Happy Tree Friends

What’s Up DOC? A Bloody Outrage, That’s what In essay “What’s up DOC? A bloody Outrage, That’s what” by Katherine Ellison, it shows growing concern for the youth of today with the wide availability of the media. The article was about a cartoon that seems to appeal to children at first but then actually turns quite violent. Her prime example indicates in this sentence that “pedophile e-mail and teenage-boobs Web sites-here comes this new swamp-thing mass entertainment: the Internet “Flash cartoon,” pared down to pure shock value” (Ellison 354). Ellison’s emotional, evaluating and aggressive style of word choice shows and persuades parents to be aware violent of mass media entertainment. Ellison starts out her article by stating that she found her 6 year old son watching a cartoon on the internet called “Happy Tree Friends.” She explains the setting of a seemingly innocent cartoon. The cartoon then takes a turn for the worse. She explains that one of the cute characters suffers a nervous breakdown and savagely murders the other cute fuzzy critters. The author then goes on to say, though she lives in a very liberal area of California; “Yet I would readily skip my next yoga class to march with right wing-fundamentalists in a cultural war against “Happy Tree Friends” (354). Ellison uses the words of UCLA neuroscientist Marco Lacoboni by telling us that children will do what they see, especially if they see it over and over. Ellison also claims that the UCLA neuroscientist goes on to say: “Not only do you get exposed and desensitized; you’re primed, facilitated, almost invited to act that way” (354). She also talks of keeping large advertisers from attaching themselves to these types of programs. The ads make massive profitability of video “Happy Tree Friends.” The author says she tries to get to the advertisers, to shame them for their involvement in such programs. She is unsuccessful because of the way that the advertising is random and big corporation’s buys bulk ads through third parties.