More handpicked essays just for you.
Essay on media violence in children's life
Causes and effects of violence to children
Violence in the media causes violence in children
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Essay on media violence in children's life
The increasing popularity of television and the internet has allowed the mass media to influence its users, especially the juvenile population. As stated in Media Violence and Youth, “99% of homes in America have at least one television giving children the opportunity to view unsupervised television” (Beresin, 1999). Bradley Okdie reported that the average person spent over 3,515 hours using media in 2012 (Okdie, et al. 2014). A study done by Friedrich and Stein found that “the average 2-5 year-old views about 28 hours per week of television”, while Lyle and Hoffman found that “by the age of three, three-quarters of the children can name their favorite television program” (Meltzoff, 1988). With ratings as the driving force of the mass media, …show more content…
“Researchers have suggested that the effect of pleasant arousal followed by violence desensitizes viewers toward violence. It not only makes violence more acceptable and exciting, but also, one could argue, more pleasing” ( Sgarzi, 2003). News outlets source the mass media as one of the driving forces behind violence in our youth. They reference the shooting in Columbine, Sandy Hook, Colorado movie theatre shooting, and Virginia Tech massacre to show how the mass media has influenced our juveniles to become more aggressive. Even though a majority of these shootings were done after the shooter was an adult, it is though that a majority of the anger stemmed from their influence as a juvenile. The history channel stated, in regards of the Columbine shooting, “There was speculation that the two committed the killings because they had been bullied, were members of a group of social outcasts that was fascinated by Goth culture, or had been influenced by violent video games and music” (History, 2014).These real life situations have only strengthened the fact that media violence has a direct link to violence in the juvenile population. Even though there is evidence that shows the connection between media and juvenile violence, others argue that violence in the media is not connected to the violence in the juvenile
Recently, the effect that violent media has on society has been the focus of many psychological studies. According to an article published in the New York Times, research has found that: “Exposure to violent imagery does not preordain violence, but it is a risk factor” (Pozios, Kambam, Bender, 2013). There has yet to be a direct link between violence actually causing people to go on these massive shooting sprees that have been so common lately. It is natural and understandable for the
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?
The Columbine Shootings were one of the greatest tragedies that the nineties faced; and changed the world that was once known. The fault for this tragedy falls on popular culture, moral climate, and the parents of the shooters; not the shooters themselves. Society has greatly affected the minds of the youth, and viewing violence on television, video games, and on the internet, has planted a negative seed of thought in their minds.
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.
“The Columbine shooters played violent video games; that has to be a factor in their decision to brutally murder their classmates!” Society is quick to point fingers and approach unknown situations with a causal mentality that often results in a false accusation of an innocent bystander. With the advent of the video game era, psychologists have debated their effect on the minds of their youthful audience. Throughout the multitude of studies and the perpetual debate, society still lacks an absolute answer. With this knowledge, when it comes to video games and their impact on the minds of children, researchers must consult a wide variety of subjects with an open mind about the potential outcomes. I conducted my research by examining my personal experience, analyzing studies refuting both sides of the argument, trying to view the American fascination with violence through an outside perspective, and reviewing the thought processes that lead the members of the Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB) in order to gain a full perspective of the issue. What correlation exists, if any, between violent video games and the violent tendencies that children exhibit after exposure to said media? Throughout my research, I have discovered that a trend does exist, but it manifests after the child has encountered puberty because of the heightened levels of testosterone that accompany this phase of development, and the trend relies heavily on other factors in a violent disposition. The age factor generally fails to exist in the violent tendencies argument; this is intriguing in that the majority of violent videogames are targeted toward an older audience. In order to truly understand the violent tendencies of mankind, we must first analyze these ...
But incidents like the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting are predictable; they are not a random act of brutality because such violence is a learned behavior. Americans glorify violence and this attitude is illustrated through the tolerance of violence portrayed through the media. And although distinguishing between violence as pure entertainment and violence as social criticism is important, good intentions can still lead to terrible outcomes. The effect of viewing violent films has been insufficiently considered, yet plays a significant role in encouraging aggressive behavior.
