Analysis Of Richard Jones's Essay On Violent Media

Before beginning my analysis, it is important to summarize Jones argument. Jones idolizes violent media as an excellent way for shaping children’s attitude and perception of life, believing it gives a positive effect. Jones also believes it can be positive for the children if are not isolated from it. He disagrees with some people’s views on how they think violent media will lead a negative effect because they believe it keeps children from expressing themselves and their feelings. Jones claims violent

According to Gerard Jones’s “ Violent Media Is Good For Kids,” violent media indeed has a remarkable influence upon the minds and general growth patterns of children. Jones argues that violent media can actually have positive effects on young people.

Jones acknowledges these points. However, he refutes them by saying that “it’s helped hundreds of people for everyone its hurt, and it can help far more if we learn how to use it” (Jones). In other words, when we channel violent media into heroic battles of good versus evil, it can empower a child in need. This rebuttal contributes to the objectivity of the essay. It shows that the author did his research so well that he can recognize opposing viewpoints and refute them.

Violent media; a strikingly relevant phenomenon millions are becoming captivated by. It’s everywhere you go, on your phone, the TV or on the computer. As much as people try to avoid it, they soon realize it’s ineluctable. Gerard Jones, a comic-book author, released a brief report, “Violent Media Is Good for Kids” that argued violent media is not only beneficial to children but also inspiring. He goes on to support his claim by sampling his own personal experiences. However, not all forms of violent media are necessarily helpful. Some are more preferable while others can harm them. To an extent, violent media can help children by helping them release built up emotions, learn lessons regarding the real world, as well as create something for themselves.

Jones uses personal stories to relate his argument to his audience. I believe Jones’ targeted audience are parents that are skeptical about exposing their children to violent media and society as a whole. Society’s stance on violence is a negative one and many are conditioned to be opposed to it. Many of my beliefs, even prior to reading this article, go hand in hand with Jones contradicting a popular belief stated by the World Health Organization, saying, “laws and policies that make violent behavior an offense sends a message to society that it is unacceptable (World Health Organization).” Jones’ goal is to reach an open-minded audience and persuade an older, more traditional audience to adopt a new view. I speculate that this article would not be effective against the majority of people opposed to these views, simply because it’s so contradictory to common belief.

When it comes to the topic of violent media, some of us would readily agree it’s a controversial subject as to whether kids should or shouldn’t be exposed to it. This is because many children who view violent media react negatively rather than not being affected at all. Where this agreement usually ends, however, is on the question of what effects does it have on children. Whereas some are convinced that it is a healthy alternative for kids to express themselves, others maintain that it causes kids to become more aggressive and contributes to juvenile crimes.

According to Gerald Jones ""¦head-bonking cartoons, bloody videogames, playground karate, toy guns gives children a tool to master their rage." In a bid to further reinforce his assertion, Jones uses his own childhood as an example of how violent entertainment can benefit kids. In his opinion, "Hulk", a fictional character, helped him become more self-assured and confident. The author further points out that his son seemed to have overcome the fear of climbing trees after he (the author) read him Tarzan comics. In Jones' opinion, by shielding our children from all the violence in the media and denying them a chance to watch their favorite heroes, we could end up "confusing them about their natural aggression in the same way the Victorians confused their children about their sexuality." Thus according to the author, shielding our kids in the aforementioned way does more harm than good in the final analysis. Sometimes in 1997, Evan Ramsey, a student at Bethel Regional High School, carried a shotgun to school from where he went on a shooting spree. During the incident, Ramsey shot at four people killing two. Although the jury is still out on what really motivated the shootings in this case, Ruthus (2011) notes that Ramsey was an avid player of video games such as Resident Evil, Die Hard and Doom. Indeed, Ramsey as Ruthus points out was fond of playing these games for hours on end. What did these video games

In the writing of Gerard Jones “Violent Media is Good for Kids” is very interesting essay in which he describes how violent media can help kids to overcome obstacles, but whether it is convincing or not, I am not truly sure because the way the essay is written is biased. Jones as writer is making this controversial topic to gain more audience to read his writings, in addition, this essay fails in detail, it needs more statistics to support the examples that Jones addresses in his essay. Also, we need more information about what is the opinion of parents of these kids that believed violet media is good so, we need the statistics of the studies of the psychologist that support the idea of good

In fairy tales, children are pushed into ovens, have their hands chopped off, are forced to sleep in coal bins, and must contend with wolves who've eaten their grandmother. In myths, rape, incest, all manner of gruesome bloodshed, child abandonment, and total debauchery are standard fare. We see more of the same in Bible stories, accentuated with dire predictions of terrors and abominations in an end of the world apocalypse that is more horrifying than the human imagination can even grasp.

While it gives the impression that Gerald Jones could be wrong in his arguments, there is an aspect of truth at least from his case studies he took in his research. In addition, while no one would support exposure of the young children to violence and violent scenes, not at least in a stable civilization like America, it is quite evident that violent media provides the children and the young people in the society with certain message in life. It becomes clear that the

In the article, “Violent Media Is Good for Kids”, the author, Gerard Jones, begins by providing background information about himself. As a child, Jones was taught that violence was wrong, and as he grew up, he learned that violent comics and stories aided him to become an action movies and comic book writer. In his article, the author addresses why violent media are good for children. He points out that it helps them transform better socially, explore and conquer their feelings, and improves self-knowledge. Jones purpose is to inform readers about the positive use of violent media on children. The author uses rhetorical appeals of pathos and ethos, and stylistic techniques such as allusions and repetitions to create his argument.

I chose this topic because I want to be a videogame designer and I wanted to defend my right to create what I want. Unfortunately, after researching this topic it is clear that it is no longer possible to say violent media is completely harmless. Videogames and television do have harmful effects on children and young adults. Research has been done since the 1950’s and almost all studies show clear evidence that media violence does cause increased violent tendencies, desensitization, and antisocial behavior – which is the same as sociopathic and psychopathic behavior, it does not mean introverted.

In 2000, Pulitzer-winning journalist Richard Rhodes published an article titled “The Media Violence Myth,” through the “American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression,” a liberal establishment dedicated to the protection of the First Amendment right to free speech. Despite coming from a background plagued with violence and abuse, Rhodes has studied nuclear history and weapons use for over 20 years and has developed a unique opinion about the media’s effect on public violence. In “The Media Violence Myth,” Rhodes aims to convince his readers that the media does not contribute to violence through its portrayal. He attempts this in discrediting his key opponent, Dave Grossman, through ad hominem, red herrings, and violent diction. These

“Violent Media is Good for Kids,” written by Gerard Jones, is an interesting argument about the positive aspects of violent media. He has narrated his own experience as a child about the impact of violent media. Jones has further developed his argument to convince parents about the importance of violent media by noting that exposing kids to violent media helps the kids to overcome their fear. Jones is focused on parents and teachers, both of whom restricts the exposure of kids to violent media. He also notes the skeptical thinking, which argues that violent media have a negative impression on kids. His argument is catchy and strong based on his own realizations of the world and experience. Let us discuss how he has made the argument realistic.

There are two assumptions in the Jones’s article, and one of them is underlying. When Jones asserts violent media embolden himself and his son to overcome fear and be brave to everything, it strongly imply people gain confidence by watching violent media. Another of the author’s assumption is that violent media teach children to control their emotion. In the article, Jones states “people pulling themselves out of emotional traps by immersing themselves in violent stories” and “Pretending to have superman powers helps children conquer the feeling of powerlessness…” to assume violent media assists children when they are facing emotional issues. While children cannot take control of their emotions, the superheroes in the violent media become an