In his article, “Violent Media is Good for Kids”, Gerard Jones argues that violent video games, violent glorifying rap music, and explicit savage depictions in comics that could cause violent expressions in children, does more good than harm. Jones, who is a comic book writer, incorporates self-testament to support his claim, and he uses several similar anecdotes overall, to prove that children should be free to watch violent media without restrictions. This paper will analyze the strengths and weaknesses of Jones using his own life and similar lives in his article pertaining to violent media.
Gerard Jones uses his own life as a prime example of the beneficial effects violent media can have on a child’s development. Jones states, “At thirteen …show more content…
This is a very serious issue to be addressed in any violent media article, and although Jones fails to give an example of this scenario he does say, “I’m not going to argue that violent entertainment is harmless…I am going to argue that it’s helped hundreds of people for everyone its hurt… modern kids are far more likely to grow up too passive, too distrustful of themselves, and too easily manipulated”(202-203). According to google, there are 7.125 billion people on earth, and according to Jones violent media may have only hurt a fraction of them however that doesn’t mean he can rule out its negative effects. In all of Jones’ assertions, he evades negative conflicts in order to justify his own opinions of violent media, which overall, is quite bias, because Jones is a violent comic book writer.
A writer who does take the negative effects of violent media seriously is psychologist Craig A. Anderson, who conducted his own research regarding the effects of violent media on children. He states, “Short-term exposure increases the likelihood of physically and verbally aggressive behavior, aggressive thoughts, and aggressive emotions. Long-term studies provide converging evidence linking frequent exposure to violent media in childhood with aggression later in life.” (Anderson “The Influence of Media Violence on Youth” December 2003 vol.4 …show more content…
Violent media is a very broad, challenging topic involving children and their behavior, and Jones fails to consider the complex ramifications of that. Most people with common sense and intelligence would not consider accepting the point made across this article due to his absence of differentiating evidence. The article has a huge amount of misleading information which should be read with caution to avoid manipulation and desensitization by Jones. Overall, “Violent Media is Good for Kids” uses Jones’ own biased perspective to coerce its readers. Society must use cognitive integrity to weigh Jones’ position that violent media is good. He is overwhelmingly validating his stance on the goodness of violent media, without adequately exploring the negative effects. In this way, he continues his stand that violent media is good for children. Whether or not, we, as a society agrees with him remains to be
Gerard Jones uses his own life as a prime example of the beneficial effects violent media can have on a child’s development. Jones states, “At thirteen …show more content…
This is a very serious issue to be addressed in any violent media article, and although Jones fails to give an example of this scenario he does say, “I’m not going to argue that violent entertainment is harmless…I am going to argue that it’s helped hundreds of people for everyone its hurt… modern kids are far more likely to grow up too passive, too distrustful of themselves, and too easily manipulated”(202-203). According to google, there are 7.125 billion people on earth, and according to Jones violent media may have only hurt a fraction of them however that doesn’t mean he can rule out its negative effects. In all of Jones’ assertions, he evades negative conflicts in order to justify his own opinions of violent media, which overall, is quite bias, because Jones is a violent comic book writer.
A writer who does take the negative effects of violent media seriously is psychologist Craig A. Anderson, who conducted his own research regarding the effects of violent media on children. He states, “Short-term exposure increases the likelihood of physically and verbally aggressive behavior, aggressive thoughts, and aggressive emotions. Long-term studies provide converging evidence linking frequent exposure to violent media in childhood with aggression later in life.” (Anderson “The Influence of Media Violence on Youth” December 2003 vol.4 …show more content…
Violent media is a very broad, challenging topic involving children and their behavior, and Jones fails to consider the complex ramifications of that. Most people with common sense and intelligence would not consider accepting the point made across this article due to his absence of differentiating evidence. The article has a huge amount of misleading information which should be read with caution to avoid manipulation and desensitization by Jones. Overall, “Violent Media is Good for Kids” uses Jones’ own biased perspective to coerce its readers. Society must use cognitive integrity to weigh Jones’ position that violent media is good. He is overwhelmingly validating his stance on the goodness of violent media, without adequately exploring the negative effects. In this way, he continues his stand that violent media is good for children. Whether or not, we, as a society agrees with him remains to be