Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Negative impact of movies on youth
Persuasive writing strategies cram
Persuasive writing strategies cram
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Persuasion: the action or fact of persuading someone or of being persuaded to do or believe something. The point argument, "Hollywood, Stop Exposing Our Kids to Violence" is more persuasive and contains facts that better support its claim. While the counterpoint argument contains strong evidence and good points it is not as good at persuading the reader as the point argument. The author uses facts that would hopefully connect with the reader, and that is why the argument is so persuasive. The point argument uses specific evidence in order to prove its point. In using such evidence the reader can really visualize what violent movies are doing to children. The author provides evidence from the New York Times stating, "exposure to media violence leads to aggression, desensitization toward violence and lack of sympathy for …show more content…
When the reader sees this it makes them wonder if watching these violent actions does actually desensitize themselves, and even make them feel less sympathy for victims of violent crimes. These thoughts really connect with the reader, and might even persuade them to decrease the amount of violence they watch. The author cites work from a former university professor stating, "What we call entertainment is really propaganda for violence. If you manufacture guns, you don’t need to advertise, because it is done by our entertainment industry" (Point para #6). The author is trying prove that when kids watch violent movies it is just advertising things like guns and other sorts of weapons. The professor believes that violent movies are just propaganda for violence, as kids may think the movies are cool
The author of “Hollywood, Stop Exposing Our Kids to Violence” claims that filmmakers need to stop producing violent movies. The article argues that many children pick up bad habits from watching violent
Violent Media is Good for Kids, by Gerard Jones, is an article which makes many claims to support the argument that a controlled amount of violence could be beneficial for a young, developing child. Even though the topic of this article can be controversial, the claims serve to support the argument in many noteworthy ways. It is written in such a way that it tells a story, starting when the author was a child and working its way to adulthood. In this case, the author uses, what I believe to be just the correct amount of rhetorical strategy, and fulfills his goal of writing the article. This argument is interesting and, at the same time, effective.
In “Violent Media is Good for Kids” Gerard Jones introduces us to his fearful and lonesome childhood. He lived in a world where he was taught to be the violence fearing, and passive boy his parents wanted him to be. But, when one of his mother’s students gave him a Marvel comic book, his fearfulness was transformed into inspiration. He found a way to escape these discouraging feelings through the “stifled rage and desire for power” (Jones 285) that he had newly found. The popular comic book hero “The Hulk” freed him from his passive and lonely persona. Throughout the article he cites his testimonies and the testimonies of others as examples; and shows how they used violence as a positive realm for “overcoming powerlessness.” (Jones 287) Ultimately, Jones is trying to convey the message that violent media can provide kids with psychological tools for coping with the problems that they face as they grow. Although there are slight hints of biased evidence, “Violent Media is Good for Kids” should be considered for the top prize for persuasive essays.
It has been happened frequently in today’s society that parents and teachers try to keep children away from violent media. Children are taught that violent is not right and dangerous. In the article, “Violent Media Is Good for Kids”, Gerard Jones asserts that allowing children to violent media instead of banned it can bring great benefit to children during their growing stage. By watching violent media, children learn to overcome fear, control the rage and prove the real self from the superheroes in the story. Jones believes that violent entertainment can assistance children to fulfill emotional and development need. In my opinion, Jones develops a persuasive argument because of his strong emotions, considerable evidences and reasonable assumptions.
Representations of violence in the media (defined as through news, film, and television) throughout history have contributed to desensitization to violent actions.
Valenti, Jack. "Violent Movies Do Not Make Children Violent." Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. 4 May. 1999. Rpt. in Violence in the Media. Ed. James D. Torr. San Diego: Greenhaven. 2001. 72-74.
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.
Persuasion is a commonly used communication technique that allows us to socially influence a certain topic positively or negatively. Its purpose is to help affirm or nullify an idea, belief or attitude. Sometimes the exact topic is very detectable in communication such as during debates but other times it displayed a little more subtly. Persuasion is more than just verbally speaking. Non-verbal communication such as body language, tone and pitch of the voice can also add to the affirmation of the topic. The setting and location also help encourage the acceptance of what is being persuaded.
