Does violence in the media affect people's behavior?.
In this essay I will be discuss the topic of how violence in the media affect people's behavior, for and against the situation. The media has entertained people for many years but violence has been around for a lot long then the TV of film have been.
Violence in media can affect people by communicating in two ways. Transmission and hypodermically. In other word the audience just believe what they see and hear instead if making their own judgments of the situation and the second is semiotic which is accepting as a more realistic model. Obviously the meaning and impact of a particular image and sound is going to affect people in different ways, depending on their age, sex, race, education, socio/economic background and previous life experiences.
Some of the effects are learning bad morals from the media and acting them out in the future. All forms of violence will affect people as easy as seeing it in real life then on TV. The context of violence is as important as a costume to a super hero, so it doesn't matter if a hero kills a villain or even vise versa. Regardless of who kills whom, its still represented as violence in the media.
The media has many arguments over violence as TAC ads show explicit violence in order to reduce the road toll deaths and it has worked, but children are still more aggressive playing with other children after seeing a violent show. Role models are someone we look up to but if there in the violence industry do we still look at them as role models or killers?.
My conclusion is that violence has been around before media and stay around until the end of time. So I don't think violence in the media does affect people the way they say it because if some is violent they were violent before watching TV of a film with violence.
Morgan Harrigan .
