Is Media Violence At Fault For Societal Violence?

The links between media and societal violence are only to be assumptions of the public. For one thing there are many other contributors to violence; so, how is anyone really sure that media is at greater fault. Media violence these days is really just a replica to society's everyday life. Without such activity taken in real life there would be no ideas for music, movies, television, basically nothing for the news crew to talk about. So the real question would have to be, is societal violence a contributor to media violence?

Violence in entertainment is the violence that has always been a part of human life. News is a trend toward "reality-based" made-for-television, movies, lurid information, and videos that demonstrate actual proceedings. Many of these types of publications are involving more re-enactments of crimes or of brutality captured on tape. Mike Oppenheim, a physician and freelance writer, wrote an essay named "TV isn't violent enough". He writes about that television is not violent enough and explains that because of the media showing such clean results and not showing the actual reality of things, the audience would assume that guns and fist fighting are a good clean way to get out of bad situations. And Mr. Jacoby a columnist for "Boston Globe", wrote an essay about how constant exposure of sex through media has worn-out its audience. "Children, in the city, who dodge bullets on the way home from school, are mostly effected by the customs of TV violence", says Leonard Eron a psychology professor at the University of Michigan and a researcher for TV violence. In his argument he said, "The child who has been watching programs with primarily aggressive content comes away with the impression that the world is a jungle fraught with dangerous threats, and the only way to survive is to be on the attack." Aggressiveness, hostility, getting some adrenaline rush, and Taking some risk have become some kind of useful function in appropriate contexts. It could be that television programs are not increasing violence in real life, but allowing for viewers to acknowledge ways out of bad situations. Biologists could even argue that violence and aggressive behavior are products of natural selection and that have been preserved for their survival value.

The suggested relationship flanked by small-screen violence and flesh-and- blood violence is possibly the most looked at of sociological query. It has engaged researchers in as many as three thousand studies in the past four decades. Though only a few hundred have added some fresh information, the National Coalition on Television Violence has come up with some guidelines in being aware for television violence. These guidelines are involving things like a rating system with warning labels before shows air, a marker used for advertising shows, public service announcements about the effects of violence; also includes public health campaigns in schools, that address violence the way current programs deal with drunk driving and/or drugs like D.A.R.E.

Networks quote an NBC-sponsored study published in 1982, with the purpose of finding any association between media violence and societal violence. The networks also submitted to the work of Jonathan L. Freedman, a University of Toronto psychologist, who argued that the stack of study on violence had formed non credible outcomes. Researchers look with satire to the fact that most studies of "pro-social" television programs like "Sesame Street" have also shown some addition in aggressiveness behavior amongst children; just as much as other violent television shows. "Encouraging children to watch 'whole-some' television is not the solution to ameliorating conduct problems and would appear on the basis of the available evidence to be counterproductive," wrote one team of researchers.

With so much research being done and that has been done, there is still no accurate fact that the assumptions about the media having any effects on its society, is really true. Even though some researchers and psychologists are saying that there is some sort of connection between societal violence and media violence, they are still skeptical about their conclusions. Societal violence is just an act of aggression that people choose to take and media violence is basically a replica of that. Violence in media is poorly portrayed to the audience. And with constant exposure of violence through media, its audience has been worn-out. The violent actions in such media is less likely to be imitated the injuries shown in the media are not the actual results that would take in real life. People should not worry in protecting their children from violent media because; the network already has done their jobs in making things too clean. With sex and violence as the climax of every type if movie or song, how can there really be anything that would be surprising and influential to the audiences? The media has exposed too much of the same old thing and just "desensitized" their audience. And there is not much proof that media is at fault for today's violent crimes, when the public has become more jaded every day with violence. In real life, the types of persuasion that a media would usually give gets left out because of all the other emotional, public, and natural issues going on in the world. Media Violence does not have so much influence on the society. Some reports, including the 1995 UCLA Television Violence Monitoring Report, have concluded that there is little or none evidence at all of which increased aggression in viewers is because of prime-time violence.

Some circumstances, in which are shown in by the media, they have scenes that include some sort of rewards and punishments, and otherwise show the actual outcomes of such violence and how it can actually reduce the probability of hostility in all viewers. Such responses would include natural or acquired hostility or aggressiveness and attitudes, beliefs, and values related to violence. In other cases it is depending on the mood of the individual. Violence is more likely to happen when a person feels frustrated, uncomfortable, insulted, or attacked, other than getting this way after watching some sort of scene of violence. Violence comes from within an individual. Either it is because someone is in a certain mood, or there can actually be some type of medical injury contributing

...