Observers were very concerned about the effects on the adult population of media representation of violence in the 1930s due to many events during that decade which triggered the development of the Effects model, also known as the Hypodermic Needle Theory or the Magic Bullet Theory by Harold Laswell. This theory was formulated by events such as World War I and the radio broadcast of 'War of the Worlds' by Orson Welles in the 1930s (Lamb, 2012). Going in depth into this theory, it is a linear communication theory which proposes that information by the media are directly implanted into the passive receiver's minds and they will be influenced by it without objection (Lamb,2012). This action of implantation can be seen as "injecting" or "shooting" as it has an immediate and powerful effect on the audience which suggests the name of the theory. In other words, this theory proposes that we are all sculptured into thinking about what the media makers want us to think about and that our behaviorisms can be changed by them.
Therefore, using this theory, some groups in society should not be exposed to certain media texts as they will reenact what they observe, essentially, violent representations. These groups in society include, children, mentally ill people, those with naturally higher aggression levels than others and media illiterates. Media illiterates who are not familiar between distinguishing reality from fiction that the media portrays, may believe easily anything and everything they see or hear. For example, excessive violence that they observe through media sources may eventually become a norm to them and they develop an immunity towards the guilt of watching people get hurt or hurting people and in some cases, they may e...
... middle of paper ...
... found out that it was merely a radio adaptation of the novel. This event proves how powerful the media is on the influence of their audiences. Even without any verification or further information from other news companies, most of the listeners still relied completely on this radio broadcast and believed it entirely. This is a great example that hypodermic needle theory was applicable at the time. They relied merely on radio for news as the radio was reachable to everybody unlike the television, therefore, it was easy for them to believe it. Nonetheless, nowadays, we have more than just the radio and television to rely for news on especially after the internet has been introduced. According to PewResearch Journalism Project, 61% of Americans rely solely on the internet for news on a typical day, whereas only 38% of Americans rely merely on offline sources for news.
There are similarities and differences in how the authors of “American History” and “ TV Coverage of JFK’s Death Forged Mediums’ Role” use Kennedy’s assassination in their writing. The intended effect of “American History” was to entertain and show how TV news and news in general affects people. In contrast the intended effect of “Tv Coverage…” was to inform readers how John F. Kennedy's assassination affected the news. The author Joanne Ostrow and Judith Ortiz Cofer both use Kennedy’s assassination in their writing to explain how TV news affects people in a community.
The theoretical model I believe encapsulates the relationship between criminal justice and the media the best is the Hypodermic Syringe model because the public often believes and accepts the message the media is trying to send, which allows the media to have a direct effect on the behavior of the criminal justice system. This is exactly what the Hypodermic Syringe model is defined as. When the media has a new story, people automatically accept it as the way the news reported it and they spread the message around to anyone they can talk to. Most people hear a story within a day of it happening. An example of this is how the media takes a story of a police officer using an unreasonable amount of force and sends the message to the public how
Newspaper, radio, film, television. These are only a few of the various forms media can take. From the moment we open our eyes to the instant we shut them, we are surrounded by media and absorb the information it hurls at us in an osmosis-like manner. The news ranges from the latest terror attack and political scandals to supposed UFO sightings and scandals involving sandals. We as an audience tend to focus more on the message the media relays rather than on the medium in which it is presented to us. “What?” is asked more than “How?” The key claim Marshall McLuhan makes in his book, The Medium is the Massage, is that the form of media influences how the message is perceived. Let’s illustrate this with a scenario: it’s eight o’clock in the morning.
Representations of violence in the media (defined as through news, film, and television) throughout history have contributed to desensitization to violent actions.
According to John Davidson's essay Menace to Society, "three-quarters of Americans surveyed [are] convinced that movies, television and music spur young people to violence." While public opinion is strong, the results of research are divided on the effects of media violence on the youth in this country. Davidson wrote that most experts agree that some correlation between media violence and actual violent acts exists, yet the results are contradictory and researchers quibble about how the effects are to be measured (271). Moreover, Davidson is not convinced that the media is the sole problem of violence, or even a primary problem. He points out that other factors, such as "poverty, the easy accessibility of guns, domestic abuse, [and] social instability" may have a greater impact on a child becoming violent than the influence of the media (277). Even though other forces may be stronger, media violence does have some adverse effects on the members of society. If senseless violence on television and in movies had no effect, it would not be such a hotly debated topic. What type of effects and whom they affect are the most argued aspects of the discussion.
One of the culprits of criminal behavior is T.V. violence. Violent programs may have a negative influence on those individuals who are already violence-prone, or children who are living through vulnerable periods of their development. Adult violent offenders tend to have shown certain personality features as children, ?one being they tended to have viewed violence on television.? The amount of violence on television continues to grow. ?A typical child watched on television one thousand murders and twenty five thousand acts of violence before finishing elementary school.? When displayed this often, how can people not become desensitized to criminal acts? ?By allowing this type of material to be openly exposed to the public we are endangering safety and society?s values.? Without control of what material is delivered to the masses, we cannot expect people to have a proper sense of right and wrong as they will constantly see the horrific things that happen in the false reality of the media and become immune to feelings of disgust toward such atrocious deeds in real life. Controlling what is viewed on television is the responsibility of the government in order to decrease violence in the real world.
