Media Violence Essay

Television, magazines, radio, movies, and medicinal do drugs argon all manikins of todays neo media. Is it possible that our modern media could be cause horror pass judgment to rise? Back in the 1920s, these medias came out so that wad could stay attached with what was freeing on around the world. Soon, the media became a form of entertainment. Over the blend in five decades, the rules and guidelines of media pretend compoundd dramatically. When the media first came out, it was all in all prohibited to even say something belittled like pregnant on TV, or profanity in music.However, eventually the immature entertainment became old, and the producers of the media had to scratch ways to keep our interest. Therefore, the media starting making the forward prohibitions, non-prohibited so that they could keep our interest. In result, today the producers the media argon showing mass murders and different vehement things on TV, like showing murders and horrors. Music arti sts sing almost angry actions. In umpteen peoples eyes, the world we know as media has left a state of innocence and entertainment, to a world of fierceness and indecency. A plethora of people would say that change in the media has created refreshing issues.Often times, people goddam our media for crime rates that withdraw been skyrocketing in the last five decades, especially in adolescences. In fact, violent crimes in adolescence living in the States lay down to a greater extent(prenominal) than doubled since the 1990s. For this occasion, we must ask, is media delirium the reason for this aggressive behavior? After reading more strives, such as Mike Males essay, Stop Blaming Kids and TV, and Sissela Boks essay, AgressionThe Impact of Media Violence, I realized that people can non full pin flush violent media as the baffle of this new pestilent, because in reality the environments that kids live in present tense do works a much bigger procedure.Therefore, throug h these essays, it became real legislate that media military group is non the biggest issue for emphasis, precisely perhaps these childrens rest homes and families. The first essay I read, Stop Blaming Kids and TV, by Mike Males, explains to the lector that the new weighed down aggressive behaviors of children have little to do with our new media and more to do with their home environments. To take up Maless essay, he starts by stating that m either people believe that media frenzy is the cause of the new crime rate increase.Males thusly starts to list various groups that ar strong believers of media military group being bad for kids and gives us many examples such as, Progressives atomic number 18 no exception. pay off Jones claims it has proof that TV makes kids violent. And the institute of Alternative Media emphasis, the middling the Statesn child will witness 200,000 acts of (TV) violence by the time that child graduates from high discipline (253).Males then g oes on to argue that point by stating, None of these varied interests non that during the eighteen days between a childs tolerate and graduation from high school, there will be fifteen million cases of real violence in American homes grave enough to require hospital emergency treatment (253). He then traverses by telling us that the discussion section of Health and kind Services said that there are e rattlingwhere 500,000 cases of abusive parents reported each year. After the Department reported this fact, this report disappeared from the news completely later on all one day (253).An an different(a)(prenominal) point that Males argues is that the Japanese and European kids have media just as violent as ours here in America and yet their crime rates are not nearly as high as ours. In fact, it is said that their crime rate are so low that their 17 year olds create less(prenominal) crime than our 77 year olds in America. Furthermore, Males then tells slightly his own perso nal experiences and what he has watched oer his years of working with children. Through his own studies, he found that many of the kids who showed any acts of onslaught or violence had an unst sufficient or bad home life.For example kids who have parents in jail or kids who have alcoholics in their families. Next, he tells us about the survey that he conducted in los angles from 400 substance school students. From this study he got that most kids parents are there biggest influence. Thus, when a kid sees his/her parents doing something, or playacting some way, they are far more likely to act just like their parents did. To back this disceptation, he provided us with yet an separate study from the Centers for indisposition Control, where they found that 75 percent of all adolescent smokers come from homes where their parents smoke (255).Males then goes on to terminate his essay by stating, Millions of children and teenagers face real destitution, drug abuse, and violence in th eir homes. Yet these profound menaces continue to lurk in the background (256) Maless master(prenominal) purpose of this essay was to persuade the reader that violent media such as TV is not the tho cause for why kids are violent. This essay was very effective because he used many foreign sources besides himself. He used a tummy of synthetic appeals and even a few aroused pieces throughout his essay. For his logical appeals he used university, departments, and programs that get off with the youth.These sources tend to be very credible and reliable. As the reader that makes us feel like what he is saying is very factual because he got his randomness from uncorrupted sources. In addition He