English 1000 HW 1

       Article 1 was about the effects of violent video games and the apparent resulting violence.  The authors' big point was about how video games, at least violent ones, had a strong correlation to leading to violence.  They gave examples of correlational studies, experimental studies, and longitudinal studies that showed how, in general, violent games do lead to aggressive behaviors.  The essay was structured such that the thesis was given, followed by a brief history of the video games, then followed by studies performed, most of which stating in conclusion that video games do correlate to violence.  I can say that I've only heard about this phenomenon, and haven't pursued an answer.  I can say that I believe everything that these authors have to say though.  I can say that I didn't know that there were as many studies on this subject as there are.  There are over a dozen experimental studies alone.  I can absolutely say that my belief on this subject has been influenced.
       Article 2 is about Weinstein and the violence that he contributed to Hollywood films over the last 30 years.  The author is a movie critic that states that he might actually enjoy watching movies with violence and unhappy endings before he even gets his thesis statement in.  He is ultimately against media violence as he states early on, but he does seem to state a lot of evidence opposing his main argument.  Most of the evidence provided, at least the statistical data, is about crime rates and gun manufacturing rather than the effect of violent movies.  His main point boils down to the fact that we just don't know, and extreme conclusions are never the way to go.  I learned while reading this essay that Weinstein, the writer to many of the more violent movies out there, is a liberal Democrat and ironically believes in strict gun control.  I cannot say that this essay persuaded me in any way though as it didn't have anything revolutionary to say.  Overall, it was a very candid and honest essay though because the author gave facts, but held off on saying that the facts were directly linked.
       Article 3 was Marilyn Manson's take on the Columbine Massacre.  It was structured in an interesting way that tied concepts of religion into horrible events.  One of his main points was how wrong American media is to put criminals, such as Klebold and Harris, on the cover of major magazines and how that effectively creates idols to every kid who is pushed around.  He also talked about how some reporters speculated that those responsible for the Columbine Massacre worshiped Manson, and how he became the representation of everything wrong with the world.  I have to say that I agree with his point that America loves to have someone or something to blame.
       I have to say out of all of the arguments presented, I found Manson the most convincing.  His way of writing showed logical thinking at its best, and was incredibly easy to see the point he was trying to make.  I have learned a lot in between all of these reports and can say that my opinion has easily been influenced by what all of these authors had to say.