January 27th Homework

In the first article, Violent Video Games: The Effects on Youth, and Public Policy Implications by Douglas A. Gentile and Craig A. Anderson, the main ideas revolved around the already preexisting notion in the reader’s mind that video games are indeed violent. These games are only getting more violent as programmers begin to create more complex and life-like animations, as well as creating intense visuals for player interaction. Developers have been pushing the boundaries for decades to see how much blood, gore, and havoc they can include in their new game before it reaches maximum capacity. As video games became more violent, scientists began running experiments to test the effects of violence on aggressive behavior. Even though all the studies done are classified as “inconclusive,” they all have similar results: violent video games increases aggressive and hostile behavior. Personally, I would have to agree with that statement, especially in young adults and pre-teens. Speaking on an opinion base alone, I feel that adults would be more understanding of the fact that the violence in video games is not real, whereas children see it as a real situation that they are put in. This article made smooth and easy transitions from one idea to the next and allowed me to be able to follow the flow of ideas. I appreciated the fact that many studies were included in the article to prove that even though all the studies tend to show an increase in violent behavior, none of them can accurately be described as definite. I still believe that violent video games can increase aggressive behavior, but at the same time, I can see how video games can be mentally stimulating and actually beneficial to one’s intellectual capabilities.

 

           The second article, Weinstein, Tarantino and the standoff over movie violence, by Andrew O’Hehir supports the idea that violence in the media has been with us for years and it’s healthy, but in moderation.  O’Hehir began the article by praising Harvey Weinstein for finally expressing some concern over the extreme violence in some media today. He directly states that we are all living under the preconceived and false notion that violent media is directly contributing to the violent incidents that happen around the country every year. I think that it is incredibly impressive for him to call out everyone, including himself, and state that we honestly have no idea what causes increased aggressive behavior, other than the unscientific intuition that violent media is the reason. The most shocking evidence of all, and something that I didn’t even know about, was murder rates have fallen dramatically and are at about the same rate as it was in the 1960s. However, he does make a great counterpoint by stating it is difficult to compare today to four decades ago when the technological advances during each era were vastly different. At this point, I still believe that violence in the media does not increase aggressive behavior as much as previously thought. I will have to say though, that O’Hehir does bring up a lot of really strong arguments and, with the added commentary of Weinstein, raises a lot of questions about what exactly will change in the media.

 

The third article, Columbine: Whose Fault Is It?, Marilyn Manson delves into how often we actually use scapegoats as a form of release. We rarely want to see someone we love get blamed for a gruesome act, so we blame influential people for doing exactly what they have been doing their whole lives. Now, I am not necessarily a Marilyn Manson fan myself, but a lot of what he is saying makes a lot of sense. When I first started reading the article and immediately caught wind of him telling the ugly truth about Christianity, I assumed he would bash on the human race. Instead, he made the most interesting and ironic point ever: we have taken for granted the essence of Jesus and most definitely defy most of the virtues God set forth in the Bible. Manson began by speaking about the history of violence, escalated to the often-misinterpreted lyrics of his songs, making him out to be, as put by him, the “AntiChrist.” He seems to know exactly what is going on. He mentions that we sit back and let children play with guns and let the media blame celebrities for a teen shooting another person. The media aggrandizes celebrity influence as negative, when in fact, the celebrities are not the ones committing these heinous crimes: we are.  

 

The author I found most convincing was Marilyn Manson. Even though I am not a fan of him or his music, he definitely raises many interesting points. Though he did not have fact based arguments, he spoke on a more personal level and it was much easier for me to agree with his opinions compared to the other authors. It was interesting to read and analyze that we are actually responsible for all the reckless violence that happens in the country. It is without a doubt questionable, however, whether or not the violence in the country would decrease if the media did not influence and exaggerate the stories. This article aligned the closest with my beliefs because it challenged me to think through the lenses of someone else and really understand what exactly happens. If anything, by beliefs about media influence on violence has only strengthened and I can continue to think more objectively about the subject.