Taking Sides Paper
Brigham Young University
SFL 210, 002
Taking Sides: Media Violence
The issue of media violence and the effect it has on children has had major impacts in the work and research of many scientist and psychologists. Professor of communication Jib Fowles argues that the effects of exposure of media violence on children does not harm them and any results from such research are so slight that it can be ignored. The purpose of this paper is to critically analyze three flaws and one strength of the research done on the “No” side of the article “Is Media Violence Harmful to Children?”
The issue of Media Violence is a very controversial issue, it has had many people and social psychologists wonder about the influence that media has on children. The article “Is Media Violence Harmful to Children?” is split into two sections and Professor Fowles is on the No side of the article. He states that results of research on the harmful effects of media violence on children are either so vague that they can be openly interpreted to something different or so insignificant that they can be ignored. Fowles side of the article focuses on criticizing the opposite side. He claims that there is not enough evidence on the media for being the primary source of violence that infects children. He finds several interpretations to each of the research studies that claim that there are negative effects on the exposure to media violence. He makes a point that viewers are not incompetent and that they actively interpret and process violence in the media to know the reality of the violence they viewed. He argues that the studies that were done in laboratories do not relate to the real world even so much that the results are discredited and do not apply to real life experiences.
The first flaw found in this article is the flaw of no control group. This is a flaw because without a control group you cannot compare and evaluate your...