researched other countries and media violence in their countries, which was really cheeseparing because what he found in those countries, was that even though those countries play the same violence and aggression on their TVs, they have a lower crime rates which really befriends back u p Maless point. Thus, for these reasons this essay was very effective in persuading the reader that TV is not to blame for this aggression.The second essay that caught my attention, aggressiveness The Impact of Media Violence, by Sissela Bok, also explains how there is not just one thing that affects why kids are so violent but a unnumbered of things. As Bok begins her essay she states, Even if media violence were joined to no other debilitating, it would remain at the mall of public debate so long as the widespread belief persists that it glamourizes aggressive conduct, removes inhibitions toward such conduct, arouses viewers, and invites imitation. (224).Next, she goes on to tell about how 21 percent of the American public blames television more than any other factors for teen violence. It is said that the media makes up for 5-15 percent of the societal violence. Furthermore, she then writes about Centerwalls study which was create in 1989 which states that if television had not been created he believes we would have 10,000 less homicides each year (227). However, Sissela fights back to this statement by addressing that Mr. Centerwall did not take into consideration of other things that were going on at the time, like shifts in policy and population.Therefore, she persuades us that media is not a for sealed topic to blame for the increase homicide rate. She continues her argument against blaming media violence by writing, We may never be able to trace, retrospectively, the specific set of television programs that contributed to a finicky persons aggressive conduct. How can anyone definitively cop the sleeper between media violence and the acts of real life violence? (228). Nevertheless, Mrs. Bok tells about her research on homicides in America and how the children homicide rates have escalated greatly, and then concludes her essay by sayingAmerica may be the only society on earth to have experiences what has been called an epidemic of children kill ing children, which is ravaging some of its communities today. As in any epidemic, it is urgent to ask what is it that makes so many capable of such violence, victimizes so many others, and causes myriad more to live in fear. Whatever role media are found to play in this respect, to be sure, is part of the problem. Obviously, not even the total excretory product of media violence would wipe out the problem of violence in the United States or any other society.The same can be said for the proliferation and unproblematic access to guns, or for poverty, drug addiction, and other guess factors. As Dr. Deborah Prothrow-Stith puts it not an either or. Its not guns or media or parents or poverty. (228-9) Boks main purpose was to persuade the reader that media violence is not the only contributing factor into this new profound violence in children. She explains that there are many other factors like these kids home environments. This essay was effective because Bok used a lot of really g ood sources such as associations, psychologists, and studies, as well as many statistics that she provided for us.She also made it very clear that she had researched this topic quick deeply by going way back into the history of childrens violence in previous decades. She provided us with a very well displayed argument and even showed some of the opposing side. However, she always fought back with the opposing arguments with a erupt argument really building her argument into a good one. In consequence, Boks essay was a very effective essay and does persuade the reader into believing that media violence is not the main cause of aggression in children.Overall, Mr. Males and Mrs. Bok both had very good arguments. They both expressed their opinions and the found facts and proof to help back there thesis. While these essays did not completely take the same stand, these authors had similar views to an extent on media violence. In both of essays they uses logical and credible sources. In addition, in Mr. Males essay he also included a few stirred pieces, about his work with the children. Both of these essays specifically cogitate on the outcome of the kids and how media violence has affected them.However, both essays would like to say that media violence is not the pinpoint cause of why kids are being more violent nowadays, as opposed to in the late(a) decades. After reading these essays I do have to say that now I dont believe that media violence is the may cause for aggression in adolescence. Furthermore, so who is to say that media violence is causing this aggression since there is no evidence? mitigate yet, why arent we looking at other oppositions such as childrens home environments? any way this is an epidemic now, and its time we chance on how to change it.Its time for the communitys to get involved in helping to layover this epidemic. Perhaps this could be through offering more rehab programs for parents, or counseling to the children with deep levels of anger and hatred. by chance its through offering anger focal point programs through schools, or spreading awareness, because in any situation, no matter the cause, this violence is happening, and we cant stop it until we try. So like Sissela Bok and Mike Males, lets look at other oppositions, and chance upon how to stop this violence before it gets even more out of control.