PlanetPapers.com RSS Feedhttps://www.planetpapers.com/ Invasion Of the Body Snatchers In the 1956 film "Invasion of the Body Snatchers", the birth of something horrifying takes place in Santa Mira, California. Dr. Bennell and Becky are two long lost loves from their youth and are reunited after years of no contact. Upon returning from a business trip Dr. Bennell notices odd occurances that start unraveling before him. After a few instances of strange behavior among Dr.Bennell's patients begin to take place he quickly becomes aware of an imminent epidemic spreading through the town. The parallels between the theme of the film and rising fears of communism and related topics of concern during that time are captivating. Communism was an ideology originating in the Soviet Union with the ideas of establishing a classless, stateless society with a common ownership in terms of production. The idea was that the commonly disliked supremacy would be overthrown. Out of WWII came The Cold War, where during the war they were common allies against the Nazi regime, they now had disagreements in how to re-build there individual societies. The Cold War essentially was a competition of sorts between nations in terms of ideologies, industry, military and in terms of progress with space exploration. The Soviet Union launched Sputnik when the U.S wasn't even close to such an incredible feat. This was one of the many catalysts propelling the Cold War that lasted for nearly five decades. America's reaction to communism came in the form of taking drastic measures against this form of thinking with Macarthyism, Hollywood Blacklisting and in not so blatant ways in films like "The Invasion of the Body Snatchers." Growing fears that the U.S could be overthrown by this new ideology emerging ripped through the hearts and minds of a great deal of Americans, from small country homes to government leaders. In the film, the idea of something being off or different was apparent at the beginning, however, the good small town doctor, Dr. Bennell was in denial of people not recognizing there own relatives. He thought those who worried that their relatives were overtaken by some other force was absurd and that it was just a mass hysteria. It wasn't until he began to see for himself the body casts of his friends and loved ones in transformation that he began to believe it himself. At first the pod developed itself inside of a greenhouse, it then 2007-12-08T17:54:05-05:00 http://75.150.148.189/free-essay/Invasion-Of-the-Body-Snatchers-6808.aspx Roles of Television hi forum i found a new article site about role of television. Our modern society is a conflicting society. This can be observed in people’s minds about the role of the television in their life. Everybody blames the television for violence and sex, but almost every family in the United States has at least one television set. We must be more differentiated in talking about the influence of television in our life, especially concerning the growth of our children. The question is not: whether television is good or bad, but: which program is good or bad. There are various good programs on television, and we have to learn how to choose them. We should teach children about 2006-05-26T09:59:26-04:00 http://75.150.148.189/free-essay/Roles-of-Television-6515.aspx Roles of Television hi forum i found a new article site about role of television. Our modern society is a conflicting society. This can be observed in people’s minds about the role of the television in their life. Everybody blames the television for violence and sex, but almost every family in the United States has at least one television set. We must be more differentiated in talking about the influence of television in our life, especially concerning the growth of our children. The question is not: whether television is good or bad, but: which program is good or bad. There are various good programs on television, and we have to learn how to choose them. We 2006-05-26T09:58:30-04:00 http://75.150.148.189/free-essay/Roles-of-Television-6514.aspx Media Violence (Complete with Bibliograhy) Psychological Reasoning Is Media Violence Harmful to Children? Media violence is getting more attention now than ever, as a precursor to children becoming violent teens and adults. Does watching a violent cartoon before school in the morning influence children to go to school and show violence toward their peers? The verdict seems to still be out on this issue. Some studies show children can differentiate between cartoon violence and violent shows depicting real people such as research by Deakin University lecturer David Ritchie. Other research conflicts Ritchie's findings. “Many children, especially preschool age, cannot differentiate between animated/fantasy, violence and reality based violence.” (NCTA funded three-year research study 1994-97) 1 Some of the reasons the cartoon violence is so damaging to this age group are that the characters are not always the villains, the "good" characters are also committing the violent acts. The character involved in the violent or aggressive acts are not punished for the act, and even though in real-life the act would cause death or severe trauma there is no scene depicting this. Many times the afflicted character will get back up and shake it off and be back to normal. This can be very confusing for younger children. "Children who watched the violent shows were more likely to strike out at playmates, argue, disobey authority and were less willing to wait for things than those children who watched non-violent programs." (Grebner, University of Penn.) 2 More surprising and disturbing is the way violence is distributed among adult and child programming. Violence was found to occur in 69% of children’s programming versus 57% for adult programming. Even to those that state media violence is not harmful to children, these facts should be upsetting. (Kaiser Foundation study 1994-97) 3 A study conducted by the Indiana University School of Medicine has shown some proof of brain changes in youth by using MRI scans. Researchers got together a group of teens who were known to be aggressive, along with a group of non-aggressive teens. Both played violent video games and then MRI scans were conducted. Researchers found that there was a change in brain function only in the known aggressive teens after playing these violent games. “Initial evidence from the study demonstrates that adolescents with disruptive behavior disorders have different frontal lobe activation patterns than teens without the disorder," said principal investigator Vincent 2006-02-28T11:42:08-05:00 http://75.150.148.189/free-essay/Media-Violence-Complete-with-Bibliograhy-6441.aspx A Cross-Cultural Catalyst The following was written, 20 April 2005. In 21st century American society, there seems to be a growing infatuation with technology and mass media in the midst of natural disaster and terrorist attacks. Specifically, Americans seem to be inundated by so much television that they no longer have the capacity to think outside the box, and would rather be immersed in the ‘idiot box’ than in a good book or a news paper. Mr. Murray, “Washington bureau chief for CNBC and the Wall Street Journal columnist” (Hess 275), remarked on his frustration with television and its effect on the public during a heated debate among several of today’s experts, in the book The Media and the War on Terrorism. I am constantly amazed at how little depth you can achieve even with a full hour of television to play with every night and with a pretty sophisticated and intelligent audience relative to the average TV audience. I am amazed and frustrated and shocked at how much more I can do with an 835-word column. (Hess 289) Is it the medium of television which lacks the capacity to transmit knowledge, or is it the viewer’s inability to constructively comprehend what is being interjected into their intellect? In his article, “To Analyze a Video Text,” Robert Scholes invites and challenges his readers to critically analyze video text and to look beyond the pleasure and surrender created by these cultural narratives. Scholes warns that it is “very hard to resist the pleasure of this text, and we cannot accept the pleasure without, for the bewildering minute at least, also accepting the ideology that is so richly and closely entangled the story that we