The Media Is Not to Blame for Violence in the Society - Term Paper Example

Media Regulation There is no denying that violence directed towards children by their peers is a painful thing. In the natural, it might be hard to comprehend gun violence, trauma, or mental sickness but everyone needs to understand the role of the media in perpetuating such violence. It is obvious that there might be some connection between violent behavior and specific media utilization practices and in some cases, violent media might be a causal thing that inspires such violent acts in the society. However, these cases are so minimal as compared to other contributing factors such as poverty and emotional abuse (Linn 436). For this reason, if poverty, drug/alcohol use, patterns of physical & emotional abuse and access to weapons are the biggest causes of violence in the society, then it is unreasonable for the government to try and regulate the media content that children watch since this does not stop children from being violent. Lack of Education while Young The claim that the media is to blame for the current increase of violence in the society is misleading since there is enough proof that lack of education is one of the biggest causes of violence in the society. Given that the government is unable to provide education to everyone, then they should leave this responsibility to the parents since they are the ones who have an access to the child at all times. While media violence might bring about violence in children to some extent, it is clear that most of the violent children come from families that had a history of violence. In most cases, these families are from the slums where there is no access to television and hence there is no possibility that media violence might be contributing to violence among children and as such the media should try to regulate the media on the pretext that it has a negative effect on children (Motion Picture Association of America). The Government cannot End Violence Given that regulating the media does not necessarily bring to end violence among children, then there is no reason why the government should be allowed to go ahead with this regulation. If violent media was such a major contributor of media violence, then a country like Japan that has one of the most violent media in the world would be ahead of the Unites States in terms of violence. However, as it stands now, Japan trails the United States in nearly every form of violent behavior instead of being behind it in every category as is currently the case. Given that nearly everyone has an access to some form of media violence, then all these viewers and gamers would be involved in regular acts of murder. This is true for all types of media including videogames that take the biggest impact of the fault today. In most cases, the violent children do not have any exposure to violent media and this means that there are other causes for this violence. However, the government has chosen to lay the blame entirely on the media and hence the reason why it is trying so hard to regulate the media content that children watch (Linn 430). The Government Cannot Educate Children Given that the government is incapable of educating every child, then the biggest responsibility is left with the parent. When talking about media violence, most of its exposure is gotten from the home environment and this means that no school education can help in averting this. In most cases, parents have control over what their children watch and it therefore remains their prerogative to dictate the kind of education that their children get. According to Susan Linn, the biggest challenge with addressing the issue of sex and violence to children is that curbing the exposure to media sex and violence cannot be done without first addressing the controversial and passionate issues of morality, artistic freedom, the role of government in media regulation and the free speech rights that are provided for in the First Amendment to the Constitution. Linn notes that unlike the advertisement of other products, the appeal for sex and violence comes from conflict and the expression of basic human rights. According to this author, America is a pluralistic nation and therefore the attitudes that people have on sec and violence are rooted in moral and religious beliefs. All the religious books have a great weight on violent and sexual behaviors. The teaching offered in these books is usually open to interpretation and hence the reason of the great confusion surrounding sin in the modern society. In trying to prove that the media is not responsible for the increase in violence, Linn points that; Most of us agree in general that it’s wrong to physically hurt another person, yet, as a society; we seem to tolerate and even applaud spanking, war, and self-defense. We disagree more about sex, except in so far as most of us think (at a minimum) that it should be consensual and that our children are too young to be having it (424). By looking at the above statement, it is apparent that parents are solely responsible for teaching their children things about sex and violence since the morals that children are taught while young are often carried over to adulthood. This leaves no role for the government to play as far as this matter is concerned. It is the parents’ responsibilities to educate their children In the constantly changing society, parents have a sole responsibility of educating their children. Given that most of the violent media content take place within the home setting, it is clear that parents are the ones responsible for helping their children to establish, assess, and select suitable media for their children to watch. While it is apparent that the media has some level of influence in relation to violence and sex, the government should not be left to determine the suitable content that is ideal for children. In a society that is trying to establish the moral and social issues, families are responsible for establishing their own value system that they should follow with their families. When children are taught at a young age how to choose in an appropriate manner, then they stick to those ideals and pass them on to their children. In most cases, children learn by watching the behavior of those close to them. If the parents set clear media boundaries, they children are able to learn what is ideal and acceptable. Once parents are united on what is ideal to watch, it becomes easy to establish a family grading system that is acceptable to all. Once parents set the rules on what is appropriate to watch for certain ages, and then it