If the latest research is 30 years old, its time some people got to work. I, for one, don't believe that my students insensitivity to violence in our culture, & love of senseless brutal action films, is independent of their media history. If they spent 11,000 hours in classrooms, and 22,000 with the media in their formative years, seeing 25,000 acts of mayhem, I doubt that they were unaffected. I don't buy the pacman analogy. Pacman doesn't look real. Does this look human to you? Why not go back further and say that Pong didn't increase the number of tennis players, so media probably has little effect? The latest playstation kickboxing games, and others, look real as hell to me. When students tell me that the movie "Ghandi" was boring except for the massacre scene, and my 15 year old comes home a few months ago and tells me that a few of her classmates thought that the images of 9/11 were "cool", an alarm bell goes off. Women fainted when they saw the original Frankenstein with Karloff in the 1930's. Today people watch mass murders, rapes, decapitations, buckets of blood exploding, and eat popcorn at the same time. Don't tell me we're more "sophisticated" today. I would counter that its barbaric media brainwashing as to what "entertainment" is. Death and senseless violence is not suppose to be funny or titilating. It should be depicted as the tragedy that it usually is for someone and their families.
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>>> If media sells products, which it does, or advertisers wouldn't
>>>spend
>>> billions on commercials, how can we then say that the show
>>>content has no
>>> lasting effect? I don't think that you can have it both ways.
>>
>>Applying that argument-by-analogy more specifically to the issue of
>>video-game violence, you could end up with an assertion like this:
>>
>>"If people who played a lot of Pac-Man in the '80s showed no
>>lasting
>>increase in their propensity to consume cherries, strawberries, and
>>bananas (the fruits whose consumption is rewarded in Pac-Man), how
>>can
>>we then say that people who play a lot of violent video games will
>>show a lasting increase in aggression? I don't think you can have
>>it
>>both ways."
>>
>>If you reject my Pac-Man comparison but continue to stand by your
>>comparison to commercials...well, I don't think you can have it
>>both
>>ways. :)
>>
>>So...data, anyone? I've pointed out that there have been no
>>relevant
>>randomized trials since Cameron & Janky (1971), and no one on TIPS
>>has
>>refuted that. (Lindsay Holland had written "If you want a couple
>>of
>>studies, e-mail me backchannel," but I did, and I got no response.)
>>
>>--David Epstein
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>>Reference:
>>
>>Cameron, Paul; Janky, Christine. The effects of TV violence upon
>>children: A naturalistic experiment. Proceedings of the Annual
>>Convention of the American Psychological Association 6(1): 233-234,
>>1971.
>>
>>
>>---
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: Click Here
---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