construct from the video” (622). The ideology presented in television is entrenched by the cultural values of American society (Scholes 620). These “video texts confirm viewers in their ideological positions and reassure them as to their membership in a collective cultural body. This function, which operates in the ethical-political realm, is an extremely important element of video textuality and, indeed, an extremely important dimension of all the mass media” (Scholes 620). He further explains that “we are dealing with and archetypal narrative that has been adjusted for maximum effect within a particular political and social context” (Scholes 622) and that “by ‘getting’ the story, we prove our competence and demonstrate our membership in a cultural community” (Scholes 621). All the meaning that 2006-01-25T08:11:46-05:00 http://75.150.148.189/free-essay/A-Cross-Cultural-Catalyst-6385.aspx WHy you really don't hate reality television. We believe that: If you have been watching celebrity BB, you’ll know who Germaine Greer is. She shocked many when she entered the BB house, because she was originally opposed to reality TV, but she said that, in her defence that, “Reality TV is not the end of civilisation as we know it, it is civilisation as we know it.â€? § To an extent that’s true; that’s why it is getting such high ratings- 14.1 million viewers watched the I’m a Celebrity Final. That’s why it is taking over our televisions. Because Producers have recognised that the one thing people love more than scripted drama is real drama. Not something created by writers. The naturalness and the reality of it make these shows more enticing. § We can laugh at and make fun of the contestants, finding their arguments and the misery caused by them thoroughly enjoyable. But unlike real life, no one need know and no one needs to get hurt, so we don’t feel guilty. § Gives ordinary people chances that normally are not available and can change their lives. Anyone who is talented enough, even a tramp, could become a singing superstar through Pop Idol, and those who don’t manage to do so become overnight celebrities. § Gives you a different outlook on life: inspires you- seeing average people achieve their dreams- motivates you to do the same. § Makes you feel better about yourself, more appreciative of what you have § Or make you re examine your life and realise that you are not happy. E.g. “Wife swapâ€?- contestants feel better about their marriage-strong. Or realize that they don’t have a good marriage- giving them the opportunity to achieve one with some one else. Viewers do this as ell. § WE can explore different “what if?â€? situations from the comfort of our own home. § Cheaper to produce- money saved on actors, makeup, costume etc. § The majority of reality TV is on the channels that taxpayers money do not fund, like ITV and Channel 4, so those who do not enjoy reality TV are not paying to see something they do not take pleasure in viewing. § Believe it or not: reality TV is beneficial to society- it helps us see ourselves as people in a different light. Many are in support of charities and a new reality show called “Vote for meâ€? is being used 2005-09-19T18:09:50-04:00 http://75.150.148.189/free-essay/WHy-you-really-don-t-hate-reality-television_-6235.aspx Resurrection In the movie RESURRECTION we once again are facing good and evil. But for now lets go back in time. If we will remember all the fairy tails, then we can see that all of them are based upon principles of good and evil. In CINDERELLA, Cinderella is an object of good and her stepmother is evil, at the end good wins. In BEAUTY AND THE BEAST, Belle is good and Gaston is evil, and once again superior wins. But we always ask one question; why did good win? Well the answer is- the power of love is the one who always wins. In CINDERELLA, Cinderella loves her prince Charming, in BEAUTY AND THE BEAST, Belle loves the Beast, and that bond between them helps them, it gives them the strength that defeats evil powers. The evil never has anyone to count on, to support them, to love them. Love is like water, there is nothing that stands on its way. Now let’s go into the era of Homo Erectus, when people just established first signs of civilization. Why did people worshiped so many gods? Well because people couldn’t explain simple natural events like thunder or earthquakes, and that’s why they had to sacrifice an animal or like Mayas were sacrificing people. They thought that if they angered their gods, they’d forgive them. In 1400’s when the question of religion got in the ways, many wars broke down. When Joan of Arc got those messages from God and they led to English defeat by French, English church told people that she was a heretic and witch. At that time people were uneducated, so English church took an advantage of population and burned Joan of Arc. Well maybe here good didn’t win, but that courage of hers gave French people self-confidence and nationalism rose once again. In 1920, nearly 500 years later after her death, the Church retracted its judgment of heresy and declared Joan a saint. In the movie RESURRECTION, we once more see good fighting evil, but in this story evil is not represented as one person, it’s represented as a group of people. Here Edna’s father is the first character who was a bad character, but about that we found out only from Edna herself. She tells us that when she was really young she got pregnant, and her father called a horse doctor to make an abortion for her. 2005-09-17T19:44:27-04:00 http://75.150.148.189/free-essay/Resurrection-6232.aspx Why Nothing is Interesting WHY NOTHING IS INTERESTING? When one contemplates how the "show about nothing" could be so comical one starts to wonder just how nothing can provide such an interesting topic for the comedies of life. In life something is what people think about. People worry about details or they worry about the big picture. The little nothings that trouble people only for a single moment of a single day are quickly forgotten. Rather its a place to hide at work or a bad day with a coworker little nothings are soon forgotten. Seinfeld takes those little nothings and combines them to create something which is truly something. From a logical perspective nothing is a mathematical impossibility. You never truly have 0 percent of anything, as you always have a small fraction of all other things by the inherant nature of matter and the atom. Nothingness is as close to a thing realized in practice as is infinity. From this vantage point to have "nothing" created in such a way as to allow for the creation of bountiful and infinite storylines and laughter seems logical. If "nothing" is close to everything, then why call it just something when nothing is nearly as likely to exist as infinity? A show about something seems rather lame as all shows claim to be about something. So a show about nothing was born. The writers of Seinfeld without doubt understood the inherant similarities between nothing and infinity. From nothingness came everything if you believe in the big bang theory. If you believe in creationism then god created everything from nothing. Again nothing seems to lie at the heart of all great creations. In life its not about how much substance one has. Rather its about how much one does with the knowledge of one's own nothingness that one soon acquires. In Seinfeld, George wrestles with the knowledge of his limitations as a short, bald, fat man, who can't attract the right girl. Kramer struggles with the knowledge that he has not fully realized one well crafted scheme in his life. Elaine worries with the fact that she can not hold onto a good boyfriend for long, nor a good job. Jerry ponders the lives of his nothing friends as well as his own Lex Luthurs which seem to always thwart his plans to find his own Lois Lane and live the life of Superman. The fabulous four 2005-08-24T22:09:28-04:00 http://75.150.148.189/free-essay/Why-Nothing-is-Interesting-6211.aspx Violence & Media The other day, I was watching a documentary on “Fast Times At Ridge Mont High.” Originally, they had a scene where moviegoers would see full frontal nudity of a man. When sent in to Universal, the movie was rated X. Why is it that full female nudity is only rated R, but male nudity must carry a X rating? When the director asked that question, Universal said, “The male form is more