Analysis Of Violent Media Is Good For Kids

The article “Violent Media is Good for Kids” by Gerard Jones is very convincing. Jones argument goes against the majority of societies opinions. Jones article first appeared on Mother Jones, which targeted many parents and their opinions on weather or not they agreed with showing their child media violence. Jones believes that media violence is not harmful for children, it is helpful. Jones also believes that when children see and use violent media it is helping them in a positive way so children meet their emotional and developmental needs. Jones states “I am going to argue that its helped hundreds of people for everyone its hurt, and that it can help far more if we learn to use it well” (Jones). Many would disagree with this statement for …show more content…
Throughout Leo’s article his main point was “if we want to avoid more Littleton-style massacre, we will begin taking the social effects of the killing games more serious” (Leo). Leo does not blame this violence on the video games he blames it on the parents that allow their children to play these games. Leo believes “video games are much more powerful versions of the military 's primitive discovery” (Leo). Another main point brought up by Leo is the fact that when people play violent video games they get too focused on the game that they forget about what reality actually is. Leo also believes that since people get so focused on the violent game they are playing that they want to copy those …show more content…
Although I do not agree with his statements it is the most convincing piece. Jones audience is for open-minded younger parents who are just starting out with kids. Throughout Jones article although he uses more opinion than fact. Which usually weakens a paper, but he uses self-experience which makes this paper more convincing. Another reason why Jones paper was stronger than Leo’s, is because he used Melanie Moore a psychologist who works with teens to back up his claims. One of the strongest parts of Jones is article is his counter arguments. Jones states, “I 'm not going to argue that violent entertainment is harmless. I think it has helped inspire some people to real-life violence” (Jones). Jones recognizes that he is going against what the majority on society thinks, instead of staying away from that he states what others opinions on media violence are and reflects how that could be true. Throughout Jones paper there was little bias, he went off of his self-experience and this is why he has such a strong opinion on this issue. The reason why I thought Leo’s paper was not the strongest and most convincing is because his audience was mostly directed at parents who have sons that play violent video games. Leo does not take into account anything except for his own views. When Leo states an opinion he does not support it with facts. For example, this is shown when