becomes hard for anyone to contravene those rules since a child knows that breaking the rule will be accompanied by consequences. In reality, parents can help in shaping their children attitudes especially if they remain involved in what their children watch. By insisting that they have a prerogative of regulating what children watch, one thing that the government fails to factor is that it is hard to achieve this objective in the current Internet age. The best solution would be to educate parents on why they need to set the standards on what their children watch so that the children might be able to emulate them. Parents should also be encouraged to teach their children about the dangers of watching certain programs since this is the only way that they can learn about the dangers of certain activities (Motion Picture Association of America). The Media is not to Blame for Violence in the Society From the above discussion, it is very clear that what children watch at a young age has very little to do with violence later on in life and therefore the government does not have any business trying to regulate violence in the all in the name of bringing order in the society. This is because there are numerous causes of violence and media content should not be blamed entirely for this problem. In most cases, poverty is a big cause of frustration and this manifests itself later on in life by way of violence. Research has repeatedly shown that people who become violent in their later stages of life usually had a difficult childhood. Instead of rushing to regulate media content, the government should be more concerned about looking for ways to reduce the levels of poverty since this account for the violence at the later stages of life. Although stress among children accounts for the highest level of violence later on in life, the government does very little in trying to look for ways to deal with this problem and instead chooses to blame it on media violence. Although this might bring a reduction to this violence, the problem would not be totally eradicated since there are other causal factors that should be dealt with if a permanent solution is to be obtained (Motion Picture Association of America). Counter Argument Parents see the media as a trigger for violence There are a lot of parents in the United States who insist that the content in the media is a trigger for violent behavior among children since children learn from what they see. These parents insist that it is necessary for children to regulate the media content that children see in order to ensure that they are not exposed to violence. The argument that most parents and other socialists in this category give is that it is easy for children who are not sure of what is going on around copying all that they see happening around them since they lack the ability to judge on what is right and what is wrong. For this reason, if the government does not regulate what is exposed to the children, then there is a big possibility that they will grow up exhibiting the violent behavior that they watch on the media. The saddest thing is that the people who mostly fall to this kind of argument are parents who are supposed to act as the models as well as educators for their own children. Today, the world is treated to numerous media reports of children and teenagers who claim that they were pushed to some sort of violence because of inappropriate media content something that acts to reinforce the belief of these parents (What’s Playing This Week for Kids and Teens). Parents are Responsible for Deciding what their Children Watch In essence, this counterargument might be right but only to a certain level in that violent media content might be a trigger for violent behavior in children. However, this argument is wrong since it is misleading to claim that the media is the only trigger for violent behavior among children. From the earlier research, the government is unable to prevent violent behavior among children but on the contrary parents are able to achieve this objective since their major focus is on their children and they can formulate strategies that can bring about behavior change in their children. From the above study, it is clear that regulating media content is not sufficient to control violence since parents should continually teach their children not to be violent. If the children have been taught on the manner that they are supposed to behave, then it will be hard for them to change even if they are exposed to violent media content later on in their life. This is because even if the United States succeeded in regulating the media content in the U.S., the children will still be exposed to similar content from other parts of the world since we live in a technological era where the world is connected by the (Motion Picture Association of America). In most cases, the issue of violence is ingrained in the religious beliefs of individuals and this means that if parents take the time to teach their children on how to approach violence, then it will be hard to change the preconceived belief within these children. Although the government might try to regulate what goes inside these children, the thing that they should realize is that the important thing what comes out. Although might decide to use the media as a scapegoat for the violent behavior around them, one thing that they should realize is that they have a responsibility of guarding what their children watch at their early stages of development since this is what will form the basis of their behavior later on in life. On the part of the government, they should focus on how to address the other violence causing factors such as poverty since they have a direct relationship with the high levels of violence in our society today. However, the problem will continue to persist as long as parents and the government continue to use the media as a scapegoat for their behavior. Although what children watch earlier on in their life might make children violent later on in life, the level at which this happens is very insignificant and the government should therefore not regulate the media content that children watch since it would do very little in bringing an end to violence (Motion Picture Association of America). Work Cited What’s Playing This Week for Kids and Teens. Common Sense Media. 22 Jan, 2014. Web. 24 Feb, 2014. Linn, Susan. Marketing, Media, and the First Amendment: What’s Best for Children? From The Hostile Takeover of Childhood. Harvard University, 2004. 424. Print. Film Ratings. Motion Picture Association of America. 2014. Web. 24 Feb, 2014. . Read More