aggressive.” I thought for a long while about this. I think it only goes to artistic value, but obviously other see the word aggressive to also me offensive. I bring this up only because it relates on a certain level to our discussion in the Entertainment Group. Violence is dealt with very much the same way. However, I don’t think I have ever heard of a move being rated X due to too much violence. It is and should be the viewers choice to let certain movies/television shows affect them. Violence in movies or television is sometimes necessary to accurately portray a type of person or a particular idea, time period, lifestyle, etc. For example, The Godfather. This movie is about gangsters. Hello! Violent much? Yeah, violence is necessary to get the point of this movie across. As it is in Requiem Of A Dream, The Basketball Diaries, The Doom Generation, Fight Club, Natural Born Killers, American History X, etc. The directors of these movies are trying to show the viewer what these types of people are going through and why they do the things they do. And they are trying to show that truthfully. Even if it means being disgusted or angry with the characters. They want the raw stuff. And frankly, we want to see it. Americans love that stuff. I may not be a violent person or even approve of violence, but if I want to get a good idea of someone else’s life or point of view, you gotta see the bad stuff. I think the term rubberneck was originated by Americans. We love violence. Does it always have a positive effect? Certainly not. But there are many other things that come into play when defending violence in movies and television. First and foremost, 2005-01-06T03:00:41-05:00 http://75.150.148.189/free-essay/Violence-Media-5986.aspx The Evolution of the Family on Television The Evolution of the Family on Television Introduction Television is not just a form of entertainment, it is also an excellent way to study society’s ever-changing families. From the beginning of the history of television in the early 1950’s to present day, there have been many television shows and sitcoms about the common North American family. Today’s sitcoms have “single-parent households, several friends and roommates, gay relationships and unmarried adults whose lives revolve around the workplace” (Terry). This is very different compared to the old-fashioned nuclear family unit of mom, dad, and the kids in past decades. The stories or themes are a reflection of societal beliefs, attitudes and behaviours of the typical family of the time. Television is often evolving with North American families to better portray or resemble them on TV. This can be seen through the different family shows throughout the decades, from Leave it to Beaver in the pre-1970’s to The Brady Bunch, to The Cosby Show in the 1980’s and finally to Malcolm in the Middle in present day. Significant change among family shows can be clearly shown in these selected programs. Although the typical North American family has constantly transformed over the years, television sitcoms have reflected and met this change. Leave It to Beaver (Pre-1970’s) A classic among classics, Leave it to Beaver appeared on television in 1957. The show is family-oriented with themes revolving around moral messages, parenting, and relationships. There is one or more moral messages often included in an episode, such as when the boys disobeyed their parents and then lied. However, regardless of the circumstances, the program consistently delivered strong advice to children respecting their obligations to their family in particular and society in general. When the boys need advice or did something wrong, the parents are the two most important figures they can turn to. Teaching children proper moral behaviour required input from the parents. This program was intended for adults seen through the eyes of a little boy. It provided advice to parents to help them establish proper parenting techniques. There is also a lot of emphasis on different relationships between the characters. Examples of this include Beaver, a youngster who sees girls as the enemy, as well as the relationships within the family. Leave it to Beaver cleverly portrays the innocence and traditional North American family of the pre-1970’s. The Brady Bunch (1970’s) The Brady Bunch is one of the most beloved 2003-12-10T22:48:44-05:00 http://75.150.148.189/free-essay/The-Evolution-of-the-Family-on-Television-5327.aspx The Evolution of the Family on Television The Evolution of the Family on Television Introduction Television is not just a form of entertainment, it is also an excellent way to study society’s ever-changing families. From the beginning of the history of television in the early 1950’s to present day, there have been many television shows and sitcoms about the common North American family. Today’s sitcoms have “single-parent households, several friends and roommates, gay relationships and unmarried adults whose lives revolve around the workplace” (Terry). This is very different compared to the old-fashioned nuclear family unit of mom, dad, and the kids in past decades. The stories or themes are a reflection of societal beliefs, attitudes and behaviours of the typical family of the time. Television is often evolving with North American families to better portray or resemble them on TV. This can be seen through the different family shows throughout the decades, from Leave it to Beaver in the pre-1970’s to The Brady Bunch, to The Cosby Show in the 1980’s and finally to Malcolm in the Middle in present day. Significant change among family shows can be clearly shown in these selected programs. Although the typical North American family has constantly transformed over the years, television sitcoms have reflected and met this change. Leave It to Beaver (Pre-1970’s) A classic among classics, Leave it to Beaver appeared on television in 1957. The show is family-oriented with themes revolving around moral messages, parenting, and relationships. There is one or more moral messages often included in an episode, such as when the boys disobeyed their parents and then lied. However, regardless of the circumstances, the program consistently delivered strong advice to children respecting their obligations to their family in particular and society in general. When the boys need advice or did something wrong, the parents are the two most important figures they can turn to. Teaching children proper moral behaviour required input from the parents. This program was intended for adults seen through the eyes of a little boy. It provided advice to parents to help them establish proper parenting techniques. There is also a lot of emphasis on different relationships between the characters. Examples of this include Beaver, a youngster who sees girls as the enemy, as well as the relationships within the family. Leave it to Beaver cleverly portrays the innocence and traditional North American family of the pre-1970’s. The Brady Bunch (1970’s) The Brady Bunch is one of the most beloved 2003-12-10T22:47:41-05:00 http://75.150.148.189/free-essay/The-Evolution-of-the-Family-on-Television-5326.aspx Bring back the good ‘ole news The Sydney Morning Herald 31st August 2002 Bring back the good ‘ole news By Katherine Lam It’s 5pm, the kids want their dinner, the boss is on my back about the report due yesterday and the car has broken down. Come on, let’s face it, the last thing we want to watch is some boring negotiation between two politicians. Never fear! The commercial stations recognise the audience’s panic and has found the cure! They have metamorphisized their prime time news programmes into entertainment soap boxes. But what happened to good ‘ole quality news? With stories like “The bold and beautiful trend is born” and “Stairs ate my pants” it’s difficult to believe that the primary role of news is to expand our horizons with fair-minded analysis and interpretation of current events. It has become such a battle for ratings amongst the stations that news has finally ceded its role to the back seat. Likewise the newspaper industry is also using infotainment as a lure for readers. But why? Oh remember children, the more entertainment generated by sensationalising news events and their peripherals, the higher the ratings; higher ratings attract more advertisements! Aha! Big Bucks! Profits! Admit it, we’re greedy! Although not the main focus of the media, the money-making formula is undeniably, an attractive option to many stations thus watch the IMPORTANT news fly out of the window! Channel Ten’s First at Five news runs for a full hour rather than half an hour like many news programs. However, DO NOT be fooled! An extended program is still highly prone to “quantity not quality.” On 29 August 2002, its leading story was about angry Brisbane residents revolting against Peter Bettie’s $500 000 dollar trip to Townsville. I guess Channel Nine did a bit better than reporting its usual “cat-up-tree” incident as a top story. Instead, it was replaced by a ninety second report about entangling a whale. Have we been engulfed by this hype for so long that we have forgotten about “hard” news? Likewise turning to the newspaper for half decent information is also becoming a rare find. Technology has brought it a new enemy- the Internet. Just a click away, it can offer sounds and visuals to bring the “reality” of their stories to viewers. So how can newspapers maintain sales? Tabloids like The Sydney Sider have turned to “soft” news and “sporty” pictures. The Bulldogs salary cap scandal was a whopper. 