Television Violence Essay, Research Paper
Title: the frimCategory: EnglishDescription: Body of paper: Television force is a negative message of world to the kids who see it. Thereis an inordinate sum of force being watched in 1000000s of people s homesevery twenty-four hours, and this contributes to the turning sum of violent offenses thatare being committed in our communities. This rhythm of more and more sex andviolence being portrayed as world on telecasting will non halt until somethingis done.Not one parent that I know wants his or her kids watching peoplegetting blown off and thrown off drops. But the world of it is that parentscannot be at that place 24 hours a twenty-four hours to supervise what their kids are watching. In fact the telecasting is frequently used as a babysitter, so that the parent cando housekeeping, have an grownup conversation, or merely loosen up after work. The typesof people who are the most likely to be harmed by the excess of force onTV are kids. Ed Donnerstein stated in the February 15, 1996 edition ofthe Boston Globe the followers: Violence turns out to make a batch of injury whenit looks harmless. One of these lessons kids learn watching televisionis that there are few effects to the individual who commits force orto the victim. Add to this positive portraiture of negative behaviour the factthat kids s plans were least likely to demo the bad effects of violenceand most likely to do it amusing & # 8221 ; ( Goodman pg. 23 ) .We are demoing childrenthat force is humourous and it can t make harm.A research worker by the nameof Meltzoff studied larning in babies. He concluded that babes start tolearn even before birth. A survey by Meltzoff demonstrated experimental learningin 14-month-olds. After watching an grownup on telecasting handling & # 8220 ; a fresh toyin a peculiar manner, & # 8221 ; the babes were able to copy the behaviour when presentedwith the plaything 24 hours subsequently ( Wood pg.292 ) . This survey indicates that babieslearn imitation really early in life. This is why parents should be more particularwith what they allow their susceptible kids to see on Television. The MightyMorphin Power Rangers, telecasting show for kids, is a really good exampleof how force on Television can impact our kids. It is one of the highest ratedkids telecasting shows today. The Power Rangers are everyplace, on everything, from tiffin boxes to boxer trunkss. And childs want it all. This creates a bindfor the parents who know that these points are non so good for their kids.ThePower Rangers is one of the most violent shows around right now and childs loveit. The force in the show has led New Zealand and two of the major networksin Canada to censor the plan from their day-to-day agendas. Nancy Carlson-Paigeof Lesley College said in the December 1, 1994 Boston Globe, & # 8221 ; Locally, teacherssee grounds that Power Rangers interferes with normal childhood development. It threatens to sabotage kids s mental wellness because of the manner it influencestheir drama & # 8221 ; ( Meltz pg. A1 ) . Chris Boyatzis of California State Universityat Fullerton completed the first scientific survey of the impact of Power Rangerson kids. It showed that those who watch the show are seven times more aggressivein their drama than those who don T ( Meltz pg. A1 ) . Micki Corley, caput 4-year-oldteacher and coordinator of the Preschool Experience in Newton Centre said inthe same December 1st Boston Globe, & # 8221 ; They are confused by it. They mimic themovements without understanding the effects. I see childs stating thingslike, If I m the Red Ranger, I m non truly Joe hitting Mary. I m Tommy orZack hitting person immorality. But it s Mary who is hurt and Mary who cries. Youcan see the confusion on their faces. They ll say, But I didn t do that & # 8220 ; ( Meltz pg. A1 ) . One can see that at this phase in the kindergartner life he orshe is non able to separate between existent and pretend.Kids and Power Rangerssupporters will state that the Power Rangers do hold good points about them besides. They say that the characters show regard for grownups, they are sympathetic people, and there is ever a moral. In fact, the plan labels the ethical motives at theend of each show. What we have to inquire ourselves is, & # 8220 ; Is it truly worth it? & # 8221 ; MarilynDroz, manager of research for the National Coalition on Television Violence, conducted a survey on the Power Rangers. This is what she came up with:1. Seventy per centum of the childs who watch the show say the combat is what theylike best. 2. In an hr of Power Rangers scheduling, there is an averageof 211 Acts of the Apostless of force. A typical Saturday forenoon sketch hr generallyhas 25 violent Acts of the Apostless per hr. A typical hr of an grownup show has six Acts of the Apostless
