Discussion corner: The Media and the effects.

[ante]

Originally Posted by Koir

It was a rhetorical question on the level of "Is there in truth, no beauty?", but hey, whatever works for you

Well, I'm in a typing mode, so I'll answer anything. I'm also tired, so I blame it on one of those states.

[Ronin4hire]

Originally Posted by Salvanas

Also, one thing I querie against the "action-causing" sides of the argument. If violent sequences, or games make us do violent things. Then how comes when we watch good and rational things, why do we not aspire to do those?

That's not the argument at all. Violent sequences do not cause people to carry out violent acts directly... however being exposed to such violence makes society as a whole more desensitised to violent acts which in turn makes carrying out such acts easier to commit psychologically.

The proponents of this argument have science on their side too. If I remember correctly studies show that children who are exposed to violent games/movies tend to show more aggressive tendencies (that they don't manifest these tendencies beyond the law seems to be the position of the crowd that says "I play Grand Theft Auto and I'm fine" crowd which personally I think is stupid.)

Personally I agree with strict censorship. In New Zealand it is a criminal offence to expose a child to media rated Restricted 18/16/13. You can face a hefty fine or even go to jail for this crime in the more extreme cases regardless of whether you are the parent/legal guardian or not. Unfortunately such a law is really way too hard to enforce to the letter so the best way to get people to change their behaviour is to inform them and promote good practice and social responsibility.... and the best way to do this? Via the media...

So coming back to the thread topic. In my opinion the media is both a reflection of society and an influence on it.

Lol... I'm rambling...

[Uriko]

i always saw the media as something that merely presents an idea & that it is up to me whether or not i will choose to believe in what is shown & how i react to it.

no one & nothing can "make me" do something.

[Ronin4hire]

Originally Posted by JoshAussie

Sounds like a big excuse to me, "The Media Made Me Do It Bitches!"

Would a Paedophile still molest a child if he never saw the news?

Blaming the media for anything is like blaming the media for inventing violence.

Also im almost always in agreement with Ronin - He knows this too tho - "Violent sequences do not cause people to carry out violent acts directly... however being exposed to such violence makes society as a whole more desensitised to violent acts which in turn makes carrying out such acts easier to commit psychologically."

But i only agree with 50% of this - And undecided on a part of it.

I definately believe that you become used to the things you see But theres an enormous differance between doing and seeing.

I can run over Hookers on GTAIV but i cant even see the sight of my own blood without getting queezy.

Sure.. having sex with, and running over hookers in GTA won't make you do it in real life... but scientists have shown that compared to a boy who has never played GTA in his life nor been exposed to that sort of violence regularly, you will display more aggressive tendencies.

For example you are more likely to lose your temper/get frustrated more easily, be more likely to inappropriately express your more negative emotions (anger, jealousy) as well as be more likely to over-react in potentially confrontational dillemas. You personally may be able to display these tendencies without going beyond the law however if you look at the bigger picture, societally speaking a whole bunch of more aggressive people is going to naturally lead to an increase in anti-social behaviour which for some people could lead to crime. Of course there are other factors... poverty etc... but I think the media is a significant one.

I don't think banning games/movies/music which feature anti-social behaviour is the answer... but I do believe in stricter guidelines as well as increased public awareness.

[MMM]

Originally Posted by ante

To be honest I don't get that analogy. The beer mug would be the newspaper, the radio, the television set, not the content, which is what I believe OP is referring to. The articles, the news-feed, etc. Not the actual broadcast, but the content of the broadcast. Do you honestly believe that what we read in books, newspapers, see on telly, doesn't effect our opinions and in turn our actions?

Naturally we have a choice to believe or not to believe in what we hear and see, but what we chose to believe is based on what we know, knowledge that we have acquired largely from the same source. Like I said before, as long as the reporting is honest and objective, that isn't a problem, but since financial and political interest have a large influence on what is reported and shown, objectivity has a tendency to suffer.

This is such an ethereal question. You see the news. You read a book. You buy a comic. You watch a TV show.

How these things affect "you" is different not depending on "the media" but depending on "you".

[MMM]

Originally Posted by ante

Well, I'm in a typing mode, so I'll answer anything. I'm also tired, so I blame it on one of those states.

This has turned into a JF standard. "I am tired" is not an excuse for how you post. If you are in no state to post properly, then don't post. As Keaton says, go outside and take a walk and get some sunshine.

Then come back, put your head together and post.

[MissMisa]

I can't even begin to tell you how many essays I have wrote about this! I've done speeches on it and everything!

In any case, I really don't think the media has as much effect as people like to make out. Although I do think it influences what we think of people, for example, celebrities, I'm sure that not everyone just takes it in as the whole truth. I think on the whole we do look at things more skeptically and don't just take things in.

There is a theory to describe the influence of the media, called the 'Hypodermic Needle.' This is the theory that people see the media, take it all in without a conscious thought, and are influenced by it. Personally, I think while this may be the case for very few people, it's not the general feeling.

Another theory which I'm incline to agree with more is the 'Two-Step Flow' theory, which is were the main source of the information comes from the media and is filtered down through 'opinion leaders' - people who do heavily influence the way people think. It's a sort of mediation through the opinion leaders which makes it less heavily media influenced.

[Ronin4hire]

Originally Posted by MissMisa

There is a theory to describe the influence of the media, called the 'Hypodermic Needle.' This is the theory that people see the media, take it all in without a conscious thought, and are influenced by it. Personally, I think while this may be the case for very few people, it's not the general feeling.

Another theory which I'm incline to agree with more is the 'Two-Step Flow' theory, which is were the main source of the information comes from the media and is filtered down through 'opinion leaders' - people who do heavily influence the way people think. It's a sort of mediation through the opinion leaders which makes it less heavily media influenced.

Interesting... what would be an example of an opinion leader?

I think the two step flow sounds about right when it comes to news media. But when it comes to violence in video games, porn increasingly entering the mainstream etc. I believe the "Hypodermic Needle" theory sounds more accurate...

But I haven't really studied the subject in depth... is there something I'm missing?

[MMM]

Porn increasingly entering the mainstream?

Ask 10 Americans to name 5 porn stars right now, and I bet they couldn't

30+ years ago, in the age of Linda Lovelace, I bet they could.

[Ronin4hire]

Originally Posted by MMM

Porn increasingly entering the mainstream?

Ask 10 Americans to name 5 porn stars right now, and I bet they couldn't

30+ years ago, in the age of Linda Lovelace, I bet they could.

I think that with the internet porn has definitely become more mainstream and easily accessible.

People may not be able to name porn stars... but I think that there could be many reasons for that over-exposure being one.

In my father's generation I would have had to enter a video store or convenience store to buy/rent porn. Now if I want I can access it anonymously via the internet (which I did once when I was less aware of the sort of harmful effects it can have).

Also cable/satellite TV brings it right to your TV with the flick of a switch.