Today the war on television violence ends, those who oppose it as the victors. When the smoke clears, we are left with an overlay of blocked channels, leaving our younger viewers to watch light-hearted comedies and tear-jerking talk shows such as Oprah and Sally. Although very far from reality, this scenario could possibly be one of the outcomes in the future. Some members of society are to think that they can lower or maybe even rid themselves of violence by eliminating it from entertainment. It is set in their minds that TV is the issue with everybody having an answer when TV is not the problem at all.
People in each age group are affected by TV violence in different ways. Some may favor it while other may not have the stomach for it. In "Violence Never Solved Anything, but It's Entertaining," Holman W. Jenkins Jr. verifies that males and females age eighteen to thirty-four and males age thirty five to forty-nine are the ones who demand violent entertainment the most. Of those statistics, the younger generations seem to be the ones who would be most effected. Is society to believe that this small percentage of the population is the leading cause of violence in the world? Opinions tend to vary. .
For Jeff Jacoby, writer of "A Desensitized Society Drenched in Sleaze," violent entertainment indirectly causes real life violence. He states that even with his highly religious and disciplined background he was "jaded" from exposure to violent TV. Portraying himself to have characteristics like that of the Brady Bunch, he thinks that if he can be desensitized, then anyone can be desensitized. With that thought, Jacoby may have a valid point. If exposed to violent TV for an extended amount of time, it may be able to desensitize anyone, especially if they come from an already broken home or bad neighborhood. To say that because of this desensitizing, everybody is to be more violent would not be accurate.