|
The discussion of violence on TV has become very heated and debated indeed. On the one hand you have a group of people who say that we control our own actions and that we are the only ones responsible for our actions (i.e., not parents, television, video games...). Then you have some that agree television violence increases the propensity of a person/child to emulate that violence, but that the effects are short-lived. They also say that violence only increases the likelihood of child violence by minor amounts, that it doesn't actually cause it, per se. Your final group says that television/movie/video game violence is pervasive and undermines the morality of children. They say that even the least violent among us can be pushed to violence by the "rush" they get from watching violence on television. All three points are very important to this issue.
Of course, most people lie between one of these three points. There are a number, however, who adhere religiously to one of the aforementioned points. It’s these arguments which are easier to discuss, since a known position is always easier to pin down than a shifting opinion. We may as well start with the last point (since information is more readily available) and progress through the spectrum in reverse.
The position is that violence tends to undermine positive behavioral patterns in children/teens due to its pervasiveness. This point deals with several key issues, such as stages of television-watching (and attention span), cognitive processes and reality checks, the end effects, and possible parental intervention.
According to Dr. Johnson, television-viewing is split into several different ages. Children under 18 months are incapable of investing the amount of attention required to watch any more than bits and pieces of television, preferring instead to go about their daily activities. They only pick small amounts of light and sound, rarely if ever putting any sequences of events together in their head. She says that at 2 ½ years, toddlers begin to pay attention to more of the content of television and that between three and five years, television, specifically cartoons, have a profound impact on children. By this age they begin to put together plots and find meaning in what they are viewing. In the middle and high school years teens understand that the violence isn’t real but it still tends to influence their behavior. However, Dr. Johnson says, their attention is mostly diverted to romantic, sexual, or pornographic materials. With younger children who are first “exploring” the world of television and beginning to understand it and who don’t yet know that the violence isn’t real, said violence can be a big player (how often have you seen children watching a program showcasing some form of violence and afterwords do Karate chops and kicks?). She feels that parents should limit the time their toddlers are allowed to watch television and that they should emphasize the un-reality of the situations.
The middle view isn’t readily publicized nor is it easy to find a source. As such, it will be stated here in order that readers know it exists and then we shall move on. Following the parenthetical example above, parents often do see their children “play-acting” violence from programs they’ve just seen. As a preventative measure or reality check the parents should instruct their children to calm down and not kick, karate chop, etc. in the house and never do it to someone else. This has a tendency to settle the children down and end the short-term effect that television violence has had on them.
It seems that there are exceedingly few people who deny that television affects the behavior of children at all, and as such, unfortunately, there is also very little information available. This side of the argument tends to believe that parents have more control over children than does the television, and also that common-sense prevails (that is, children realize the violence they are seeing isn’t real). A few talks between parents and children that the super-heroes on TV aren’t real should nicely “fix” the problem of reality questions. This group says that as long as children realize that the violence they see on television isn’t really happening and that there are consequences to such actions, children won’t emulate it.
In the end, no position is necessarily entirely right, nor does anyone know the true effects of violence on children. A detailed understanding of these three key arguments will help you, as a parent, decide what is right for your children. In the end it is your decision, and hopefully an understanding of all the sides of this issue will help you to decide wisely.
|
| |