In a research analysis of Media and Violence, studies show that “Although the typical effect size for exposure to violent media is relatively small ... this ‘small effect’ translates into significant consequences for society as a whole” (“Media and Violence: An Analysis of Current Research”, 2015). This states violent behaviors can come from the smallest variables, or clips from videos, which is why it is important for parents to control what their kids see, read, and watch, and limit the amount of violence exposure.
With the nation's violence rate increasing over the past few years, one must ask, "why?" Harold Lasswell formulated the core of questions of content analysis: "Who says what, to whom, why, and to what extent and with what effect?" The issue of media content has become an increasingly popular, as well as controversial, topic. There have been many concerns from parents regarding exposure of their children to inappropriate themes in the media. An overall increase of violence and crime in America suggests that the children are being exposed to violence too early, allowing them to become comfortable in seeing and ultimately portraying violence. Prolonged exposure to such media portrayals results in increased acceptance of violence as an appropriate means of solving problems and achieving one's goals. Since children younger than eight years cannot discriminate between fantasy and reality, they are uniquely vulnerable to learning and adopting as reality the circumstances, attitudes, and behaviors portrayed by entertainment media. Therefore, media content should be regulated, especially for younger children, as well as increasing the difficulty of access to such content.
“ For at least two decades experts have warned that television, movies, and other entertainment media are desensitizing young people to violence and death.”(Reisman). Reisman is stating that younger adolescents are more influenced to perform violent activity after playing a violent video game than a mature adult. Media Violence can be defined in one or two ways, either its good for society or bad. Choosing violent material as a daily form of entertainment can lead to addiction, which can cause a person to alienate themselves, loss of occupation, fail out of school, or even commit
Therefore those who become desensitised to violence may perceive it as “normal” and be more likely to engage in violence them selves. The desensitisation hypothesis claims that excessive media violence diminishes the disgust with which we normally view violence and makes us more relaxed about its consequences. However research lacks in support of this claim and some research even shows a complete opposite. Goldstein, for example, found that immediately after seeing a violent film, men were more concerned about murder, and more punitive towards those who commit murder. This finding was confirmed across four different countries and therefore showed no support for the desensitisation hypothesis.
Television, movies, and video games are a big part of children’s lives in today’s technologically advanced society. However, there is a big controversy questioning the effects of these media outlets on children. Much of society claims to have proof for the belief that media violence affects children negatively. However, I am skeptical of the evidence that is stated to prove that claim. I feel that society has placed the blame on these mediums for the violent acts, however serious or trivial, that children commit way too easily, before they even begin to examine the parenting of today’s society.
Television violence, and media violence in general, has been a controversial topic for several years. The argument is whether young children are brainwashed into committing violent real-world crimes because of violent and pugnacious behavior exposed in mass media. In his article “No Real Evidence for TV Violence Causing Real Violence”, Jonathan Freedman, a professor of psychology at the University of Toronto and author of “Media Violence and Its Effect on Aggression: Assessing the Scientific Evidence”, discusses how television violence, claimed by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), does not cause real-world aggression among adolescents. The FCC determined to restrict violent television programming to late night hours only because their “scientific research” proves of increasing aggression among young viewers (Freedman Par. 2). Freedman goes on to explain that the FCC has no substantial scientific evidence stating that there is a correlation between fictional violence and real-world aggression among young audiences. He has completed research in 1984 and 2002 on the relationship between media violence to actual acts of violence on the street. Because he has completed research projects related to this topic, Freedman’s statistical evidence shows that there is a reduction in youth violence and it essentially does not cause real-world crimes (Freedman Par. 1). The FCC continues to claim that exposure to media violence does in fact increase aggression, and yet their readers continue to believe their fabrications. Freedman argues that people who research media violence tend to disregard and omit the opposing facts. No one type of violence is more effective on aggression than another type. There is no evidence showi...
...onditions that ensure an adequate counterbalance increasing consumption in some cases, end up having a negative effect on children. Children learn best through demonstration followed by imitation, with rewards for doing things the right way. While not all are affected the same way, it can be said that, in general, violence in the media affects attitudes, values and behaviors of users. You run the risk that children end up understanding that it is reasonably practicable to resort to violence. The fear is that the models of aggressive behavior can be considered suitable. Thus, in an investigation, a good proportion of children (third) defined as normal acts of violence they had seen him mightily little. It is not; here is a risk of direct imitation, but rather a change in terms of reference: where extreme violence appears to be normal any more light may seem harmless.