Television Industries Aren't Responsible for violence

Essay by sable013College, UndergraduateA+, January 2007

download word file, 2 pages 3.0

Downloaded 14 times

Many people believe that the violence in today's world is a direct link to the violence seen on television. I totally disagree with this. If this was true wouldn't everyone be violent? Although the television and movie industry can somewhat influence people, they can't be blamed for the actions of society.

Here is a reason why television violence serves as an easy target for the blame. Televisions are in almost every household in America. To some, there might be a correlation between real life violence and violence on television since they both deal with hostility. No one doubts that the different shows and movies viewed have some effect on behavior. Some documented experiments have found that shows like Mr. Roger's Neighborhood and Sesame Street actually cause more aggressive behavior in children. Results from other experiments have more to do with the general arousal effects than imitating the violent acts being viewed.

Statistics show that crime rates have been dropping since 1990 even though technology is becoming more advanced and the violence in movies is more gruesome. What about the rise in violence between 1900 through 1935, an age when the television didn't exist? So if the television and movie industry isn't to blame than who is? Social changes around this time frame are some reasons behind the increase in crime and violence. As time advanced, divorce became more ordinary. Children were brought up in single parent homes. This inadequacy doesn't necessarily mean that this will lead the child to a life of crime, but are usually contributing factors. During 1998 in Jonesboro Arkansas, an 11 and 13 year old boy shot and killed four classmates and then blamed it on watching a violent movie. The governor of Arkansas, Mike Huckabee, used media violence as a scapegoat as a quick fix...