In contemporary times, violence and sex has made its way into the media in vast abundance. For an adult, it may seem as though sexy and violent themes in movies and television is simply entertaining, but the repetition of these sexy and violent themes is having a negative impact on children. It is fair to say that media should not be censored, but are we letting our children be negatively impacted by violence and sex in the media?
During the times of early film, sex and violence was not allowed on the screen because of the Hollywood production code. Sex and violence were simply implied and graphic detail and images were omitted from the screen. In recent times, we have allowed much more sex and violence in the media and on screen in explicit detail. Child psychologist Dr. Debra Kowalski, explains, "With children having so much exposure to the media, the messages that come across are very important and they shape how a child sees the world and what a child sees as important. A lot of the messages related to violence and sexuality can negatively impact a child." There are also current studies being conducted by Michael Suman, coordinator of The Center for Communications Policy at the University of California at Los Angeles. He has done a three year analysis of the effects of violence and sex in the media, on children. He has concluded that Violence depicted repetitiously in the media has three types of negative effects on children. It increases violence because children see people behave violently, and children often imitate what they are seeing on a regular basis. It desensitizes children because they see heinous things in the media, and they become used to passively accepting offensive and crazy behaviors. And the last idea is that it causes children to become fearful because they get the false notion that violence is always happening, and danger is always in inch away. The overabundance of violence and sex is misleading to children, and they start to believe that it is overabundant in the real world as well.
In the movie Hostel II (2005) three American students who are on a trip, are lured into a European hostel, where they are sold to the highest bidder who's fondest wish is to kill them slowly, in any way they like. The movie depicts violence, sex, sadism, and torture in graphic and bloody detail. This movie is rated R, and a child who is under 17 can see this movie as long as a parent or guardian permits. A problem here is that parents no longer have as much control over what their child is doing, or watching on television. Recently, I saw the movie Hostel was available on On Demand. On Demand is a program for people who have Comcast, and basically, you can watch the content on demand by simply clicking an OK button. If a child wanted to see this movie without their parent or guardian, it would be very easy for them to do so. On television, there is a program called “The First 48”, and it airs on A&E. This show is a real life account of gruesome murders, and details about the violent and vicious acts are elaborate, and disturbing images are inevitable. This show has a disclaimer at the beginning of the episode, warning of the material, but anyone can view this channel and this show. On MTV, there is an extremely popular show entitled “The Jersey Shore”. On this show a group of roommates typically drink a large amount of alcohol, go out to a club, and “smoosh” attractive people they meet along the way. In this show, sex is a common theme, and it seems as though the roommates are usually involved with new sexual encounters every night. MTV is available for anyone who has cable, including children. Sometimes, parents may not be able to monitor what their children watch on TV because they may be at work while their child is at home, or the child may have their own personal TV.
The uprising of sex and violence in the media is a danger to our children because children are still forming their concept of reality. As children see an overrepresentation of sex and violence, it becomes commonplace in their schema of reality. So where do we draw the line? I don’t think the media should censor itself; instead we should police the little ones, and maybe try our best to change some of our own personal media patterns at home.
Beresin, E. V.. "The Impact of Media Violence on Children and Adolescents: Opportunities for Clinical Interventions." American academy of child & adolescent psychiatry. American Academy of Child Adolescent Psychiatry., 2010. Web. 20 Feb 2012. http://www.aacap.org/cs/root/developmentor/the_impact_of_media_violence_on_children_and_adolescents_opportunities_for_clinical_interventions.
Fragmented Quotes, . "TV and Film Violence." www.cybercollege.com. Cyber College, 2011. Web. 20 Feb 2012. http://www.cybercollege.com/violence.htm.
"Key Facts: TV Violence." . The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, 2003. Web. 20 Feb 2012. <http://www.kff.org/entmedia/upload/Key-Facts-TV-Violence.pdf>.
I agree with your claim that children are effected by the media. Young adults are very impressionable and these shows can distort their view on what's 'normal' behavior in society. I thought it was great you included both a movie and a popular T.V. show as examples to support your argument! I enjoyed reading your opinion on this topic!
ReplyDeleteSex and violence in media mass are abundant indeed. Nowadays, it has become something casual since we are being exposed of it frequently, and it scares me. It would be great if we could somehow reduce those things so children couldn't see it easily, but there will always someone who argued that it's the parent's fault for letting their children watch those kinds of things.
ReplyDeleteI am one of those who argue that the parent and guardian is responsible for how their child views, and perceives media. Parents are responsible to teach their impressionable children the difference between real life, and media entertainment or art. If a parent is so concerned about television ruining their child while they arent home, then they can decide not to have a television in the home, for example. Instead of putting televisions in childrens bedrooms where they have time unsupervised, maybe parents can put in a few books, art supplies, basketballs. I am talking about young impressionable young children and not 15 year olds. Maybe this is a sign of changing times, but I dont think children should be watching so much television and movies in the first place. I think it has become common for televisions to babysit children and I think there are reasons for this, like having working, busy and exhausted parents. Children should gain a perspective of the real world from being out and about in the actual real world, playing games, being active, reading and communicating with other real world people. With so many new advances in technology, parents CAN control what their children are viewing and listening to. Parents CAN teach their children about different art forms. Parents CAN teach their children that what they see on the screen is not an accurate account of the real world. Parents CAN make rules and set boundaries for their children. It is not the responsibility of artists, television executives, and movie producers to protect other people's children. I can remember watching the movie "IT" as a young impressionable child. This movie scared the living life out of me, but I knew that it was supposed to be a movie for entertainment purposes. I listened to a lot of Tupac as a very young child as well, but my parents taught me how music was a form of self expression and not a template or an example for me to follow. Parents should be involved with their child, they should know when their child is mature enough to actively participate in certain media and art. I was old enough to watch the scary movie "IT" when I was 7 or so, but a different 7 year old may not be psychologically ready for it. I have always felt really passionate about media and art and music. I feel passionate about the freedom we have to express ourselves as well.
ReplyDeleteBrittany -
ReplyDeleteYou did a really nice job in this piece opening up an avenue for conversation while still stating your position. Your use of out-of-class sources was also very impressive. Nice work.
- Ruth