2002-11-07T13:00:00-05:00 http://75.150.148.189/free-essay/Bring-back-the-good-‘ole-news-5125.aspx TV violence "The relationship between violence on the screen and violence in real life is extremely complicated. But while the relationship may not be that of direct cause and effect, we must bear it in mind. Violent programmes may depress some people, shock others, de-sensitise some and encourage imitation by a few." (BBC Handbook-Guidelines for T.V Producers Regarding Violence and Censorship) The media is all around us and for this reason I feel it is inevitable that it will have some sort of effect on us. Television is the most popular and accessible form of media; everybody has at least one television set in their home. It is also said to be the most vivid portrayer of the world. Screen violence is a term given to violence seen in television programmes, videos and cinema; basically any violence viewed on a screen. What causes a problem when debating screen violence is how we define and measure violence, as different people have different interpretations of what is violent. Some kinds of 'violent' activity are labelled as 'violent' others as 'war heroism'. Everybody interprets and responds to the media in different ways. The 'hypodermic syringe' or 'effects' model is a theory, which concentrates on the negative effects of the media i.e. what the media 'does to us'. The power is believed to lie with the media and terms such as 'the mass media' or 'mass communications' are often used to emphasise the size and scale of media operations. It believes in a passive audience and highlights certain groups of people as being more vulnerable than others are. Children, people who are mentally ill, women, and the working class are the named groups because they are either obviously vulnerable (i.e. children and the mentally ill), or exposed to the media much more than other groups of people (i.e. women and the working class). I agree with this as far as children and the mentally ill are concerned because they have little control over what they are exposed to and are not selective viewers. However, the other groups mentioned are not as vulnerable, as they are able to decide for themselves what they watch and can create their own opinions about it. There are two key effects that this theory believes can be induced in an audience: Inactivity- the couch potato Manic activity- where the audience imitates what they have seen, i.e. copycat crime (often related to violence) There are of course problems 2002-03-30T13:00:00-04:00 http://75.150.148.189/free-essay/TV-violence-4588.aspx Television Television is a big part of most of our lives. We watch our favourite shows on it every week. Our parents watch the news on it every night, and we settle down in front of it for the weekend movie. Most Australian families have one in their household, so it’s not as if we don’t have a clue what it is. Like anything in the world, there are different sides to the story, but is TV really as good as it is hyped up to be? Television can be educational, such as when stations broadcast documentaries like World Around Us on Channel 7. People watch it and discover things they never knew about the animal or place featured. It could later influence them to travel to that certain place to experience such sights as featured on TV. This will then boost tourism for that place. By watching Television at night or after school, students are given something to talk about, provided they paid attention to what was going on. They can discuss their views on certain issues that may affect them, appeal to them or influence them to make the same decisions made on the show. It can be entertaining because some people may impersonate cartoon characters, making people laugh and brightening up their day. Television is really versatile- one can watch it when they like. They can turn it off if they reckon the show they are viewing is absolute crap, and best of all, it cannot hear or see their criticism. One can say how pathetic the actor is behaving, fall asleep during the show, or comment on the clothes they are wearing, or judge their acting style, and not have to worry about the reactions, because, IT’S ONLY A BOX!! There are down sides toward watching TV; too much may be bad for your eyes, or cause you to develop a splitting headache. Such pain is a discomfort to other activities carried out throughout the day and night. If one spends all his time in front of the television, then it means a lack of many things, including exercise, social outings, fresh air, and MONEY. Yes, that’s right, like all things, Television cost's money. The power bill needs to be paid, an aerial needs to be installed, and maintenance will eventually be needed. TV is not of much use to one if the power has been cut off or there is 2001-12-11T13:00:00-05:00 http://75.150.148.189/free-essay/Television-4145.aspx Television News - informing the public about significant events <H2>Discuss to what extent two television stations broadcasting to audiences in Western Australia succeed in informing the public about significant events, in a fair and balanced way.</h2>Television news is an entertainment medium intending to inform the public of current issues in society, but that is not its prime function. It also serves as a program that helps viewers to see issues from different perspectives. Some perfect fairness cannot exist, so bias of some sort must be present in all Television news. The news segments generally adopt a point of view and set out to convince the viewers to agree with that point of view. This persuasion is achieved through a number of tactics, the main two being the use of logic and evidence to support the idea, and persuasive language that the newsreader uses to help convince you to believe that idea. Television news is less concerned with issues than with other mediums of news, such as newspapers and magazines, and more concerned with drama and entertainment. The excessive use of specific camera angles and shots and the way the segment within itself is presented prove this. For example, consider the presentation of the newsreader. The presentation of the newsreader would not be that important if the sole purpose of the news program was to inform viewers. The attention would be concentrated more upon the information presented rather than the way the presenter looks, but in today’s day and age, viewers aren’t satisfied with just the bare facts. They want some form of entertainment and viewing satisfaction as well, and this entertainment is supplied in the form of Re-enactments and impressive camera shots of news stories on television, the presentation of the segment and news reporters and readers, and the use of graphics and visuals. Some television station’s news programs are more concerned about important world issues than others. Take for example, on one Wednesday April 19th on ABC news, one of the headlining stories was concerning Cyanide leakages in the shared river systems of Hungary, Romania and Yugoslavia, showing the side effects of the spillage. This story was presenting a very controversial and important issue, yet the same story was not even mentioned to viewers that same night on Channel