When families sit down to watch television, they expect to watch family type of shows. Family type shows meaning rated PG or PG13, sitcoms and movies that do not include weapons, killing, foul language, and non-socially accepted actions. When children killing, they start to believe that it is accepted. Do children think that killing and hurting others and themselves have little meaning to the real life, children can become traumatized. Most killers or violators of the law blame their behavior on the media, and the way that television portrays violators. Longitudinal studies tracking viewing habits and behavior patterns of a single individual found that 8-year-old boys, who viewed the most violent programs growing up, were the most likely to engage in aggressive and delinquent behavior by age 18 and serious criminal behavior by age 30 (Eron, 1). Most types of violence that occur today links to what people see on television, act out in video games or cyberspace games, or hear in music. Media adds to the violence that exists today and in the past few decades. It will continue in the future if it is not recognized as a possible threat to our society. When kids go to a movie, watch television, play video games or even surf the web, they become part of what they see and hear. Soaking violence in their heads long enough becomes a part of the way they think, acts, and live. The line between pretend and reality gets blurred.
The main aim of this report is to analyze the impacts of changes in the media concerning the societal and individual view of politics and politicians. The report also describes significant milestones in mass media since the year 1960 and examines the impact of mass media on how people think politically. The report then considers the effect of technological advancements in mass media and the effect on the results of elections. The use of mass media has increased over the last fifty years in that it is a primary medium through which supporters of various campaigners share their ideas and views concerning politicians and different political parties. Through social media, behaviors and performance of several activists have brought
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...
A widely accepted cause of the murders committed by children is violence in the media. The parents of three students killed at a high school in Padukah, Kentucky filed a $130 million lawsuit against the entertainment industry because they believe that violence in the media inspired the boy, Michael Carneal, who killed their children ("Media"). To some extent, these parents are correct in their assumption. On average, children watch television 16 to 17 hours per week, beginning as early as age 2 (Strasburger 129). Furthermore, when video games are added, some teenagers may spend as many as 35 to 55 hours per week in front of the television set (Straburger 129). Within these many hours of television viewing, there are many violent scenes. The National Television Viole...
Unquestionably the media being newspapers, internet, radio and television, influence society. They can affect, have affected and will continue to affect the progression of life in this nation and around the world, as electronic technology continues to be the chosen mode of communication for a whole generation, offering direct, often anonymous influential information.
The definition of mass media is “a means of communication that reaches large numbers of people in a short time, this can consist of the use of television, newspapers, magazine, and radio”, and within the last decade the internet as well. (HarperCollins) The media can actually be a minor or major effect on individuals depending on how or what their view is on the particular subject or matter. The effects it plays on individuals and societies will depend on the exposure to the subject matter at the time, but it effects all ages from young to old.
In our democratic society, mass media is the driving force of public opinion. Media sources such as Internet, newspaper, news-broadcasts, etc, play significant roles in shaping a person’s understanding and perception about the events occurred in our daily lives. As long as the newspapers, internet, network television, etc, continued to be easily accessible to the public, the media will continue to have an influence in shaping its opinions. Factors such as agenda-setting, framing and priming help shape the public opinions. Agenda-setting is when the media focuses their attention on selected issues on which the public will form opinion on, whereas framing allows the media to select certain aspects about the problem and then make them appear more salient. Similarly, priming works by repeatedly exposing certain issues to public. As the issues get more exposure, the individual will be more likely to recall or retain the information in their minds. This paper will discuss these three factors played out systemically by media and how our opinions are constantly being influence and shape by them.
The mass media has played a key role in shaping people’s lives. The modern society’s use of mass media including TV, radio, newspaper, as well as print media has largely influenced people’s ideas regarding themselves and the society at large. This is evident from their behavior towards themselves and their community as well as their treatment of the environment. While some experts believe that the media is to blame for most of the negative behavioral traits among the active members of society, the majority agree that the media makes people understand and develop a positive sense of association with their society within which they live, making it easy for them to identify and get their role in it.
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).