her generalizations about structure, reflecting new and different cultural norms in America. This changing ideology is depicted best in Oliver Stone's Natural Born Killers (1994), which defies nearly every concept Marchetti proposes about action-adventure films; and it sets the stage for a whole new viewpoint of action in the '90's.
According to John Davidson's essay Menace to Society, "three-quarters of Americans surveyed [are] convinced that movies, television and music spur young people to violence." While public opinion is strong, the results of research are divided on the effects of media violence on the youth in this country. Davidson wrote that most experts agree that some correlation between media violence and actual violent acts exists, yet the results are contradictory and researchers quibble about how the effects are to be measured (271). Moreover, Davidson is not convinced that the media is the sole problem of violence, or even a primary problem. He points out that other factors, such as "poverty, the easy accessibility of guns, domestic abuse, [and] social instability" may have a greater impact on a child becoming violent than the influence of the media (277). Even though other forces may be stronger, media violence does have some adverse effects on the members of society. If senseless violence on television and in movies had no effect, it would not be such a hotly debated topic. What type of effects and whom they affect are the most argued aspects of the discussion.
In Gerard Jones’ essay titled “Violent Media Is Good for Kids”, he discusses the issue of media violence kids are exposed to. He personally believes violent media is good for children and their development. While many people may argue with him on his stance, he experienced violence as a child, even though his parents tried to shield it from him, and thus it resulted in him believing violence is acceptable for children (Jones 565). His belief that violence is good for children came from Marvel Comics, particularly the Hulk (565). Jones and Melanie Moore, a psychologist, agree violence stories “… to meet their emotional and developmental needs…” (Jones 566). Jones has created a program called Power Play, to enable children to tell heroic, combative, and powerful stories. However, he does believe violence has caused some real-life violence (Jones 567). Jones said that, ‘“I am going to argue that it’s helped hundreds of people for every one it’s hurt…’” (qtd. by Jones 567). Jones thinks American society has such a huge fear of ‘“youth violence’”, it has progressively made the fear into a reality (567).
For a long time now the debate has been, and continues to be, as to whether or not violence on television makes children more violent. As with all contentious issues there are both proponents and detractors. This argument has been resurrected in the wake of school shootings, most notably Columbine and Erfurt, Germany; and acts of random violence by teenagers, the murders of two Dartmouth professors. Parents, teachers, pediatricians, child psychiatrists, and FCC Chairmen William Kennard and former Vice President Al Gore say violent TV programming contribute in large part to in violence in young people today. However, broadcasters and major cable TV providers like Cox Communication say that it is the parent’s fault for not making it clear to their kids as what they may or may not watch on TV. The major TV networks and cable providers also state it is the TV industry’s fault as well for not regulating what is shown on TV. So who is the guilty party in this argument of whether or not TV violence influences of the behavior young people in today’s society?
There are many different facets to the nature versus nurture argument that has been going on for decades. One of these, the influence of nature and nurture on gender roles and behaviors, is argued well by both Deborah Blum and Aaron Devor, both of whom believe that society plays a large role in determining gender. I, however, have a tendency to agree with Blum that biology and society both share responsibility for these behaviors. The real question is not whether gender expression is a result of nature or nurture, but how much of a role each of these plays.
Does entertainment influence society's attitude towards violent behavior? In order to fully answer this question we must first understand what violence is. Violence is the use of one's powers to inflict mental or physical injury upon another; examples of this would be rape or murder. Violence in entertainment reaches the public by way of television, movies, plays, music, and novels. Through the course of this essay it will be proven that violence in entertainment is a major factor in the escalation of violence in society, once this is proven we will take all of the evidence that has been shown throughout this paper and come to a conclusion as to whether or not violence in entertainment is justified and whether or not it should be censored.
While violence is not new to the human race, it is an accumulative epidemic that is taking over today’s society. With firearms, ammunition and explosives becoming more accessible, this is resulting into more violent behavior and less serious consequences. Violence in the media plays an imperative role in the etiology of violent and hostile behavior in the world today. While it is difficult to determine which age group have experienced more televised violence, studies have shown that the consequences of aggressive and violent behavior have brought a great deal of human agonizing, suffering, pain and financial destitution to our society, as well as an atmosphere of apprehension, distress and doubt. Research indicates that violence in the media has not just increased in quantity; it has also become more explicit, sexual and sadistic. Most acts of violence in media and on television are laughed off and there are no consequences for these actions.
