Introduction
The last few decades have seen an upsurge in the amount of media information available to the general audience. Some of this material is violent, and concerns have been expressed about the impact of children exposed to violent media. As a result, Gerard Jones argues in his piece “Violent Media is Good for Kids” that violent media may be beneficial to children rather than destructive. He was inspired to write this post for other readers after witnessing disturbing behaviors in his child. Jones’s central point was that individuals avoid dealing with their emotional troubles by engaging in violent stories given by the media. More specifically, Jones contends that violent media may help a child’s growth by allowing them to express their anger in a way that is good for the child while still being harmless to everyone. In the paper, Jones’s argument regarding the developmental benefit of interaction with violence in media is explored to demonstrate the validity of the author’s reasoning.
Discussion
The starting point for understanding the author argues that during their early formative years, children acquire a significant number of behaviors from their surroundings. As such, children are sensitive at a young age, and they use material gathered from their surroundings to develop their thoughts. It is therefore proposed that exposing youth to violent content makes them more likely to engage in violent conduct in real life. Parents are advised that introducing their children to violence puts them at risk of acquiring aggressive tendencies. However, Jones challenges this widely-known view and disputes parents’ and educators’ assumptions that exposing their children to violence will harm them. Namely, he writes: “I am going to argue that our fear of “youth violence” isn’t well-founded on reality and that the fear can do more harm than the reality” (Jones, par. 16). Moreover, he believes that avoidance of exposure to violent media leads to the consequence of modern-day, in which children are significantly more likely to be docile, skeptical of themselves, and easily persuaded. Therefore, the author dismantles the notion regarding the negative effect of violence observation, claiming that the opposite is true.
Furthermore, the article unveils the positive effect that violence in media might have on children. Namely, Jones argues that “people pulling themselves out of emotional traps by immersing themselves in violent stories” (par. 5). By this statement, the author means that through illusions of supernatural fight and devastation, people integrate the scariest, most vehemently rejected bits of their emotional lives into richer perceptions of selfhood. In other words, Jones believes that instead of making children assume violence is normal behavior, which should be represented in their life, the media allows them to reject violence without participating in it directly. Hence, it is suggested that children confront their fears regarding abuse and reflect on it by observing it instead of learning that violence is harmful, emotionally draining, and has judicial consequences firsthand. As a result, violence may teach youngsters how to uncover their inner strength, something they may have never discovered before. Furthermore, as they age, children may gravitate toward violence that promotes justice rather than harmful forms of violence. Therefore, learning about both beneficial and detrimental violence might help young people make better decisions in the future.
Gerard Jones deploys a variety of rhetorical approaches to build his case for violent media. For example, he employs ethos by emphasizing his individual story with violent media: “The character who caught me, and freed me, was the Hulk:… I had a fantasy self to carry my stifled rage and buried desire for power” (Jones, par. 4). The author eventually left this character, but it helped him to shape his identity. He describes how this experience transformed him from a small, fearful child into a renowned action film and comic book creator. Gerard signals to his readers that he is not only acquainted with violent media but also one of its creators by exposing his career as a renowned writer. This approach demonstrates his expertise on the issue because he is well-versed in it. Gerard used pathos to explain the good influence that violent media may have in real-life circumstances he has observed. Hence, the author’s writing is successful when he uses real-life instances to emphasize his point. The viewer may empathize with the youngsters’ difficulties, noticing the good influence that violent media had on their lives.
Conclusion
To conclude, Jones argues that media violence is beneficial to children rather than destructive. The author acknowledges the concerns that many parents have about introducing youngsters to such material and goes on to demonstrate that unpleasant emotions exist in all persons. However, Jones maintains that when children watch and use violent media, it helps them achieve their psychological and developmental requirements healthily. He demonstrates how violent media may help youngsters release their energy in a safe environment rather than restraining it. Gerard positions himself as an authority early on by beginning with his perspective on violent media, and the audience considers his assertions trustworthy as a result.
Work Cited
Jones, Gerard. “Violent Media Is Good for Kids.” Mother Jones, 2000.