More handpicked essays just for you.
Does violent media influence people
Previous literature about the effects of media violence
Previous literature about the effects of media violence
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Does violent media influence people
Mass media is part of our daily lives, it is said that it can influence a person’s choice, view or behavior. An increase in violent crimes in our society, have led people to blame mass media violence due to the fact that it can increase violent and aggressive behavior which will eventually lead to them committing a violent crime. Even though there are many factors that may contribute to these types of behaviors, can mass media really be that influential on us? There have been researches done to see if there is any link between mass media violence and violence and aggressive behavior. For example, the study done by Professor Bushman of Ohio State University, found out that people who played violent video games for three consecutive days showed an increase in aggression and hostile behavior (Larsen). Now there are those who disagree that mass media violence can influence an individual to behave violently or aggressively. Joshua Quittner, the author of the article “ARE VIDEO GAMES REALLY SO BAD?”, says that he likes to play the bloodier games like Samurai-slashing Bushido Blade and Tekken 2. He says does not feel that these games have altered his behavior or have hurt him in any way, instead he says that these games help improve his reflexes.
Recently our country has been plagued with many shootings, which have occurred in schools, government buildings, and in movie theaters. Studies have been done to find out if there are any links between mass media violence and killings that have occurred. For example the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary, led to President Obama wanting to look into researching if there is any link between gun violence and mass media violence (Christian Science Monitor). According to police, who searche...
... middle of paper ...
...heory is that we are able to learn from the violence that is shown throughout the media. These theories that are out there are going to be hard embrace due to the fact of the past violent crimes that have occurred in our society. With all the violence out there in the media, has led to some people asking that mass media violence be banned or censored. The state of California tried to pass a law trying restricts violence but due to the First Amendment were denied by the Supreme Court. Trying to get rid of mass media violence in our society is and will be an impossible task, but by using other alternatives such as the one by the Federal Communication Commission we can cut down on the amount violence shown. Hopefully this will lead to a decrease in violent crimes in our society and stop violent crimes like the ones at Sandy Hook and at the Navy Yard in Washington D.C.
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.
The United States will not soon forget the rampage at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Connecticut that came just two weeks before Christmas last year. This tragic event resulted in the death of twenty students and eight adults. Although the event shocked the nation, rampage shootings are nothing new. Over the years, many families have lost loved ones to these horrific events. As a result, these mass shootings such as the one that occurred at Sandy Hook Elementary caught public attention leading to a push to find the cause of these events. Out of this research a variety of possible causes came to light consisting of arguments stating that high school bullying, availability of guns, mental illness, violent movies and video games are the cause of mass shootings. However, these researchers and debaters tend to ignore the role of massive media coverage in the increase of copycat shootings in the United States.
Many People have put their attention directly on the influence violent video games have on the bad behavior of children. People believe videogames intensify aggression in children, while others say it can be a safe getaway for a child to express his aggression. Many opinions on this issue are stated still today, and they remain divided amongst the people who claim videogames to be a cause of aggression and those who claim otherwise. A child’s behavior can not be determined by violent video games, but instead is caused by a variety of environmental and domestic factors. It is easy to blame video games on violence, instead of looking at factors such as economic status, familial issues, and exposure to other entities such as television and media. This paper will bring forward the opinions of those who believe in no relationship between violent video games and bad behavior with one counter argument expressing the opinion of those who believe there is a relationship.
Family environment and the press are two major influences resulting in the recent tragic school shootings. As much as society continues to focus the killing rampages on factors such as television and music, what children are exposed to in reality contributes to the violence. The most recent school shooting in Michigan involved a six-year-old first grader who killed a classmate with a .22 caliber pistol. The news coverage had vanished after two or three days, and I was left wondering what had happened. Considering the fact that the media wore the Columbine incident out, I wanted to know why they did not pay more attention to this school shooting. As evidence did arrive, it was discovered that the child lived in a household where cocaine, heroin, and many other illegal drugs were commonplace. Also in this “home” guns were easily accessible to the child. Children growing up in this type of environment certainly are likely to be held accountable for future violence. Even though I am against the news media presenting too much school violence, Americans should have been deeply disturbed by this shooting because of the child’s young age. The Michigan shooting should have enlightened Americans to the dilemma we face in this country. Two weeks after the Columbine High School shooting, information on the mass murder was still being broadcast on television. The press was feeding young viewers ideas on how to kill their classmates. News was reported how the teenage murderers acquired information regarding building bombs, obtaining guns, smuggling guns into the school, and proceeding to kill their classmates. A mentally unstable teenager could simply watch these news reports and write a book entitled, “How to Slay Your Classmates”. This onslaught was ridiculous and the news coverage should not have been permitted to continue for countless weeks. Society has determined three reasons on which to blame the shootings. First, the nation blamed it on television’s violent programs. Following that, Americans gave the music recording companies the evil eye as well as attacking the gun manufacturers. All of these reasons involve material objects that are unable to think for themselves. Televisions and CD players do not control themselves, people control them. Finally, boundaries controlling the television programs children view should be set by the parents. The same explanation applies to firearms. How can it be a gun’s fault that a person killed another human being?