Jones, Gerard. “Violent Media Is Good For Kids,” Current Issues and Enduring Questions. Ed. Sylvan Barnet. Boston, MA: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2011. 195-199. Print
Many psychologists have studied the effect of the media on an individual’s behavior and beliefs about the world. There have been over 1000 studies which confirm the link that violence portrayed through the media can influence the level of aggression in the behavioral patterns of children and adults (American Academy of Pediatrics, 2001). The observed effects include, increased aggressiveness and anti-social behavior towards others, an increased fear of becoming a victim or target of aggressive behavior, becoming less sensitive to violence and victims of violent acts, and concurrently desiring to watch more violence on television and in real-life (A.A.P. 2001). According to John Murray of Kansas State University, there are three main avenues of effects: direct effects, desensitization, and the Mean World Syndrome (Murray, 1995, p. 10). The direct effects of observing violence on television include an increase in an individual’s level of aggressive behavior, and a tendency to develop favorable attitudes and values about using violence to solve conflicts and to get one’s way. As a result of exposure to violence in the media, the audience may become desensitized to violence, pain, and suffering both on television and in the world. The individual may also come to tolerate higher levels of aggression in society, in personal behavior, or in interpersonal interactions. The third effect is known as the Mean World Syndrome, which theorizes that as a result of the amount of violence seen on television and also the context and social perspective portrayed through the media, certain individuals develop a belief that the world is a bad and dangerous place, and begin to fear violence and victimization in real life (A.A.P. 2001).
According to Gerard Jones, violent media can actually have positive effects on young people because children will feel rage and anger just like anyone else. He explains that children need to experience anger so that they can learn to understand and control it. Jones also believes that violent media are a positive influence on children because it can make the child braver. Jones explains how violent media can help a child view the problems around them and help motivate them to fix it, just like a superhero would. Jones makes some good points. For example, he brings up the quote of Melanie Moore, an urban teen psychologist, who said, “Children need violent entertainment in order to explore inescapable feelings that they’ve been taught to deny,
Violence in the media is a problem in American society today. The effect can be severe and widespread. The people exposed to this media violence are mostly children. They are very impressionable and imitate what they see, hear and are told by their friends. In this essay I will state my opinion and the opinions of several physiologists and other officials.
We cannot be absolute when it comes what shapes us, yes indeed we come to this world which specific characteristic, our genes make us who we are but do not determine our future and our possible potential. Our cultural influence and our interaction with our environment make up our experience and step by step build our schemas and our perception regarding the world around us. Nature gives us the first tools in order for us to service, give us the information from generation to generation to overcome the possible obstacles. Then, nurture’s takes over, through the interaction with the averment, base to our cultural norms and rules we shape our beliefs; values; attitudes and behaviors. We learn how to behave, how to interact and how to communicate with the people around us. Thus, the answer between what side to choose, nature or nurture, I personally believe that the answer lies between the two of them. As we say, especially in the field of psychology, it depends. Yes, we born into this world we some innate information, but this information is interpreted from the stimuli we gather through the interaction we have with the
Society has been bombarded with violence from the beginning of time. These concerns about violence in the media have been around way before television was even introduced. Nevertheless, there have been numerous studies, research, and conferences done over the years on television, but the issue still remains. Researchers do acknowledge that violence portrayed on television is a potential danger. One issue is clear though, our focus on television violence should not take attention away from other significant causes of violence in our country such as: drugs, inadequate parenting, availability of weapons, unemployment, etc. It is hard to report on how violent television effects society, since television affects different people in different ways. There is a significant problem with violence on television that we as a society are going to have to acknowledge and face.
Thus, Americans are constantly exposed to violence when they turn on television and movies that are filled with shooting or other violence. Dues to majority of exposure, we change our perspectives on violence itself. We need to understand that the exposure at such young age alter our values and norms. Children thinks violence is the normal thing. However, we need to prevent this from ongoing situations by taking control of the television in our households. When children or teenagers watch their favorite actors in TV shows or movies, actors use violence as solution. It changes symbolically. Still; children begin to accept it as a solution. Children need to realize that the consequences of violent acts do exist and they are real. Those possible solutions are to limit their hours
By the time a child reaches the age of one, they see about 200,000 acts of violence on television. (Nakaya, 3). The Media has been becoming more and more violent over the years. A poll in an issue of Times Magazine, from 2005, showed that 66 percent of Americans think that there is an abundant amount of graphic acts of violence on televisions (Nakaya, 18). People are exposed to thousands of acts of violence through video games, television, and movies. Many studies show that media violence increases violent behavior in in humans. Studies show, violent video games, and graphic television have physiological effects on children. The government has very few regulations on media violence. Some people believe the government shouldn’t limit content because others might be insulted by its material. Media violence is such a broad topic and has such a large presence in daily lives, so we cannot simple get rid of it. The Federal Communications Commission stipulates, “By the time most children begin the third grade, they will have spent the equivalent of three school years in front of a television set.” Even though the government shouldn’t censor the media, Media violence is becoming a serious issue because it is becoming more violent, it makes people behave violently, and it has little regulations.