Overwhelming amount of evidence
This is one of the most effective arguments that support the possibility that aggressiveness from various individuals is a direct link to the media violence influence. This situation presents various scenarios which have occurred and are directly linked with the watching of violent scenes which have reached the population through the media. The evidence presented indicated that the violence committed by the individuals was directly linked to watching media that was violent in nature. The acts of violence committed act are a replica of the scenes which had been watched by the individuals who committed them. After having the firsthand experience with the violent media they went ahead and tried to replicate the various scenarios of violence which they had witnessed in the media. Replicating of the scenes viewed is a strong indication on the amount of effect that the media has.
A perfect example of evidence is that of a twelve year old boy who watches a professional wrestler than kills a friend by imitation the actions of the professional wrestler. This without doubt is a direct indication that violence has direct link with the aggression of the boy. How effective it is, is illustrated when the boy tries to imitate the professional wrestler. The students in columbine who were avid fans of a violent video game are also very effective in illustrating the effect of media violence. By playing the violent video games it encouraged the boys to kill their teachers and other twelve students.
Downplaying of the Impact of Media Violence
There is another most effective way of illustrating the impact that media violence has on the various forms of aggression exhibited by individuals. The media companies who sell out the violent media to the people try to downplay the impact that media violence has on the aggression of the people. This is done by irresponsibly brushing off the views that various people have formed on the impact of violent media. This is a clear indication that there is some bit of truth, if not the whole truth that the media companies are trying to hide. If they do not downplay the matter there is a clear indication that they will lose the revenue which they gain through the various endorsements and advertisement revenue that they get.
Media companies often argue out that the violence exhibited in the media is merely an illustration of what is happening in the real. This is a clear indication that they feel that they air violent media; the audience is seeing what they often experience in the real world. This reaction by the media is a deliberate attempt to confuse the people what they should really believe in about the violent. When the beneficiaries of the violent media try to cover up their mistakes it is a clear indication that we should believe that aggression is caused by the violent media and is a very effective way in proving the point put across.
The substantial magnitude of violent media
This point put across is not a very effective way to support that violent media has resulted in the various forms of aggression. This has been the conclusion which has been reached indication on how with the rise of consumption of violent media there has been a rise in the violent crimes. However these statistics do not clearly indicate the casual relationship that exists between violent crimes and violent media. This is a very clear indication that the effects of violent media are not adequately supported making the statement not convincing enough.
Magnitude of the effect of violence is not that strong
The magnitude of the effect of media violence on the aggression of the people has continued to be exaggerated by the psychologists and politicians. However there has been evidence which clearly indicate that youth violence is declining as opposed to the perception that it has been on the increase. Provision of this evidence is a very effective way in illustrating that media violence does not caused aggression. The support of such a statement by convincing facts is a very effective way.
Murder rates in various countries such as Canada was at very record low in 1999. This is when it was compared with the period of 1970. Over the years the amount of audience access to media violence has been increasing. However with the illustration of such statistics it is an indication that violent media is not the cause of aggression. During the 1970s and the 1960s the likelihood of murders in school was very high as opposed to now as shown by the FBI records. Although there have been several incidences of murder in schools the number of person killed has been low. The presentation of such clear facts on the trends of murder with the development of violent media is an effective way to support the statement given. During the early 1990s the rates of murder have been dropping steadily and dramatically and this effectively supports that violent media has not had any effect on the aggression of the people.
Inflation of the responsibility of violent media by psychologists
Most of the scientific organizations have been coming up with statements which seem to agree that media violence is harmful as it causes aggression. Even though such institutions run by professional researchers and psychologists have made such unequivocal statements on the effects of violent media there is certainty that such institutions have not carried out thorough research. Without scientific review in making such statements, it is a clear indication of the irresponsibility. When such institutions do not act scientifically in making such statement it effectively shows that violent media does not cause aggression as it has not been scientifically proven.
Through their irresponsibility most institutions do not show the ill effects of media violence. These institutions merely state that aggression is caused by exposure to violent media without proving it scientifically. Such irresponsibility by scientific institutions is a clear indication that there are no hard facts to support the bad effects of violent media. This is a very effective in refuting that aggression is not caused by violent media. With no prove scientifically it clear conflicts the notion that aggression is caused by violent media.
The evidence provided is not that strong
Through the provision of the various incidences of violence it tries to refute that they are not caused by the violent media. In trying to deny such claims while providing evidence that indicate that the perpetrators of violence have tried to commit violent acts while replicating what they have seen is not an effective way. The evidence that is provided clearly indicates the relationship between the violent media and the acts of violence that has been carried out. When students kill one another after watching violent media indicates the influence that media has.
This is an apparent form of diversion from the real facts that are evident. This tries to bring doubts into the various perceptions that could have possibly led to the violent acts. Some of the reasons given include: witchcraft, parents fault, moral breakdown, lack of religion and culture. These possibilities are not well elaborated making it an ineffective way of presenting the document.
Violent media clearly results in aggression from the persons who view. Evident facts are illustrated when the children watch wrestling players or play violent video games and have the desire to replicate what they have seen. When they replicate the violent acts that they have seen it clearly indicates that such aggression is caused by violent media. This has resulted in deaths of their fellow colleagues and rise in violent crimes. The media have tried to downplay the ill effects of violent media which indicates cynical behaviors as they would lose out. These facts would clearly prompt me to limit the exposure of my child. This would entail exposing children to educative media and fully shutting them out of violent media. This calls for the need of limiting children from all forms of violent media.