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.
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.
When we think of violence, we automatically picture guns and knives being used to kill people. Although this is a part of violence, it’s not the only way a violent situation can arise. Violence can be any harm done to a person through physical contact. Along with guns and knives, this can include one’s own bare hands or any object within proximity. On television, we see every type of violence carried out, whether it be a simple punch or a serial killer who finds pleasure in the violence he causes. Any form of a violent situation that you can think of has most likely been acted out on a television series or movie. TV is written to blow scenarios out of proportion and create unrealistic versions of different scenarios. Instead of a decent conversation to solve a problem, a punch is thrown or a gun is pulled. By portraying these types of solutions, television is promoting violent behavior. The characters in the action, crime or horror shows are actively encouraging these types of behavior. Although these scenes are needed to produce a captivating plot, there needs to be awareness as to the fact that these scenes are being idolized to the wrong audience.
In 1973, Thomas Elmendorf, an emergency room physician, made a speech to the American Medical Association about the increase in violence behavior among young adults and it’s correlation to violence on TV. In it he cited that “Murder is the fastest growing cause of death in the United States. The annual rate of increase exceeded 100 percent between 1960 and 1974.” He also goes on to explain that by the time a child graduates high school, they have spent an astonishing 18,000 hours in front of the TV, not to mention other forms of media, versus 15,000 hours in the classroom. Elmendorf also elaborates that within those 18,000 television hours, a young adult will have witnessed “18,000 murders and countless highly detailed incidents of robbery, arson, bombings, shootings...
“Contrary to the claims that violent video games are linked to aggressive assaults and homicides, no evidence was found to suggest that this medium was a major (or minor) contributing cause of violence in the United States.” (Markey, 290)
One of the first steps to changing our gun culture is to take gun violence out of the media. Kids are exposed to violence in television, video games and movies everyday. Dr Norman B Anderson of the American Psychological Association says there was a link between Adam Lanza’s (the gunman of the Sandy Hook shooting) violent video game obsession and his killing spree that cost far too many innocent lives. A study done at Brock University showed children and teens who played violent video games over a long period of time showed increased development of aggressive behaviors. This goes without saying that there must be a decrease of violence in the media. The kids watching violence on television are the future of society. They cannot all be aggressive, violent people who believe that shooting civilians is okay or stealing cars is something to take lightly. We must change this by
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.
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...
Are video games a negative or positive influence on children’s behavior and actions? Several studies have been pointing out that exposure to violence on television, movies, video games, cell phones and the Internet increases the risk of violent behavior in the viewer, like to grow in an environment filled with real violence increases the risk of violent behavior. Plentiful of the research on current media have focused on the violence spread by TV for experts in developmental psychology and John Murray of Kansas State University, United States, it is difficult to conclude otherwise than that violence on television has increased levels of violence and aggression in the society, and that video games have an effect even more powerful. Violent video games are more distress, than the films of the same sign and that the images of violence shown on television because they are interactive, because they use a technology environment that allows the user total immersion in the situation, while producing new objects cultural. The reason is that video games are not limited to violence to show a passive spectator, but require the person to connect with the character and act for him, while violence in film and television images whose exposure is limited only to visual perception. The video game violence has long-term real effects. Children exposed to high levels of violent entertainment can become more aggressive and develop a tremendous face the suffering of others, also increases the likelihood they interact and respond to violence in their social environment. In violent video games as success is clearly defined as killing or take, and failure as die or loses the good and evil as the wicked: they, different from us, it is just revenged, I mate,...
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.
The first effect of mass media on teenagers is violence. Aggressive behavior is the first example of violence in the media. Aldridge argues that, teens who watch violent movies may behave in an aggressive way towards others for example bullying and fighting in school. This is important because there are high risks of teenage developing into aggressive behavior that may last into adulthood if they are not being supervised on what they see on TV (2010). Fearful of the world may also occur for those who watch violence television programs. According to children and television violence, teens that are being over exposed to violent on television may worry about becoming a target of violence. The relevance of this idea is that teenagers will more likely grow up thinking that the world is a scary place and that something bad will happen to them (2008). Imitative behavior is another major effect of seeing violence in the media. According to Weldon, two teens from Johnstown, Colorado, killed a 7 year old girl by beating her to death. The teens claimed that they were imitating moves from a video game called “Mortal Combat.” This is an example case which shows that violence in the video game may lead to an imitating behavior (2007).