Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Parents should be responsible for their children's behavior
Responsibility of parent
Does media enhance violence in the society
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Violence is often something people complain about to others. When there is an argument it may come to violence. Movies are causing people to become violent because when heroes in movies use violence to beat up the villains, this shows children violence is okay. The article claims that filmmakers should be blamed by putting violence in their movies. Therefore it is up to the parents to watch over their kids. But in a counter argument it claims that violence in music is okay and that the parents should know their kid’s tolerance to violent scenes. 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
movies. Also, children begin to get the wrong idea about violence. The author states,” Researchers have found tremendous evidence supporting a link between exposure to violence in media and violent behavior in children” (paragraph 5). In other words kids will act differently after watching violent films. For this reason children are influenced by the violence they watch. Meaning filmmakers implementing violence in their movies should be very limited. In the counterpoint of “Hollywood Filmmakers Should Not be Villainized for movie Violence” claims Filmmakers should not be blamed if violence is in their films. When people watch violent movies it’s for entertainment purposes not. Not everyone will react the same to violence in movies. It might calm an active murderer. Parents are involved in limiting their kids to an amount of violence tolerated. The counterpoint states,”, risk factors for youth violence includes history of early aggressive behavior, exposure to violence in the family, low parental involvement and many others. Exposure to violence, does not appear on the CDC’s list”(paragraph 16). This means the kid’s vicinity or how they act causes them to be violent. Not the movies. This is powerful because if kid’s live in a violent neighborhood they are in danger of having violent behavior. Or if they were exposed to it physically or their parents are neglected by their parents. Therefore violence in movies does not make kids violent on the filmmakers behalf. Movies can be the main contributors to violent acts but for the most part they are not. It might just be the person reacts to violence differently from others. Parents need to know what violence their kids can handle and although if they are a teen they can see violent PG-13 movies alone they need to be aware of their kids. Therefore violence can be making people violent but it most likely isn't the cause of violent acts.
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.
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.
As violence becomes more common place in todays society, instead people search for something to blame. Experts tend to employ violent video games a scapegoat. They believe that kids that play video games with glorified violence are likely to be violent in real life. Author Gerard Jones disagrees with these ideas and composes a convincing argument against it in his article "Violent Media is Good for Kids." (Jones, 1) I believe this article is written well, considering it makes important points and uses his life experiences to tell us about it. In his thesis, it says that comic books which critics assume are immature and gloried violence actually teach pacifism and tolerance. Jones goes on to say that humans must learn to how to handle
Finally, teenagers may condone violence in movies. After all, if your role model is committing violent acts and getting away with it, why shouldn’t you? This is the mentality of some teenagers. Although research in the field is incomplete, it is clear that these high risk factors, combined with others, will lead to teen violence. Teenagers may have fantasies of attempting the violent -yet “cool”- things that they observe in movies.
By now, you’ve all probably seen a PG-13 movie with violence in it. You could have not even batted an eye at the violence. Violence in movies is common these days. We’re used to it. A recent survey done by professor Brad Bushman, at Ohio State University even found movie violence has doubled since the 50’s and for PG-13 movies gun violence is shown to have tripled since 1985. Some say this is going to have a negative impact on our society and that the MPAA should change their ratings system so that violence is a theme that is only allowed in R-rated movies. Still, their claims have no evidence of media violence harming people in the real world. Violence in movies does not have long-term negative effects on our society proving that the MPAA shouldn’t have to restrict violence in PG-13 movies.
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.
To begin with, parents should carefully monitor their children’s viewing habits, because the body of empirical research connecting children's exposure to media violence with subsequent increases in their aggressive and violent behavior was already above average by the 1970s (Bushman, & Huesmann 6). Infrequent exposure is not likely to produce lasting consequences, but parents need to be urged to protect their children against the kinds of repeated exposures that heavy play with violent video games or immersion in violent TV programs is likely to produce. One example of what can happen is Isabelle Martin. She grew up in a rough neighborhood, and had only her mom to raise her. She grew up around countless acts of violence in her neighborhood. She never had a steady job, and was always socializing with the wrong crowd of people. She began to do drugs and her life became and downward spiral. Therefore, parents should consider the district around them. Children are easily i...
Televisions, movies and music are responsible for teen violence because the televisions and movies have programs that show a lot of fighting and music that have thoughts that might result in violence, there are a lot of parts in the dialogue that is suitable for adults and all the media has inappropriate language. This is bad because there is a lot of violence going on in the world. This might eventually lead to the world having terrorism issues.
The debate about violence in media, such as video games, has been going on for years now, however, there is no definite answer on what to do about it. Should adolescents be able to differentiate between video game fantasy violence and real life? Is it partially the parents’ fault for not controlling their access to these games? Perhaps there is more to it than just the scientific side of things. Adolescents should be able to differentiate violence in video games from real life and be able to recognize patterns in gender role and age. In turn, adults should be held responsible for what the adolescents play by controlling access to this media in the first place.
Furthermore, the sect of the society that exhibits this act constantly to the children is the entertainment industry. Here, violence has become a means of entertainment in the manner in which it is being portrayed in the society. In the article titled, “Does Hollywood market violence to children”, the author, Albom discloses,
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.
It is not uncommon to hear others claim that violence in the media is directly correlated to violence within youth. However, the article “Violent Video Games and Movies Causing Violent Behavior” coauthored by Eugene Beresin and Steve Schlozman exposes the truth; the concept of violence in media relating to violence in real life does not have scientific backing. Nonetheless, it has been shown that children prone to violence chose to play engage in violent media sources at a higher level than those with a less violent history. The article “Violent Video Games and Movies Causing Violent Behavior” successfully and convincingly uses Aristotle’s and Toulmin’s concept of argument to state that there is no evidence that violence within media directly affects children.
Violence on screen is often offered to the young population, which responds to it in so different ways. Children's psychological development is based on social experiences and imitations. Children are influenced either by their families (direct source of influence) or by their surroundings (indirect source of influence). The question I will be exploring is the responsibility of the violence in films in children’s aggressive behavior. I will discussthe points of view of the magazines, Economist and Journal of Popular film & Television, and a web site
Some people believe that violent video games can cause behavioral problems. This is not true; it is only their opinion. They may say people that play violent video games start having behavioral problems, and what was that cause? It is only people and it has no effect on them, only their own action and their weak mental health issues. The violent video games for computers and consoles’ sale rate went up but violent crime offense went down. Video games are for players to have fun without causing any harm while they are playing. Why do they believe that behavior problems were caused by violent video games? They do not seem to realize that television and movies also have violent scenes. Some examples of popular violent movies include First Blood, Expendables, Dark Knight, Spiderman, and Superman. All action movies have shooting, explosions, and fighting. Horror movies are filled with violence as well, such as Halloween, Scream, and Saw. Horror shows and movie are showing stabbings and serious harm. Even Television shows, like the Three Stooges, Cops, wrestling and America's Funniest Videos! Children's cartoons have violence as well; Disney animated films, Looney Tunes, Tom and Jerry, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, and Watership Down.
...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.