Seven News. This proves that ABC news is more concerned about important world issues that are likely to have some affect on people than Channel Seven is. Channel Seven have proven to 2001-12-11T13:00:00-05:00 http://75.150.148.189/free-essay/Television-News-informing-the-public-about-significant-events-4147.aspx The Jerry Springer Show Television has come a long way from the first black and white silent show to its current craze, which happens to be the television talk shows. In the nineteen eighties, the daytime airwaves were monopolised by soap operas and game shows but the trend gradually evolved to talk shows towards the nineties. Being before my time, research appears to imply that the talk show intrusion of our airwaves all seemed to start with the originals such as Geraldo Riveria, Donahue and Sally Jesse Rafael. Surprisingly though, some of the morality and the topics remain somewhat similar throughout the years, such as the improvement of society and the quality of life often show on shows like the Oprah Winfrey Show and the Montel Williams Show. As we approach the darker realms of talk shows, we come to talk shows such as the Jerry Springer show. At first impression, one may get the inherent idea that the show is basically is exploiting the misery and troubles of real life people who do not live the blessed lives that we imagine up in our ideal minds. There is no doubt to me at all that the main aim of such shows is to exploit the lives of these misfits and the more dirt the producers get, the higher their ratings. But unfortunately, it is ironic that when the decrease in society's morals is highlighted in every episode Springer airs the producers are getting richer. Looking deeper at the show, we can safely say that the show is based mainly on relationships between people. Morality is first put into question when guests start to confess of deeds that have betrayed their partner’s trust, at this point, a fight would normally occur and the audience would cheer on the fight with shouts of “Jerry, Jerry!” Once again, morality questions the reactions of the audience. There is no basis on what is the right kind or ideal life, but it is apparent that when the audience cheers when the guests act up, the audience is reassuring the guests that the lifestyles in which they live, regardless of how the audience truly feels, are satisfactory . Jerry Springer would end every show with his final thought and it is here where he offers advice as to what is the appropriate way to handle one’s personal relationships. Personally I think that this is a bid to enhance his 2001-09-16T14:00:00-04:00 http://75.150.148.189/free-essay/The-Jerry-Springer-Show-3729.aspx Men and how advertizing deminishes them Have you noticed how all tv ad show that women are smarter than men, 2001-08-06T14:00:00-04:00 http://75.150.148.189/free-essay/Men-and-how-advertizing-deminishes-them-3610.aspx Our Quiet Teacher: Television Violence and Children “Unless and until there is unmistakable proof to the contrary, the presumption must be that television is and will be a main factor in influencing the values and moral standards of our society…” Pilkington Report (Merriam-Webster Dictionary of Quotations 411) The sentence stunned even the hardest of courtroom observers. Judge Charles Arnold just finished sentencing Joshua Phillips, a young 15-year-old boy, to life in prison with no possibility for parole. “Your monstrous act made you an adult,” he told Joshua shortly before he was taken away to spend the rest of his life behind bars. What caused the judgment to be so severe on a child from such a good family? Joshua Phillips was convicted of first-degree murder in the stabbing death of 8-year-old Maddie Clifton. Joshua never denied killing the girl once he was confronted with the truth. His story goes like this: He was ‘playing’ rough with Maddie outside his family’s home in Jacksonville, Florida. According to Joshua’s lawyer, he was imitating his favorite wrestling moves from television. According to Joshua’s testimony, he accidentally hit Maddie in the eye. When she wouldn’t stop crying, he panicked and hit her, and eventually stabbed Maddie in order “to get her quiet.” He then stuffed her body underneath the mattresses of the waterbed in his bedroom. He even helped “search” for her when she wasn’t seen for several days. One day, as his mother was putting away some clothes in his room, she smelt a foul odor coming from what she thought was under the bed. She thought that perhaps a mouse had died lay beneath the bed. What she found horrified her. Without even imagining that her son was the killer, she immediately called the police. After several short questions, Joshua admitted that he was the murderer. He now sits behind bars in a state prison in Florida where he will grow up, grow old, and then die (Leisner). What is happening in the world today? Rapes; School shootings; Gangs. It often seems like everywhere one looks, violence shows up in grotesque forms. We see it in the streets, back alleys, school, and even at home. The last of these is a major source of violence. In many peoples' living rooms there sits an outlet for violence that often goes unnoticed. It is the television, and the children who view it are often pulled into its realistic world of violent scenes with 2001-05-03T14:00:00-04:00 http://75.150.148.189/free-essay/Our-Quiet-Teacher-Television-Violence-and-Children-3307.aspx The Effects of Television on Society There is probably no greater influence on society than the television. It has become arguably the greatest invention of the past century. With it, we have witnessed countless historical events: Inaugurations of presidents; man’s first steps on the moon; the assignation of John F. Kennedy; even disasters as they happen. Americans watch TV in the morning to receive the daily news. They eat watching it. They watch it before they go to bed. But as television has saturated our lives, has it always resulted toward our betterment or has it possibly led to the deprivation of American society? Although there are many benefits of television, American society has most assuredly been adversely affected by it. Since the birth of television, crime has skyrocketed. Many years ago, problems in school were chewing gum and running in the halls. Now, students fear for their lives as our schools have turned into war zones, with school shootings becoming a national problem. Many attribute this problem to the violence children watch on television. Children have become desensitized concerning the value of human life by the many murders and violence viewed on the screen. Television has led to the moral decline in our nation like no other device in history. With the coming of cable and satellite television, Americans now have scores of channels to watch with very little educational value. Many children sit for hours in front of the television, and could not imagine missing a favorite show or movie. The media has an arguable hold on the politics of this nation. Many attribute Kennedy’s victory in the close election of 1960 to the presentation he made in two televised debates in the closing months of the campaign. The media has an agnate ability to control the ideas of American politics and rewrite history without too many people even noticing. Most Americans hold dear the precious first amendment right of free speech. But with freedom, there must also be responsibility. Societies that do not offer freedom in the media often have the lowest crime rates of the world. Why is this? Television has softened the moral values and ideals of its viewers. It has the power to preach into our subconscious what its advertisers want you to believe. That is why billions of dollars are spent on advertising. Why? Because it works! Continued saturation by shows that softly depict murder, crime and abuse, sometimes 2001-05-03T14:00:00-04:00 http://75.150.148.189/free-essay/The-Effects-of-Television-on-Society-3312.aspx We've Come A Long Way - Sex on TV "Ellen," "Will and Grace," MTV's "Undressed," only to name a few, are an example of some of the shows that many people think go against the morals of the American society. These shows have topics such as gay and lesbian relationships, people talking about sex openly, and basically, how the people around them react. Topics of this sort have not been allowed to be apart of primetime