Through manipulation and lies, media manages to modify objective news into biased news in order to convince the public of what the media wants them to believe. The article, “How the Media Twist the News”, by Sheila Gribben Liaugminas discusses the major influence that news has on readers based on their choice of stories and words. “How the Media Twists the News” has borrowed from multiple other texts such as the books like Public Opinion and Liberty and News, news magazine writers such as Ruderman, and news networks like CBS through Bias, A CBS Insider Exposes How the Media Distort the News and CNN to make her arguments valid and prove that the news is biased and that it does influence readers significantly because of it.
The media takes a biased approach on the news that they cover, giving their audience an incomplete view of what had actually happened in a story. Most people believe that they are not “being propagandized or being in some way manipulated” into thinking a certain way or hearing certain “truths” told by their favorite media outlets (Greenwald 827). In reality, everyone is susceptible to suggestion as emphasized in the article “Limiting Democracy: The American Media’s World View, and Ours.” The
As censorship of the American media has broken down over the years, the amount of violence allowed to be shown in movies, on television, and in video games has skyrocketed. From coast to coast in our nation, this saturation of hostility in our media has caused many contentious debates between scholars, parents, students and government officials alike. In this controversy, the central argument revolves around the effects violent media has on our society. The question that most researchers strive to answer is this: does watching or participating in violent media cause violent or other harmful behaviors? There are those who would say yes, it does promote destructive behavior in real life. On the other hand, there are those who argue no, violent media is simply a reflection of what is already occurring in our society.
Many psychologists have studied the effect of the media on an individual’s behavior and beliefs about the world. There have been over 1000 studies which confirm the link that violence portrayed through the media can influence the level of aggression in the behavioral patterns of children and adults (American Academy of Pediatrics, 2001). The observed effects include, increased aggressiveness and anti-social behavior towards others, an increased fear of becoming a victim or target of aggressive behavior, becoming less sensitive to violence and victims of violent acts, and concurrently desiring to watch more violence on television and in real-life (A.A.P. 2001). According to John Murray of Kansas State University, there are three main avenues of effects: direct effects, desensitization, and the Mean World Syndrome (Murray, 1995, p. 10). The direct effects of observing violence on television include an increase in an individual’s level of aggressive behavior, and a tendency to develop favorable attitudes and values about using violence to solve conflicts and to get one’s way. As a result of exposure to violence in the media, the audience may become desensitized to violence, pain, and suffering both on television and in the world. The individual may also come to tolerate higher levels of aggression in society, in personal behavior, or in interpersonal interactions. The third effect is known as the Mean World Syndrome, which theorizes that as a result of the amount of violence seen on television and also the context and social perspective portrayed through the media, certain individuals develop a belief that the world is a bad and dangerous place, and begin to fear violence and victimization in real life (A.A.P. 2001).
Javier, Rafael Art., William G. Herron, and Louis Primavera. “Violence and the Media: A Psychological
Television violence, and media violence in general, has been a controversial topic for several years. The argument is whether young children are brainwashed into committing violent real-world crimes because of violent and pugnacious behavior exposed in mass media. In his article “No Real Evidence for TV Violence Causing Real Violence”, Jonathan Freedman, a professor of psychology at the University of Toronto and author of “Media Violence and Its Effect on Aggression: Assessing the Scientific Evidence”, discusses how television violence, claimed by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), does not cause real-world aggression among adolescents. The FCC determined to restrict violent television programming to late night hours only because their “scientific research” proves of increasing aggression among young viewers (Freedman Par. 2). Freedman goes on to explain that the FCC has no substantial scientific evidence stating that there is a correlation between fictional violence and real-world aggression among young audiences. He has completed research in 1984 and 2002 on the relationship between media violence to actual acts of violence on the street. Because he has completed research projects related to this topic, Freedman’s statistical evidence shows that there is a reduction in youth violence and it essentially does not cause real-world crimes (Freedman Par. 1). The FCC continues to claim that exposure to media violence does in fact increase aggression, and yet their readers continue to believe their fabrications. Freedman argues that people who research media violence tend to disregard and omit the opposing facts. No one type of violence is more effective on aggression than another type. There is no evidence showi...
Shapiro, M., & Chock, M. (2004). Media dependency and perceived reality of fiction and news . Journal of Broadcasting & electronic media, 48(4), 675-695.
Television violence causes children and teenagers to be less caring, to lose their inhibitions, and to be less sensitive. In a study on the connection between violence and television done with 1,565 teenage boys over a six-year period in London, William Belson, a British psychologist, found that every time a child saw someone being shot or killed on television they became less caring towards other people (Kinnear 26). William Belson also discovered that every time a child viewed this violence on television, they lost a fragment of their inhibitions towards others (Kinnear 26). In addition to William Belson’s study, studies done by many scientists and doctors show that seeing violence on television causes viewers to become less sensitive to the pain of others (Mudore 1).
...onditions that ensure an adequate counterbalance increasing consumption in some cases, end up having a negative effect on children. Children learn best through demonstration followed by imitation, with rewards for doing things the right way. While not all are affected the same way, it can be said that, in general, violence in the media affects attitudes, values and behaviors of users. You run the risk that children end up understanding that it is reasonably practicable to resort to violence. The fear is that the models of aggressive behavior can be considered suitable. Thus, in an investigation, a good proportion of children (third) defined as normal acts of violence they had seen him mightily little. It is not; here is a risk of direct imitation, but rather a change in terms of reference: where extreme violence appears to be normal any more light may seem harmless.