Evaluate My Essay

[negativezeroz 5,000+ posts]

Since the beginning of time there has been violence. In the current age, many people have blamed violence in video games, film, and television for disastrous violent outbreaks in society. It is my right to read, watch, or engage in any activity I feel is acceptable, thus proving that violent video games, film, and televised shows are not responsible for the occurences in our society.

Video games have been out for longer than I have been alive. Sure, the games may have become more violent but that does not prove anything that could link displays of violence in our lives to them. One fine example is from the NCAC member Seth Killian. In his report he states that there is "no evidence that these players are more violent in other settings than any other cross-section of the population..." (Killian 1). I, myself, play games that are portrayed as violent, yet I am not going out and killing anyone because I thought it was right based on an activity I enjoy in my leisure time. So why are video games being blamed for any disturbances in society caused by young kids? Well, the media is lying to everyone. Directly from U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Statistics, shows that since 1994 crime rates have been plumetting. Duke Ferris claims, since 1994, crime rates are at the "lowest levels ever recorded. In other words, the Playstation era has, in fact, produced the most non-violent kids ever." Ferris also points out that:

The media in particular loves to bash video games, making sure to point out any time there s an Xbox within 50 yards of a crime. This is because games are the new competition - every hour you spend interacting with a game is one hour less spent drooling in front of their fear-mongering programming. Gaming is also a new medium, one that has recently become wildly successful. Young people play them and old folks don t understand, so they must be bad. Don t forget that in the 1950 s, rock and roll was linked to youth violence in the same way. The hedonistic, tribal rhythms were going to turn America s youth into a bunch of violent maniacs. Rock and roll was banned and censored all over the country. (1)
Just like movies, video games have ratings for a reason. If the games being designed and published every year were not rated, then there might be a very small chance of some link between the games and violence. The ESRB (Entertainment Software Rating Board) has seven different ratings they give video games: C, E, E10+, T, M, AO, and RP. One game that the media has really hit hard is the Grand Theft Auto series. In GTA, you can kill anyone you want so that must be a source for the violence in America, right? Wrong. In 2004 alone, 54% of the games published were rated E for everyone, while only 12% were rated M for mature. Those figures right there prove that games are not the cause for violent kids who happend to be under the age of 18. I play games rated M because I am allowed to purchase the game and yet I am not corrupted by the content of the games that I play.

Who does not enjoy going to a new movie that they have been waiting a couple months for? I know I enjoy watching new movies. Then what about the violence in movies? Movies like Saving Private Ryan and one of the more extreme cases, Saw, have graphic scenes in them but are they corrupting youth? No. When I first saw Saving Private Ryan, sure it was bloody and vulgar, but it was a movie about a true life event. Saw is a different story; Saw has scenes of self-mutilation and desperation. Has Saw caused anyone to recreate the events that took place in that film? No. Since I am considered an adult because of my age, then I am allowed to see any movie I want, no matter what the contents of it are. Same goes for parents who take their children to R movies then complain because it is disgusting. Then why are they taking their kids to see a movie that is intended for mature audiences only? Kevin Durkin suggests that the "evidence of effects of media violence upon behavior is controversial but, at best, weak" (34), is stating that there is not enough proof of people who watch violent movies are going to engage in violent acts based upon the fact that they watched something they consider acceptable. Hostel is a very graphic and violent movie. In fact, I saw it twice the opening day. How's that for a slap in the face to media being blamed for violent outbreaks? Have I gone out and tied someone down so I could do anything I wanted in terms of torturing them? No. Do I think torture is right just because I saw it in a movie? No. There are movie ratings for a reason. Jack Valenti made a great point in his write-up about the effects of media violence:

Years ago many of us in the movie world came to the conclusion that we had a duty to inform parents about film content. This is the prime reason why for over thirty years a voluntary movie rating system, created and implemented by film producers and theater owners, ha been in place. These ratings give advance cautionary warnings to parents so they can decide what movies thet want their children to see or not to see. (117)
Anyone who owns a T.V. watches it at least once during the day. All the news channels come on around dinner time and just babble on about what blew up, who got shot, or where drugs were found. Nothing truly good is displayed through the news. Why? The "bad" news is more interesting for one. I personally don't watch a whole lot of news but the few times I do, it's all the same. Kevin Durkin validates my point saying "it is possible that the international press was eager to seize upon any hint of television or video effects because these usually make a good story" (29). It is expected, through experience of watching and reading the news and magazines, that most things published are going to to be about something negative relating to some new invention or new T.V. series, stating these things are causing violence in America. Which is false. On average, a child watches over 27 hours of television a week and will witness roughly 100,000 acts of violence before finishing grade school. So where are the facts showing television is to blame? The only number that has been published is a rough estimate of 4-6% of violence in media has a chance of being linked to the acts carried out by the youth in America. Then what can one do about violent shows on T.V.? Nowadays, most T.V.'s come with the V-Chip in them. This chip allows parents to block out channels and shows they do not want their kids watching. I can personally say I do not know a single person who actually uses the V-Chip.