entertainment only until a couple of years ago because they are said to be immoral and a threat to people's values. It is about time that these topics are allowed to air on television because they show what is really going on in the world. It has been known for quite sometime that not everybody is intimate only with people of the opposite sex, and not everyone waits until marriage to lose their virginity. So, why try to pretend as if these values are still important and practiced by all? The question that crosses many is, "Why have these issues not been accepted yet?" Is the answer that some people have been taught that these things are wrong and immoral? These topics are not a threat to society; they are merely reality. It is time that that individuals are allowed to express their way of life without anyone putting them down and making them ashamed of who they are. One of the issues that has to be accepted as a society is homosexuality. Gays and lesbians have participated in marches and in rallies, and some have even come out on TV asking our society to be more open-minded. These sorts of actions show that homosexuals don't want to be in the closet anymore. This is not the past where people felt ashamed of what they were, and would commit suicide for being gay. They are not the problem; it is society as a whole for not accepting their beliefs. As American citizens, everyone has a Constitutional right to do and act as they please as long as they don't infringe on the rights of others. Being homosexual does not hurting anyone. People who are homophobic discriminate them because they are afraid of what they don't know. Usually what happens, is that when we see homosexuals, people automatically think of what they do in bed instead of the person that they are. This isn't right, and this is where television comes to play. On television, 2001-03-06T13:00:00-05:00 http://75.150.148.189/free-essay/We-ve-Come-A-Long-Way-Sex-on-TV-2994.aspx America at War: The World Is Not Enough When a person is given the microphone at a podium, the attention of the audience is customarily afforded to that person so that they may convey their message(s) clearly. In the past fifty years, advancements in technology and the ability to transmit information have transformed the world into a global stage for any individual or group who wish to broadcast their agendas. The more modernized and stable countries, namely western European nations and the United States of America, have a strangle hold on the microphone to this global stage and are reluctant to release it. The major problems inherent in the effort to emphasize global instead of discreet national histories of mass communication rest within the mentalities of these western powers. A country, like America, whose mindset fosters ideals such as media imperialism, capitalism, and cultural dominance will have supreme reign in a society that can be easily influenced by the various tools of the media. With the exception of the Persian Gulf War in the early 90’s, the Vietnam War is the last major conflict that the Unites States has been involved in. After the breakup of the Soviet Union, which effectively ended the Cold War and automatically allowed America to become the front running nuclear power, the U.S. needed a new objective to conquer other than communism. Since the U.S. armed forces cannot thoroughly flex its military muscles in the absence of a war, an acceptable alternative is to inundate other developing countries with the thoughts of “democracy and freedom” through the media. However, the validity of America’s true intentions are often questioned when it begins to preach that all humans are entitled to have the freedom of choice. What exactly, do these freedoms entail? Normally, for American businesses and industries, this suggests that people are free to choose to consume American made goods and products. Although it may have been inadvertent at first, an imperial power such as America will expand in its blundering efforts to do good or protect its borders (Herman 1992). After a certain amount of time, this expansion is no longer by chance but by purpose because those who control the channels of media begin to promote imperialistic views, which eventually lead to the domination of a market, be it newspaper, radio, or television. The American dominance in the television market for example, can be aptly characterized by a silly show about lifeguards working on 2001-02-15T13:00:00-05:00 http://75.150.148.189/free-essay/America-at-War-The-World-Is-Not-Enough-2885.aspx Television : Candy for the Mind A man once said, "Televevision is candy for the mind." He was right. Making an analogy to candy is ideal ; either, if taken in 2000-10-28T14:00:00-04:00 http://75.150.148.189/free-essay/Television-Candy-for-the-Mind-2421.aspx The Effects of Violence in Media on Society Today Is societies violence the media’s fault? This is the question that has been asked since before television was in every American’s house. Of course there are the different types of media today ranging from newspapers, to on-line reports and stories. There have been arguments upon arguments about this issue, and over 3,000 studies conducted. Unfortunately there isn’t one single result, there is only an array of supposed answers to this undying question. CBS president, Howard Stringer is pointing to a different scapegoat for society’s violence. “I come from a country … that puts a lot of American movies on and has more graphic violence within it’s live drama on the BBC than anywhere else, and there is a lot less violence in the United Kingdom than there is here. There are 200 million guns in America, and that has a lot to do with violence.” He feels it has to do with gun control, which others have suggested. But there are so many violent acts, that one can’t focus on the guns, just like one can’t focus on the media. David Phillips, one of the men we discuss later put it perfectly, “It’s like watching rain fall on a pond and trying to figure out which drop causes which ripple.”There have been many studies conducted on the effects of violence on children, and on the effects on society as a whole. There have been about 3,000 studies performed on this topic. Two of the most prolific studies were the UCLA Television Violence Monitoring Report, and the Mediascope, Inc. test sponsored by the National Cable Television Association. Of course there were many other studies done, but these made headlines because of their results. The UCLA study focused on all of the television media, and discovered some interesting facts from their study. Prime Time Series raised the least concern. Theatrical films raised more concern and had a lot more violence. The Saturday morning cartoons had mixed reviews. 23% of the cartoons raised concern, but that was only rating the most popular cartoons: Mighty Morphin Power Rangers, X-Men, etc. They termed the action in cartoons as “Sinister Combat Violence” which basically means the whole story line leads to violence.Mediascope, Inc. focused on the amount and context on cable, effectiveness of rating systems and parental advisories, and the success of anti-violent messages. They found that perpetrators go unpunished in 73% of all violent scenes, 2000-05-22T14:00:00-04:00 http://75.150.148.189/free-essay/The-Effects-of-Violence-in-Media-on-Society-Today-1991.aspx Does Violance on television Cause Aggressive Behavior An 18-year-old boy locks himself in his room, mesmerized for hours by the corpse-filled video game Doom, while shock-rocker Marilyn Manson screams obscenities from the stereo. Shelved nearby are a video collection, including the graphically violent film Natural Born Killers, and a diary, replicating the unrestrained expressions of hate and death, published on the boy's personal website. Should this boy's media preferences be cause for alarm? The question is not new, but the April 20,1999 massacre of 12 students and a teacher by fellow Columbine High students Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold has added urgency to the search for answers. The Littleton, Colorado teenagers reportedly immersed themselves in the same media described above, even producing and starring in their own murderous video before gunning down their classmates, and apparently taking their own lives. We live in a world of violence -- Kosovo, Bosnia, the West Bank, and