Posted at 12.18.2018
Keywords: assault in media, assault mass media, mass media effects violence
The debates about the violence in media are being held for few generations, but there continues to be no distinct answer. The primary question is the influence of assault on people through the mass media: television, theatre, video gaming and even literature is just packed with violent elements. The issue of media violence is not going away, focusing on the "culture of violence", whether this is a standard part in our life, or it's what causes more aggression inside our society.
During your day people spend a lot of time in the internet, nearby the TV screens, participating in video games, hence the result of this on people is apparent - mass media really has a great impact on us. Every day on Television we see images of violence: death, harm, pain, sufferings, misery, wars and conflicts - it is merely impossible to mention everything. Daily information shows us wars and issues from all over the world. Films, both for men and women and children, also are full of violence : fighting with each other, murders, abuse and so forth. Even books and publications doesn't stay apart, the same situation is with the internet.
That is excatly why so many people, like scientists and ordinary people who are not indifferent, raise the question: if advertising violence affect people habit and can cause the increase of violence in real-life?
There are 2 points of view: a lot of people blame media for too much violence and want to censor violent content to protect people, and especially children from its effect. Another people feel that media just reflects the real life as it is, and that doesn't cause violence in population.
Another essential requirement of the problem is the affect of violence in press on children, as children are incredibly sensitive and incredibly vunerable to this violence. Now, when children offer an unlimited usage of various types of media, there is a great matter for the way they perceive and take into account the violence they see, read or notice.
Some experts, like teacher L. Rowell Huesmann from the College or university of Michigan, dispute "that contact with media violence triggers children to behave more aggressively and impacts them as parents years later. " Others, like Jonathan Freedman from the University or college of Toronto says that "the scientific evidence simply does not show that viewing assault either produces violence in people, or desensitizes these to it. " (L. R. Huesmann, Laramie D Taylor)
During the last 50 years there have been a lot of special researches concerning the effect of advertising on children. They show that American children between 6 and 18 years of age spend from 2 to 6 time everyday using different types of mass media: television, video, movies, video games, radio, music, computer and the web. (James Steyer)
This is more time than they spend on any other activity, so almost all of the information they perceive throughout the day is from media. A large proportion of this press acts of assault in different varieties. It has been believed that by age 18, the common young person will have viewed 200 000 acts of assault on television by itself. (L. R. Huesmann, Laramie D Taylor)
Prolonged usage of such multimedia shows ends up with increased acceptance of violence as a proper means of handling problems and attaining one's goals, and this television, videos, and music videos normalize using weapons and show them as a way to obtain personal vitality. (J. L. Freedman).
Research has associated assault in advertising with a number of physical and mental health problems with children and adults: aggressive tendencies, desensitization to violence, fear, depression, nightmares and rest disturbances. A lot more than 3500 research studies have examined the connection between media assault and violent tendencies, and nearly 80% of these showed a genuine connection. (L. R. Huesmann, Laramie D Taylor)
So should children come in contact with the mass media because of violence? And how do we protect children from violence showed in the media? Should the violence in advertising be censored or remaining free?
A lot of journalists speak about the protection of the to free conversation. Joanne Cantor argues: "Censorship is not the answer, but the to free conversation is aggressively used to safeguard commercial interests at exactly the same time that the free speech rights of child advocates are stifled". (Joanne Cantor, 2002)
The North american Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression lists a number of reasons to safeguard media assault as a form of "free expression":
censorship isn't likely to solve the issues of violence in society
decision about what is "acceptable" or not is definitely a subjective opinion
each person can pick what things to see or even to hear, can pick the appropriate for him variant of press information
a lot of literature and motion pictures with components of violence existed in the past and now are considered to be a good classics.
A whole lot of free appearance defenders say that that mass media is merely one of lots of parameters that benefit people habit. Psychologist Melanie Moore says: "Dread, greed, power-hunger, trend: they are aspects that people try not to experience in our lives but often want, even need, to see vicariously through stories of others. Children need violent entertainment in order to explore the inescapable thoughts that they are educated to deny, and reintegrate those thoughts into a more whole, more technical, more resilient selfhood. " (J. Steyer)
Another people say that violence in media is only a way of artistic manifestation and a mean of demonstrating the life span as it is.
Researchers R. Hodge and D. Tripp, for example, dispute that: "Multimedia assault is qualitatively not the same as real violence: it is an all natural signifier of issue and difference, and without representations of turmoil, art of the past and present would be seriously impoverished. " (D. Grossman, G. Degaetano)
But still most people concur that today we've too much violence in the mass media. It can't help influencing us anyways, because at list it makes us understand that the life span is not good as we wish and that the world around us is merely so cruel. Violence in advertising makes people feel disappointed and not optimistic.
Television, videos, and video games are full of acts of assault, deaths, crimes. When a child sees a violent action, he thinks it a game and may try to respond it in real life. According to recent research at the University or college of Wake Forest, which results are provided at the conference Academy of Pediatrics, the rate of recurrence of viewing assault on tv set is directly related to the number of battles and other forms of destructive patterns. The results of this study are regular with earlier numerous studies of Dr. Durante, who found a significant correlation between your violence depicted and the true assault among children and children.
Even if some individuals don't believe in the results of research, in my opinion even the chance of that assault in mass media and real life aggression are linked will do to convince public and government for taking necessary actions, as this question is a open public issue. And so the state and general population organizations intervention is of great importance as concerns the censorship.
Anyway advertising constructs simple fact, and affects our views on contest, gender, politics, and body image, in not good way of course.
In my view, today, it appears appropriate to conduct new studies that illustrate the affect of assault on individual psyche, especially on children and children, taking into account the impacts of all the kinds of media. These studies should be communicated to the public in order to protect the younger era of extreme and unjustified demonstrations of cruelty.
In this respect, so relevant is the question brought up by Plato in the IV century BC: "How can we so easily believe that children are paid attention to and identified the spirit of what terrible myths invented by just anyone and for the most part contrary to the truths that are we believe should be with them when they develop up? ".