Media Violence Essay

Television, magazines, radio, movies, and music be all forms of to twenty-four hourss modern media. Is it possible that our modern media could be causing crime grade to rise? Back in the 1920s, these medias came out so that commonwealth could stay connected with what was going on approximately the world. Soon, the media became a form of entertainment. Over the last five decades, the rules and guidelines of media have got changed dramatically. When the media first came out, it was completely prohibited to tied(p) guess something small analogous pregnant on TV, or cursing in music.However, eventually the new entertainment became old, and the producers of the media had to find ways to keep our interest. Therefore, the media starting making the previous prohibitions, non-prohibited so that they could keep our interest. In result, today the producers the media are showing mass murders and other violent things on TV, alike(p) showing murders and crimes. Music artists sing about v iolent actions. In many a(prenominal) peoples eyes, the world we know as media has left a state of innocence and entertainment, to a world of rage and indecency. A plethora of people would say that change in the media has created new issues.Often times, people blame our media for crime rates that have been skyrocketing in the last five decades, especially in adolescences. In fact, violent crimes in adolescence living in America have more than than doubled since the 1990s. For this reason, we must inquire, is media violence the reason for this aggressive behavior? afterward reading many essays, such as Mike Males essay, Stop Blaming Kids and TV, and Sissela Boks essay, AgressionThe Impact of Media Violence, I genuinelyized that people cannot just pinpoint violent media as the practise of this new epidemic, because in reality the environments that kids live in nowadays playing periods a much bigger role.Therefore, through these essays, it became very clear that media violence is not the biggest issue for violence, tho perhaps these kidskinrens homes and families. The first essay I read, Stop Blaming Kids and TV, by Mike Males, explains to the reader that the new profound aggressive behaviors of nestlingren have little to do with our new media and more to do with their home environments. To begin Maless essay, he starts by stating that many people believe that media violence is the cause of the new crime rate increase.Males thusly starts to list various groups that are strong believers of media violence being bad for kids and gives us many examples such as, Progressives are no exception. Mother Jones claims it has proof that TV makes kids violent. And the institute of Alternative Media emphasis, the average American child will witness 200,000 acts of (TV) violence by the time that child graduates from high school (253).Males then goes on to argue that point by stating, None of these varied interests not that during the eighteen course of studys betwe en a childs birth and graduation from high school, in that respect will be fifteen million cases of real violence in American homes grave nice to require hospital emergency treatment (253). He then continues by telling us that the Department of Health and Human Services said that there are over 500,000 cases of abusive parents reported each year. After the Department reported this fact, this report disappeared from the news completely after only one day (253).Another 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 crime than our 77 year olds in America. Furthermore, Males then tells about his own personal experiences and what he has watched over his years of working with children. by means of his own studies, he found that many of the kids who showed any acts of aggressi on or violence had an unstable 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 middle 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 acting some way, they are far more likely to act just like their parents did. To back this statement, he provided us with yet another study from the Centers for Disease Control, where they found that 75 percent of all teenage smokers come from homes where their parents smoke (255).Males then goes on to conclude his essay by stating, Millions of children and teenagers face real destitution, drug abuse, and violence in their homes. Yet these profound menaces continue to lurk in the backdrop (256) Maless main purpose of this essay was to persuade the reader that violent media such as TV is not the only cause for why kids are violent. This essay was very effective because he used many outside sources besides himself. He used a messiness of logical appeals and even a few emotional pieces throughout his essay. For his logical appeals he used university, departments, and programs that deal with the youth.These sources tend to be very credible and reliable. As the reader that makes us find like what he is saying is very factual because he got his information from good sources. In addition He researched other countries and media violence in their countries, which was authentically good 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 diswhitethorn crime rates which really helps back up 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 spot essay that caught my attention, Aggression The Impact of Media Violence, by Siss ela Bok, also explains how there is not just one thing that affects why kids are so violent but a myriad of things. As Bok begins her essay she states, Even if media violence were linked to no other debilitating, it would remain at the center 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 cistrons 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 published 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 th e time, like shifts in policy and population.Therefore, she persuades us that media is not a for sure topic to blame for the increase homicide rate. She continues her argument against blaming media violence by writing, We may neer be able to trace, retrospectively, the specific set of television programs that contributed to a particular persons aggressive conduct. How can anyone definitively pinpoint the link 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 killing 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 countless 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 elimination 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 easy access to guns, or for poverty, drug addiction, and other risk factors. As Dr. Deborah Prothrow-Stith puts it not an two 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 good 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 profoundly 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 better 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 standardised 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 emotional pieces, about his work with the children. Both of these essays specifically focused on the outcome of the kids and how media violence has affected them.However, both essays would lik e to say that media violence is not the pinpoint cause of why kids are being more violent nowadays, as opposed to in the recent 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? Better yet, why arent we looking at other oppositions such as childrens home environments? Either way this is an epidemic now, and its time we learn how to change it.Its time for the communitys to get involved in helping to stop this epidemic. Perhaps this could be through go more rehab programs for parents, or counseling to the children with deep levels of anger and hatred. Maybe its through offering anger management 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, l ets look at other oppositions, and learn how to stop this violence before it gets even more out of control.