All the shows that are considered violent are actually put on by the same companies who make "good quality" shows. No single media coorportation would are air all the same types of programs. Say the USA Network started airing all news channels. Would they profit off this move? No. This is the same reason why they air movies such as Die Hard and Wrong Turn, along with airing King of the Hill and sometimes even sports events. This helps them out in the long run. They aren't concerned about the content, they are more focused on what makes them more money and gives them more viewers than the other channels. Jeff Greenfield brought to my attention what he had learned about television's effect on our society:

I learned that many of the most noxious of these programs actually are prodcued and aired by some of our most well-respected, prominent organizations--huge media conglomerates run by people who spend half their evengins getting Humanitarian of the Year awards. (52)
The people brought up without parental supervision or raised by parents who sell drugs or are in trouble with the law themselves, are the ones who are most likely to be the violent youth. Video games, T.V., and movies are not to blame for this so-called violent youth in America. It is the parents, the community, the life-style on which kids are raised. Adolescents who join street gangs are more involved in deliquent acts than adolescents who are not gang-involved. That is a true statement. You can not argue that for which is true. Average middle-class kids who see violence on T.V. aren't likely to go out and shoot anyone up. But those in disadvantaged neighborhoods who see violence will interpret it as normal behavior. Thus, providing evidence that it is the way in which a person is raised that can lead to violence as compared to kids who plays violent video games or see a movie with graphic scenes in it. My parents have raised me in a good community and life experiences that will help guide me through the rest of my life. Have I been in trouble with the law? No. When I go rent a horror movie, will I react by recreating that which I just saw? No. More than 40% of violent outbreaks in life can be linked to the person already having a criminal background or being involved with gang activity.

Since I have been alive, there are three things that I have come to know a lot about: Video games, T.V., and movies. People always want the easy way out in life. Blaming video games, T.V., and movies for violence in America is the easy and false way out of being proven wrong. No televised show, no movie, and no video game has or ever will corrupt me, so why must those things be blamed?

---------

 

Sorry for any spelling errors. I just finished typing this and it has been a long day. My peer-evaluation rough draft is due tomorrow so this will be torn apart by the people in my english tomorrow. Final essay isn't due for like another week.

Click to read more...

 

[yne721 10+ year member]

do your own homework.

how hard is that?

 

[negativezeroz 5,000+ posts]

do your own homework.
how hard is that?

This is my work. The peer-evaluation section of my argumentative essay is happening tomorrow so I was just asking for people to look at it now so I can correct things tonight/tomorrow before the evaluation so I can get highest grade possible. I hate english with a passion so I am bad at essays.

 

[yne721 10+ year member]

is that supposed to be Bureau of Statics, or statistics?

and also, if it's getting evaluated tomorrow, why should we do it? they're just going to tell you the same things tomorrow that we'll tell you here. If I were you, i'd post my final draft here, since you're already getting your first draft evaluated by other people....

 

[negativezeroz 5,000+ posts]

Statistics //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/blush.gif.99bc659ee2012b7d826165e26fb5eebe.gif

 

[klepto 10+ year member]

I dont think too many people on here want to spend their time reading that //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/fyi.gif.9f1f679348da7204ce960cfc74bca8e0.gif, but i could be wrong...

 

[Twistid 5,000+ posts]

cliffnotes plz

 

[yne721 10+ year member]

I dont think too many people on here want to spend their time reading that //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/fyi.gif.9f1f679348da7204ce960cfc74bca8e0.gif, but i could be wrong...

x2

cliffnotes plz

can't help you. I got sick of reading it after the first paragraph //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/crap.gif.7f4dd41e3e9b23fbd170a1ee6f65cecc.gif

 

[negativezeroz 5,000+ posts]

is that supposed to be Bureau of Statics, or statistics?
and also, if it's getting evaluated tomorrow, why should we do it? they're just going to tell you the same things tomorrow that we'll tell you here. If I were you, i'd post my final draft here, since you're already getting your first draft evaluated by other people....

I dont think too many people on here want to spend their time reading that //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/fyi.gif.9f1f679348da7204ce960cfc74bca8e0.gif, but i could be wrong...

Lol true. But I am watching the Discovery Atlas which is two hours long so I figured maybe one person would evaluate it by the time it is over.

I should have my final typed up around the end of this week (its fall break this week so we'll see) so I guess I could just post that instead??

cliffnotes plz

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/hilarious.gif.02a037aad04aa96f19982b298a3d70a8.gif

 

[MikeofTulsa Moderator]

A very well written essay. a few more quotes than I would have used. But overall very well written. Could have used a better ending. or perhaps a more detailed ending.

 

[faulkton 5,000+ posts]

i hate correcting my own shit.. why would i correct yours?

its one thing to post like one grammer question but to think people wanna coorect the hole thang is redicuolous it is'nt gona happan.

 

[negativezeroz 5,000+ posts]

A very well written essay. a few more quotes than I would have used. But overall very well written. Could have used a better ending. or perhaps a more detailed ending.

Thanks. I can take like one of the longer quotations and just reword it. I was using them because they state what I am trying to state and use facts.

Sources:

Opposing Viewpoints: Violence

Opposing Viewpoints: Mass Media

CQ Researcher Online: ***, Violence, and the Media (Charles S. Clark)

NCAC: http://www.ncac.org/censorship_news/20040121~cn092~Violent_Video_Game_Players_Mysteriously_Avoid_Killing_Selves_-_Others.cfm

GameRevolution (very good read): http://www.gamerevolution.com/static/index.php?section=feature⊂=violence&page=violence

 

[mattf 5,000+ posts]

I'm gonna save that so if I ever need to write a paper on that topic I will already have it done.//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/naughty.gif.94359f346c0f1259df8038d60b41863e.gif

 

[JimJ 5,000+ posts]

Just briefly looking over it, could use better transitional stuff between ideas, it seems a bit jerky and disconnected.

Third quote should probably be an inline one instead of a blockquote.

Maybe it's just a stylistic thing, but ending with a rhetorical question isn't too effective. After all, you spent your entire paper talking about why it's wrong to think that, so end with something strong and to the point, not an empty question.

 

[Flipx99 5,000+ posts]

I wouldn't start any sentence with the word Sure. It sounds way too conversational.