Violent Media's Call to Duty

Violent video games have become increasingly popular. Not only are adults enjoying the new fad, but young children are too. Many studies have been conducted in order to determine how the newest violent media has been affecting the children of today. It is a common misconception that the children who play these violent games, watch movies and television shows grow into a violent adult, while the children who more sheltered from this media become model citizens. In the article, “Whodunit—The Media?” Maggie Cutler addresses the controversy that follows the notion that violent media has a negative effect on children and asserts her opinion that instead of exploiting the media violence as harming this latest generation, working with the media will prove beneficial to the safety and sanity of the children. Violence in the media is repeatedly blamed for violence in children, while it needs to be realized that there are so many other factors that feed into the behavioral development of a child. “Media violence is a risk factor that, working in concert with others, can exacerbate bad behavior.” (Cutler). The effects of violent media have been seen in children; however other risk factors contribute to trigger the response. There is no way of noting that violent media alone causes bad behavior. “One of the reasons so many media violence studies have been done is that the phenomenon may be too complex to study conclusively” (Cutler). The complexity of the accusation against the media is preventing any solid conclusion, and many of those studies have gone on to note that violent media affects children who have already been exposed to other various risk factors. To say violent media itself is corrupting youngsters is unfair to say the least. If the main focus is to ensure the safety of children, a second look needs to be taken into how the media in itself affects children. The various studies that have been conducted make many claims on how the media supposedly affects children the way it does. These studies have been done with little elaboration on not only how to fix the issue, but also the details of why children are affected in the way studies claim. “Several studies have shown that violent boys tend to watch more TV, choose more violent content and get more enjoyment out of it. But the studies admittedly can 't show exactly how or why that happens” (Cutler). With this information, there are a plethora of conclusions to be made in favor of either side of the problem. It could be said that this media affected the child, and inspired their violent tendencies while creating an addiction to the shows. But on the other hand, that the violent child may favor shows with violence because it provides an expressive release they feel inside. The focal point of the violence debate is losing sight its purpose. Fighting violent media has been all about keeping this generation sane and safe. “Studies have even found that a ‘cathartic effect’ of media violence makes some kids less aggressive” (Cutler). The stigma that follows the media and its violence as having a negative effect is distracting from the benefits it has to offer. It is time studies start to focus on children’s safety and well-being, rather than combating violence in the media itself. Utilizing this seemingly terrible type of media will have its benefits. Finding a balance between the two opposing arguments against media will prove beneficial. It is time cynics take a step back from combating violent media to pursue more evident triggers, and let this generation take advantage of a form of expressive release. Rather than exploit the media as public enemy number one, take a step back and consider how this popular fad can contribute to the safety and sanity of this generation’s children.

Work Cited
Cutler, Maggie. "Whodunit-- The Media?" thenation.com. The Nation 8 Mar. 2001 Web. 6 Nov. 2012.

Cited: Cutler, Maggie. "Whodunit-- The Media?" thenation.com. The Nation 8 Mar. 2001 Web. 6 Nov. 2012.