abortion clinics. The value of human life has reduced to, simply, a few vital organs in a hollow body. Life is no longer viewed as the sacred and amazing gift that it is. Human life is now only a temporary, useful commodity. And, when it is no longer useful? Well, it can be thrown away, like used Kleenex. This irreverence for life has been a result of numerous hours of senseless violence society feeds into their brains every day. Yet, media representatives defend the entertainment industry, denying any direct link between violent media and violent behavior. In many peoples' living rooms, there sits an outlet for violence that often goes unnoticed. It is the television. The children who view it are often pulled into its realistic world of violent scenes with sometimes devastating results. Much effort has gone into showing why this glowing box, and the action that takes place within it, mesmerizes children. Research shows that it is definitely a major source of violent behavior in children. The statistics prove time and time again that aggression and television viewing do go hand in hand. Research shows the truth about television violence and children. Some are trying to fight this problem, while others are ignoring it, hoping it will go away with yesterday’s trash. Still, others do not even seem to care. However, the facts are undeniable. The experiments carried out, all point to one conclusion: television violence causes children to be violent, and the effects can be life-long. Here is the scene: Bugs Bunny, Daffy Duck, 2000-04-15T14:00:00-04:00 http://75.150.148.189/free-essay/Does-Violance-on-television-Cause-Aggressive-Behavior-1856.aspx Immorality in Television <b>Vulgarity in Television</b> In the early years of television people where much more sensitive to what was said and took offense to any form of obscene language. Even in the movies it was unacceptable. However, for many the standard for the use of vulgar language has expanded. In many shows on television vulgar words are used way to often. In many cases unnecessarily. These words do not bother me in the least. However, there are many parents with young children who are offended by this. This would not such a big deal if only the shows that carried these vulgarities would be shown later at night, as they where for many years. Also, most of the programs are not correctly rated to warn of there content. Besides using the basics of the swear words some programs take it to a different level. Instead of using the words themselves they use a form of slang in order to get around the censors. Although these words are not the same as the ones commonly used, they do share the same meaning. By having these programs use these words they are encouraging the children to use a new language that there parents do not understand. And because the parents do not understand the words the children then think it is all right to use profanity. Profanity in television is not so much a problem as it is an annoyance. It makes television more interesting to watch and can occasionally make a situation more humorous, but I do not enjoy it when a five-year-old calls their parents a-- holes to there face. <b>Rating System</b> Recently introduced to all the television shows is the new rating system. This system was implemented to warn about the kind of shows on television. The system tells whether the show is to mature for young children. However, does the system still have flaws? Although it does give an idea as to what the show contains, it does not tell as to the extent to which it is. An example would be the television show "Strangers with Candy." This program is extremely crude with little humor. Normally I enjoy crude humor, but this show is gross. It contains vulgarity, drug use, and sexually references. And to top it off the show is at 10:00. Shows like this should not be viewed any time. My point of bringing this up is to show how lose the 1999-12-07T13:00:00-05:00 http://75.150.148.189/free-essay/Immorality-in-Television-1435.aspx Violence on TV What has the world come to these days? It often seems like everywhere one looks, violence rears its ugly head. We see it in the streets, back alleys, school, and even at home. The last of these is a major source of violence. In many peoples' living rooms there sits an outlet for violence that often goes unnoticed. It is the television, and the children who view it are often pulled into its realistic world of violence scenes with sometimes devastating results. Much research has gone into showing why children are so mesmerized by this big glowing box and the action that takes place within it. Research shows that it is definitely a major source of violent behavior in children. The research proves time and time again that aggression and television viewing do go hand in hand. The truth about television violence and children has been shown. Some are trying to fight this problem. Others are ignoring it and hoping it will go away. Still others don't even seem to care. However, the facts are undeniable. The studies have been carried out and all the results point to one conclusion: Television violence causes children to be violent and the effects can be life-long. The information can't be ignored. Violent television viewing does affect children. The effects have been seen in a number of cases. In New York, a 16-year-old boy broke into a cellar. When the police caught him and asked him why he was wearing gloves he replied that he had learned to do so to not leave fingerprints and that he discovered this on television. In Alabama, a nine-year-old boy received a bad report card from his teacher. He suggested sending the teacher poisoned candy as revenge as he had seen on television the night before. In California, a seven-year-old boy sprinkled ground-up glass into the the lamb stew the family was to eat for dinner. When asked why he did it he replied that he wanted to see if the results would be the same in real life as they were on television (Howe 72). These are certainly startling examples of how television can affect the child. It must be pointed out that all of these situations were directly caused by children watching violent television. Not only does television violence affect the child's youth, but it can also affect his or her adulthood. Some psychologists and psychiatrists feel that continued exposure 1999-04-08T14:00:00-04:00 http://75.150.148.189/free-essay/Violence-on-TV-650.aspx Violence on Childrens TV Are today's children being exposed to too much violence via television? I think so. From the teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, to the Mighty Morphin' Power Rangers, kids are always being exposed to the rock-'em-sock-'em heroes of T.V., or the brainless violence of Beavis and Butthead. When we live in a country where our children watch an average of three to four hours of television daily {quote}, That is a large number of punches, kicks, and many other violent acts that our children are soaking up every day. Is that really what we want for the children of our country? Hundreds of studies of the effects of TV violence on children and teenagers have found that children may become "immune" to the horror of violence {quote?