of force ( Meltz pg. A1 ) . The Power Rangers
are an entertaining part ofour childrens day but the few minutes a day they watch may have severe circumstances. The morals, and views of reality of the kids are shattered. These childrendo not think that what they are doing is wrong when they hit or kick. Theysay,” The Power Rangers do it, why can t I?” This makes it even tougher onthe parents. They must explain that what the Power Rangers do on the televisionset is make believe. This confuses the child because they see it with theirown eyes, yet it is not true. We must not pin point the Power Rangers as theone show that influences our children s violent behavior. Other violent kidTV programs have a similar effect upon children. Cartoons and child programmingget most of the attention under this issue because of the damage they can doto the children, but also theatrical movies, and not prime-time series television,bear much of the blame for TV s blood-and-guts reputation. The UCLA TelevisionViolence Monitoring Report, as published by the September 20, 1995 editionof the Boston Globe, stated that of 121 television series airing during the1994-95 season, 10 were frequently violent or used violence in questionableways (Elber pg. 84). Television and the American Child by George Comstock,states on page 27, that the National Television Violence Study, which tookthree years to finish, shows shocking information about what we are viewingeveryday. What the analysis of 2,693 television programs from 23 channels showedis that a majority of programs contain what the researchers call “harmful violence.”They found that in 73 percent of the scenes, the violence went unpunished. In nearly half of the programs with slug-fests and shoot-outs, the victimsmiraculously never appeared harmed. In 58 percent they showed no pain. In fact,only 16 percent of the programs showed any long-term problems physical, emotionalor financial. We must show the children that the things that the charactersdo, do hurt people, and that violence is never the answer to any problem. Wemust teach the next generation how to work out his or her problems with hisor her “enemy” by talking the problem out with the other, and compromising. Another, more scientific, solution for the problem of violence on TV is theV-chip, technology that would enable parents to block violent programming. President Clinton said on the matter of the V-chip, as stated in the March6, 1996 edition of the Boston Globe, “We re handing the TV remote control backto America s parents so that they can pass on their values and protect theirchildren” (Jackson pg. 15). New president of Creative Coalition, a groupthat lobbies for First Amendment rights, and ex-actor Christopher Reeves, supportthe V-chip, if Legislation maintains parental control of television viewingand ensure that only the industry would rate the programs. Reeve recognizes”a serious need” to curb television violence but asserted that the industry,not Congress, was best suited for the job (Hohler pg. 11). I do not agree with the passing of the V-chip. Why should the people who want programs withgood morals pay for this? Parents should not have to empty their pockets toblock violence and sex. All programming should be family friendly. If lightweightcomedies, public television and weekend sports are not steamy enough, thenpress your code and unleash AK-47 terror and near-porn into your living room. Instead the Sesame Street viewers have to shell out the cash, instead of theChainsaw Massacre fans. They should go to the electronic store and buy a televisionwith a S&G-chip, for sex & guts. Let them earn their violence by paying forit. Parents of peace are about to make electronic stores rich. Fans of gutterand gore do not have to lift a finger for either their clicker or their wallet. I do not believe that we should be trying to solve this problem by putting amere computer chip into the TV. We need to solve the problem by going to Hollywoodand telling the industry that this type of programming in not necessary. Weneed to tell them to be creative, and use their brains. They are taking theeasy way out by showing this stuff. In the long term we all suffer for it. Thereprobably will never be an end to the controversy of television violence. Weare getting more and more information and on the effects of television violence. All of these findings have produced an increasing awareness of the basic problemand of the need for change. We know excessive viewing of television violenceis harmful to the viewer. It is time we take a solid stand on the issue andtell the producers of these shows that we don t want them. This paper was written by alex and they can be reached at alex.aol.com.