Violence in the Media: A Discussion

Violence in the Media: A Discussion

February 4, 2008

By Rachael Hartman

I answered the following question in an online posting for a college journalism class. I included some of my classmates' responses, as this is a great example of how to try to communicate from an Apostolic worldview with my classmates in an academic setting.

Q: To what extent, if any, should there be control over the violence presented in media? Do you think viewers, especially children, are harmed by the prevalence of violence in media? Are you concerned about the lack of correspondence between the synthetic world of television violence and the actual incidence of violence in social life? If you think there should be some controls, what groups of individuals would you trust to establish and implement them?

Rachael: Yes, I do believe there should be control over the violence presented in the media--not by the government, but by the people and the media itself.

I believe that people--both children and adults--are harmed by the prevalence of violence in the media. However, I do not believe that everyone who watches something violent automatically acts out violently.

I do believe that the “harm” induced on those that watch violence is one of a numbing of the conscience, a check-out of reality, and a perversion of the mind.

I believe that the violence presented in the media should correspond proportionally to the violence that actually takes place in society. For instance, if 10 percent of the population is committing violent crimes, then 10 percent of the television programs should present the reality of what is happening in society in order to bring social awareness to the problems.

I also believe that the violence presented should be true stories of violence that has taken place. I do not like the fact that most of the violence our society watches comes from someone's “creativity.” I believe those people are wasting good brain cells on producing violence in the form of drama, and they could be using their energy to stop violence instead of promoting it.

I believe if every violent act on TV were a reenactment of something that actually happened and the story was told in a way to condemn the violent act, our society would be communicating a better message.

Instead of “violence is entertaining, fun, and this stuff is all made up, so it is okay to watch,” it would be “violence is real, evil, causes pain, and here are the consequences that come from it.”

Classmate #1 Response: Rachael, I hate to say it, but I don't agree with what you said- “I also believe that the violence presented should be true stories of violence that has taken place. I do not like the fact that most of the violence our society watches comes from someone's “creativity.”

It would be nice if we lived in a world where creative people used their “creativity” to better everyone else. But unfortunately, this is not the world we live in.

We live in America, where we are free to express ourselves in any way we want, as long as it does not inflict harm on someone else. And violence on TV or in movies does not inflict physical harm on people.

It may damage someone emotionally, but it doesn't damage everyone in that way. Some people can watch that stuff and let it pass right by them. If you can't handle it, then you shouldn't watch it. I know which movies and shows I should watch. I judge it for myself.

Everyone does not view violent content in the same way. I myself (and you, too) don't appreciate the “creativity” behind violent movies. But I'm only going to hold myself accountable. Let them watch it if they want and call it creative. I have my ideas of what's good, and they have theirs.

Rachael: I agree with you that everyone should make their own decisions--which is exactly what we do as things are in our country today.

What I'm talking about may seem “ideal” for today, but considering that the choices we make today shape the future, we should think twice about who we allow to shape the future.

It is all fine to choose not to watch something that brings uncomfortable feelings/thoughts, and allow others to make their own choices, but it is the silent response--the easy response. It isn't really saying “I don't agree”--instead “I don't want to”--which sends the message that violence as entertainment is okay if that is what you want.

It all boils down to the children. No matter what we choose to do with our own lives, our kids will be affected by the culture in some way.

What message will our kids grow up around? The message that anything goes? The message that people that enjoy violence rule the culture?

As it is, there is no strong counter-culture force that speaks the message “violence is bad.” Most of the people who don't agree with all the violence are simply sitting back ignoring the problem, which isn't helping to fix the problem.

My ideal suggestion to get rid of the “created” violence and replace it with real-life happenings is not to eliminate people's choice to watch or not to watch, to broadcast or not to broadcast. But it is to motivate real people to do something to end real violence, instead of just ignoring the problems by entertaining themselves with the “fake” version of what is hurting real people all --around them.

Every one-in-three homes in America, a child is abused.

Classmate #2 Response: Yeah, I agree with some of your points, obviously there should be control, but from within.

The media should exercise good taste and standards of practice, but they should also have the right to show whatever they want without state interference if the material is deemed important and flagged as violent beforehand.

Violence may numb the senses if it is hammered into someone (that is true), but I don't know if it makes someone “less conscious,” even as perverted as it is. Truth can't really be hidden--that is if the violence is real. News is news, even violent news.

Fictional violence is a subjective thing, though. It's up to the audience. For example, fictional violence can convey a message of antiviolence. The audience should police their children and choose what they themselves want to watch.

People may be wasting brain cells producing this kind of fake violence but they still have the right, and, I guess, that's the point. Maybe I'm a bit of a libertarian.

Rachael: No, you and (#1) are both right about people having a right. I agree.

I just wish that more people would choose to do the morally right thing, so that the children of our country would have a better culture to grow up in, especially children that grow up in the ghettos.

It makes me sick how much violence is on TV and movies--how our culture embraces so many evil things--and how many people out there are convinced that violence is their only choice for life.

Maybe we, in our rich white world, don't really get the picture. If we only knew our own potential to make a difference in the poor communities, we could change the way things are. If only we would.

ninetyandnine.com

----------

Rachael Hartman is a senior majoring in Liberal Studies with a Minor in Writing. She attends New Life Sanctuary in Bloomingdale, Georgia, pastored by her father J.S. Hartman. She enjoys wearing bright colors, walking her dogs Charlie and Gretchen, making specialty coffee drinks, drinking hot tea, and dreaming for the future.