}. Gradually they even accept violence as a way to solve problems, imitating the violence they observe on television, as well as identifying with certain characters, victims and/or victimizers. One might ask If we know what is happening, why do they put violence on television? The basic reason is because violence is what people want to see. Much of the American viewing audience, and especially children, will watch the shows with more action before they even think about watching the morally correct ones. Another reason is that some broadcasters claim that there is not enough evidence to prove that TV violence is harmful. But, scientists who have studied this aspect have stated that TV violence and aggressive behavior are linked. In a Children Now Executive Summary, only one of many studies on the issue, experts agreed, among other relevant topics, "that television can have a negative effect on children, encouraging anti-social behavior such as dishonesty or violence." (Heintz-Knowles 2) This study as well as many others show that the violence is there. Another factor that points to children's television being too violent is the aggressive behavior that it is bringing out in the children that are watching it. During the average four hours a day that children watch television, They witness an average of 20 violent acts per hour. That is about 80 violent acts per day and, "Children who watch the violent shows, even 'just funny' cartoons, were more likely to hit out at their playmates, argue, disobey class rules, leave tasks unfinished, and were less willing to wait for things than those who watched the nonviolent programs," says Aletha Huston, Ph.D., now at the University 1999-04-08T14:00:00-04:00 http://75.150.148.189/free-essay/Violence-on-Childrens-TV-658.aspx Television and Race <center><b>Race Televised: America's Babysitter</b></center> At some point in the course of human events, America decided that the television was their Dali Lama, their cultural and spiritual leader. Overlooking its obvious entertainment based purpose, Americans have let the television baby-sit and rear their children. I do not recall a manifesto from the television industry, but society put television in a role it does not have authority in. The only thing television set out to do was provide the passive entertainment American society wants. True, television does not accurately reflect race in America, but it is not the job of the television industry to do so. Too much importance has been put on television to provide guidance and information that American society has grown too lazy and too indifferent to find for themselves. When society finds that their information is wrong or tainted they blame television instead of finding truth and accuracy for themselves. Although television does not reflect race accurately, Americans have become too dependent on television to provide everything they know. In one of this generation's most popular TV shows, The Simpsons, it is easy to find stereotypes. There are numerous examples throughout the series, mostly toward Apu, the Indian storekeeper. For example, in episode 1F10, Homer and Apu, the writers do not overlook a single Indian stereotype. First of all they have an Indian man as a convenience storekeeper. The episode starts with Apu committing the usual convenience store stereotypes. For example he sells a $0.29 stamp for $1.85, $2 worth of gas for $4.20, etc. Next he changes the expiration dates on rancid ham and sells them. When his customer gets sick from it, he offers a 5 pound bucket of thawing shrimp. Later he picks up a hotdog that he dropped and puts it back on the hotdog roller. A news team catches him on hidden camera and Apu's boss fires him. In this scene we find out Apu has a stereotypical Indian surname, Nahasapeemapetilan. His boss also makes a joke about the Hindu religion. "Ah, true. But it's also standard procedure to blame any problems on a scapegoat or sacrificial lamb." [Daniels] The stereotypes continue redundantly. Jokes about Indian films, food, and other things fill the script. Then there is the grand finale, where Homer, the main character, and Apu go to India to ask for Apu's job back at the main office. The president and CEO very closely resembles 1999-02-26T13:00:00-05:00 http://75.150.148.189/free-essay/Television-and-Race-583.aspx Effects of TV on Children Sitting in school, little Jane sits anxiously watching the clock. The teacher is talking to the class, but Jane just can't wait to get home. When the bell finally rings, she runs out of the classroom, and all the way home. After blasting in the house, she runs to turn on the TV. Having nothing more exciting to do, Jane will sit in front of the television until her mom pulls her away for dinner. This is an all to familiar scenario in many American homes today. What many people don't realize are the problems that can develop from young children watching too much TV. Many emerging dilemmas are resulting from this concern. When a young child with a maturing brain sits in front of the TV for several hours every day, it can instigate loss of creativity, impatience, and violence further along down the road. The ability to be creative is an important factor in the development of a young child's mind. By sitting down and watching TV for a couple hours, the child is entertained, but is also not thinking. Information in spoon-fed to them, so when it comes time to read a book in school, some can have a hard time grasping ideas. They are so used to having images flash before them to provide understanding; they have trouble moving their eyes side to side to gather the information for themselves. With the TV in front of them, supplying amusement, they may never stop to think that putting a puzzle together, or reading a book could also be fun. They could actually become dependent on this one source of fantasy, and never bother to create their own. As the child grows older, it is less likely to put effort into playing with other kids, or taking up a hobby. While losing creativity, the child can also gain impatience. By having all the stories and facts plastered clear in front of them, they can easily loose interest sitting in a classroom all day. Even during their favorite TV show, there is a brief change of pace in the story line when a commercial comes on, which is about every seven minutes. Their attention spans are being molded by this continuos interruption, causing them to loose focus easily. Research has shown that teachers today are using many more multimedia devices to capture the students attention. Being so used to seeing information 1999-02-26T13:00:00-05:00 http://75.150.148.189/free-essay/Effects-of-TV-on-Children-584.aspx Violence In Entertainment And Its Effect On Society Does entertainment influence society's attitude towards violent behavior? In order to fully answer this question we must first understand what violence is. Violence is the use of one's powers to inflict mental or physical injury upon another, examples of this would be rape or murder. Violence in entertainment reaches the public by way of television, movies, plays, and novels. Through the course of this essay it will be proven that violence in entertainment is a major factor in the escalation of violence in society, once this is proven we will take all of the evidence that has been shown throughout this paper and come to a conclusion as to whether or not violence in entertainment is justified and whether or not it should be censored. Television with its far reaching influence spreads across the globe. Its most important role is that of reporting the news and maintaining communication between people around the world. Television's most influential, yet most serious aspect is its shows for entertainment. Violent children's shows like Mighty Morphin Power Rangers and adult shows like NYPD Blue and Homicide almost always fail to show human beings being able to resolve their differences in a non-violent manner, instead they show a reckless attitude that promotes violent action first with reflection on the consequences later. In one episode of NYPD Blue three people were murdered in the span of an hour. "Contemporary television creates a seemingly insatiable appetite for amusement of all kinds without regard for social or moral benefits" (Schultze 41). Findings over the past twenty years by three Surgeon Generals, the Attorney General's Task Force on Family Violence, the American Medical Association, the National Institute of Mental Health, the American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and other medical authorities indicate that televised violence is harmful to all of us, but particularly to the mental health of children (Medved 70-71). In 1989 the results of a five year study by the American Psychological Association indicated that the average child has witnessed 8,000 murders and 100,000 other acts of violence on television by the time he or she has completed sixth grade. In further studies it was determined that by the time that same child graduates from high school he or she will have spent 22,000 hours watching television, twice as many hours as he or she has spent in school (Bruno 124). In a 1999-01-22T13:00:00-05:00 http://75.150.148.189/free-essay/Violence-In-Entertainment-And-Its-Effect-On-Society-554.aspx Is Television Good Or Bad? Television is not a bad thing, but in fact is a resource that can be used to educate and entertain people 1999-01-22T13:00:00-05:00 http://75.150.148.189/free-essay/Is-Television-Good-Or-Bad-555.aspx