Weinstein, Tarantino, and the standoff over movie violence.
This article is inconclusive all in all. Weinstein was basically saying that he didn't want to participate in anymore violent movies. His reasoning was if he didn't want that for his own children why would he turn around and be a hypocrite and do the complete opposite of what he was telling them. They explained that there is no real connection to social media to an increase of aggression. They compared it to being like drugs and alcohol, the right balance most likely won't have much affect but too much may cause issues in the long run.
Columbine: Whose Fault Is It?
This article says that America just likes to be able to blame their faults on anything. So when there is violence or a murder they want to blame it on the most logistic thing possible and that would be social media. They said in the article that if a person is old enough to commit the crime they should be old enough to be held responsible. An example of putting something innocent to blame is that there was a song called "Lunchbox" written and it was interpreted as a song about guns. The author explaned that with the blessing of this country being a "free" one there is also the burden of being held responsible for your free choices and people aren't ready to face that. I liked the line that said at the end, "So don't expect the end of the wold to come one day out of blue - it's been happing every day for a long time".
Violent Video Games: The Effects on Youth, and Public policy Implications
This article basically says that there isn't enough concern in how to little the exposure of kids in social media. There was no conclusion whether or not the evidence is true or false in the matter of the affect is real but they are still going deeper into research. There was an example of the video game that was banned and it made it more desirable to the public. "In a 2004 survey of pediatricians, over 98% believe that the media affects childhood aggression". (225).
No comments:
Post a Comment