http://voices.yahoo.com/the-effects-tv-violence-teenagers-237680.html?cat=25
This article from Yahoo! discusses how TV can increase teenager violence. From a young age children watch television as a way to stay occupied. Teens now see violent acts on a variety of television programs and see it as a normal part of life. When they watch TV and see role models using violence they come to accept it more. Violence in television programs can lessen teen's morals. Television becomes the main source of information in teen's lives, over books and newspapers. Not all teens are violent by nature but violence in television seems to play an important role.
Do you think that violence on television is carried over into real life with teenagers? Does television make violence seem like it is just apart of everyday life? Do you see a decrease in morals in teens because of violent acts on television? What other negative behaviors do you think are shown on television that teenagers might see as normal, or copy? What shows have you encountered where you see a lot of violence?
prompt 2:
ReplyDeleteMost of the comments written on the article disagree with the writer's position in their article. 5 of the posts said something on the lines that TV violence can make an impact on some people, but not as much as the article is making it seem. It seems as if the commenters were almost overlooking the situation, possibly because they themselves have not seen a person extremely effected by the violence in media. One comment did bring up the fact that they do not believe TV is the thing making an impact and that your childhood upbringing has much to do with it as well.
My guess on what these commenters value is their innocence. Most appear to be teenagers or young adults and seem to assume TV violence has not changed anyone a large amount. Their point of view has everything to do with their surroundings because they are coming off as biased to what they think they already know.
I think the fact that mcardle.20 used a part of "The Method" to support the initial claim. This person found repetition within the comment section, which helped bolster the claim with evidence. However, instead of going with the majority, I like the fact that this person viewed the dispute from his/her own perspective. This person goes against the grain and voices his/her own position on the argument. The comment sticks to the prompt by addressing what the commenters value as a whole and what the thought process of the commenters was. To lengthen the response a bit, I would suggest addressing the questions Catherine posted, and possibly using more evidence to support claims; however, overall, I believe the comment is focused, to the point, and well put together.
ReplyDeletePrompt 6:
ReplyDeleteBuilding off of what Mcardle.20 said, the article is rather controversial as many of the comments agree as well as disagree. Edward Raver the author dictates many problems with television depicting how there is little to no benefit, when it is also the cause of demoralized adolescents. The Author throughout the article displays objective reasoning in the data, substantiating it with numerous cited sources. Such discussions are often more open to persuading if evidence is brought up, however the author does little to build off any of the arguments through further analysis. Moreover there is no perspective from the other stance as to what supports teens watching television. Another unfortunate case is most of the article is consistent ranting from one message to the next, such as each paragraph opens with a new message. In one message the author depicts how television has caused the loss of books, yet the paragraph talks little of actual books effects. Despite little diving into the analysis of the message, the author at times does well in building off of other sources, successfully integrating them into the essay.
From what Catherine was asking, ultimately violence does carry over into teenagers. While there is little evidence proving how there are direct implications, consistent violence towards uneducated adolescences cannot in any way be beneficial. With Mcardle.20’s opinion, there are not huge factors that show television’s influence on kids making it difficult to determine, although many of the comment’s claim there are little to no adverse effects. One problem is how some channels can actually offer information. The discovery and history channel often gives excellent sources of information which the author seamlessly forgot to take into account.
I believe Mitch did a good job responding to this post. He addresses what the author is trying to dictate to his readers and provide evidence from the article on how the author supports his claim. Not only did he respond to the prompt but he also mention that he is building off what Mcardle.20 had already stated in his post instead of saying the same the thing that Mcardle.20 indicated in his comment. Lastly Mitch answered the questions Catherine asked at the end of her blog.
ReplyDeleteI'm using prompt 6.
ReplyDeleteThe author begins by explaining that violence is an influence on teenage acts of violence. It is clear that this will be his stance throughout the article. He explains why teenagers watch violent television and then goes into the effects. The author explains why violent TV can desensitize the viewer. The comfort level is making an easy transition to violence. The author goes on to talk about how violent TV can take away morals of teenagers. He offers up a lot of evidence for his claim, which shows he stands firmly behind it. He builds off other articles' points. For example, one article was about violence in urban teenagers and he added to this statement by further explaining how an urban setting can play a pivotal role. I agree with Mitch, in that the author does a good job with building off other sources.
I think it is definitely possible for violent TV to corrupt teenagers. I do not see direct evidence that teens are losing their morals from violent TV, but the evidence makes sense. It is hard to say that this television is the reason, but it is possible. Personally, I do not watch very violent TV shows but I guess shows like 24 and any action movies are good examples.
Kelly's comment is good in the way that it addresses most of the points in mentioning what claim the author is attempting to make and some of the evidence the author uses to support the claim. She also takes the time to answer the facilitator's questions, contributing to the conversation to the blog. On the other hand, I feel like the comment is lacking in the way that none of the comments on the article are addressed to further respond to the prompt and show how the readers feel about the topic and the author's authority on the subject. Also the inclusion of more specific evidence that the author gives about the subject and what persuasive techniques were used would have been helpful as well.
ReplyDelete