Has the media influenced the way we live and behave as a society?

        There has always been debate on how the media industry has a negative influence on society, from influencing violence, to changing how people choose to look and live their lives. Over the years it has grown extensively from a minor claim to, in some cases, a national panic. There is no confusion as to why the media has had the reaction it has from society. Sources have looked at different aspects of the debate whether the media is the influence that has turned members of society to violence and to changing the way they live or whether it is the people themselves just being human and thinking for themselves, which mean that the media is not to blame.

        Annette Hills suggests in Media risks: the social amplifications of the risk and media violence debate (2001) that media can create an effect on society that causes the members of society to panic. Hill overviews the social amplification of risk in relation to society and the moral panic and media violence debate in Britain. Crime cases such as The James Bulger case in 1993 and the Dunblane massacre in 1996 are used as an example of ‘social amplification’ of the risks of ‘media violence’. The video recording act (1984) and The criminal Justice act (1994) were created after such events had created such public coverage. The media was blamed for the events because it had influenced the Bulger’s killers but then social groups, people who were protesting against the media used the media to report the case. Hill suggests that Organisations manipulated the ‘risk events’ to control the information about the event. This implies that it is not the case itself but the organisations that cause the social panic. Hill also suggests that the examples of media violence ranges from children’s cartoons to adult horror films that are represented as having negative effects on individuals and society as a whole and that the individuals that are effected by the films are most likely to try and recreate or reproduce the scenes and action that they have seen on screen. More recently Video games have been brought into this debate and are now being blamed for most of the recent cases of violence shown in the media.

Like Annette Hill in Media risks: the social amplifications of the risk and media violence debate (2001), Mark Coeckelbergh Suggests in Violent computer games, empathy, and cosmopolitanism (2007) that games like ‘Grand theft auto’ and ‘Manhunt’ cause public outrage due to the violent behavior because the games were seen to be  ‘glorifying’ violent actions as the whole point of each game is to be violent. The outrage was due tot the fact that teenagers, adults and, in some cases children who had managed to get hold of the game on way or another were repeatedly playing these sort of games and the worry of society was that they would try and reproduce the violent behavior they had encountered in the games. The people who play were defending all video games arguing that games are games and nothing more, they aren’t real and the players can tell the difference between the real world and the virtual world created in the game. Suggesting that there has to be something wrong with the person to begin with to be influenced by the games. Although Coeckelbergh agrees that some game can inspire some violent behavior, he also admits that’s there are also influences from environmental factors, what surrounds society and the players of the video games. Coeckelbergh states that no matter what there is always human freedom, which every person in society has which means they choose to play the games and they control the effect it has on them. They do not have to act violently they can simply choose not to, and that there is not enough evidence to show that playing video games is the most important factor in people acting violently.

Robert B kozma suggests that the media can have an influence on our educational system and how we learn at school or in higher education in ‘Will media influence learning? Reforming the debate (1994).’ He suggests that there are many different ways that media can help students with tasks and different situations., helping the children or teenagers to be taught in a more effective way. New media technologies that have been introduced to schools recently have been brought into the educational system with the use of black or white boards being replaced by projectors and boards that are connected to computers wirelessly. Kozma states that this type of media will help to advance the development of the whole system and although Information technology has been taught in schools around the Globe for many years yet it is only recently that the teaching has gone beyond the basic skills. Learning to create a website or in some cases learning to create a world of animation. But Kozma also recites the work of Richard Clark in 1983, which suggests that after reviewing results of comparative research that there are no benefits to be made from the media or “employing any specific medium to deliver instruction” stating that it does not influence students learning or achievement. Kozma looks at the debate form both sides, one being hat the media influence does develop learning and the other that it is students that advance their own learning not the media. It can be said that this is just a matter of opinion as Kozma suggests by looking at the process of mind within the debate.

             The media are constantly being condemned for the view that it has negative influence over society. There have been hundreds of studies to try and prove once and for all if this is true or not. Sarah Coyne suggests that these studies from over the last 60 years have shown that viewing violence can influence violent behavior. But she states that theses studies are all conducted in a laboratory so they do conclude that watching violence results in real criminal behavior. It is implied that the people who have seen to be influenced by the media already show aggressive behavior before viewing the violence. Studies are used to prove to society that the media does have a negative effect such as the Allan Menzies case in 2003 who killed his best friend and said that a character from the film ‘Queen of the damned ‘ told him to do it and the series of ‘clockwork orange’ murders in the 1970’s but as Coyne states ‘if violent television influenced violent crime’ there should have been an increase in violent crimes when television was first introduced into society, no matter where it had been introduced. Coyne looks at the research done on the subject and the results are that some people are just more prone to the effects than others. Which relates back to what Coyne was saying about how it could be the people who already have aggressive personalities that are affected. But there are many reasons as to why people would be more prone to the effects for example if they had been brought up in a violent home or a violent neighborhood or was never disciplined as a child and has never known right from wrong. This follows hat Mark Coeckelbergh suggests in Violent Computer games, empathy and cosmopolitan (2007) when he suggests that there are also influences from environmental factors, what surrounds society and the players of the video games.

              

          Testing casual direction in the influence of presumed media influence by Nurit Tal-or, Jonathan Cohen, Yariv Tsfati and Albert C. Gunther suggests that’s people do change their behaviors after watching a film or seeing an advertisement. They suggest that people see a new media technology or a film or advertisement and then estimate what could happen and ‘the potential effects’ and then they change their behavior according to the outcome of what they thing the effects could be. Cohen et al use the example of a parent who expects their children to be influenced by the violent behavior seen in the media such as in their cartoons and automatically gets a television with a v-chip. This is control what the children watch. They also suggest that the third person effect is some thing that can be blamed in this debate. Suggesting that it is not people’s fault that the influence is put upon them. As Hans Bernd Brosius and Dirk Engel suggested in 1996 that the third person effect is when people expect the media influence is to more of an effect on others than themselves. This can be seen throughout our society.

      

            K. Schoenbach reveals in Myths of media and audiences (2001) that we as a society use the claims against the media as a way of explaining why the world is the way it is to ourselves. Society likes to make these claims as a way of explaining why teenagers act aggressively and hurt people or why children sometimes thrash out at others. Schoenbach goes on to say that these claims are the reason that laws are created such as the video recording act (1984) which Annette Hill wrote about. These claims can inspire a lot more than just the law, according to Schoenbach, they can inspire people to spend lots of money on new media technologies, and blaming the media for not making changes to the world to make it a better place. But Schoenbach also suggest that none of these claims have never been confirmed or worked in ‘realty’ but are still widely believed. Any new medium that has been or is going to be introduced to society has and will be welcomed by myths, rumors and claims that they are dangerous to society, Schoenbach suggests that this has been the case since writing became a way of communication when Socrates complained that his memory had declined due to the new medium of written texts.  In 1971 Marshall McLuhan predicted that the video recorder would influence every part of our lives and Schoenbach agrees with him. The video recorder represents Media technology and Schoenbach stands by what McLuhan said and says that he was completely correct.

                  Another way that the media has been said to affect society is a personal one. The way we dress and look has, for a while, been blames n the media. Teresa L Marino carper, Charles Hegy and Stacey Tantleff-Dunn investigate this in relations among media influence. They suggest that the media has an effect on body image as in the way we dress, how we style our hair as well as our weight. Eating concerns including anorexia nervosa and bulimia nervosa. This ties in with our weight and physical attractiveness. We as a society have a desire to be attractive and the media in one way or another with magazines and advertisements determine what is classed as attractive.  Carper, Hegy and Tantleff-Dunn ‘s results conclude that the most vulnerable to the influence form the media are women and gay men. Straight men are still influence but the numbers are much lower. These results partially accounts according to Carper for the relatively high number of eating disorders observed in our societies population.

                  The influence that the media has over the whole of society is a vast and an on going debate. According to most whatever the new media technology is it will come across claims from society. From video games to films the whole media industry is said to have negative influence on society but according to authors of such articles as Media risks: the social amplifications of the risk and media violence debate (2001), Violent computer games, empathy, and cosmopolitanism (2007) and ‘Will media influence learning? Reforming the debate (1994) there is not enough evidence to conclude whether these claims are the truth or merely myths as K. Schoenbach suggests in Myths of media and audiences (2001).

Bibliography

Brosius, HB Engel, D. (1996). THE CAUSES OF THIRD-PERSON EFFECTS: UNREALISTIC OPTIMISM, IMPERSONAL IMPACT, OR GENERALIZED NEGATIVE ATTITUDES TOWARDS MEDIA INFLUENCE? Int. Journal of Public Opinion Research, Oxford Journals. 8 (2), 142-162

Carper TL, Negy C, Tantleff-Dunn S. (2010). Relations among media influence, body image, eating concerns, and sexual orientation in men: A preliminary investigation , OhioLINK Electronic Journal Center. 7 (4), 301-309

Coeckelbergh,M. (2007). Violent Computer Games, Empathy, and Cosmopolitanism. Ethics and Information Technology . Ethics and Information Technology. 9 (3), 219–231.

Coyne, S. (2007). Does Media Violence Cause Violent Crime?. EUROPEAN JOURNAL ON CRIMINAL POLICY AND RESEARCH. 13 (3-4), 205-211

Hill, A. (2001). Media risks: the social amplifications of the risk and media violence debate . Journal of Risk Research. 4 (3), 209-226

Kozma, R. . (1994). Will media influence learning? Reframing the debate. Educational technology research and development. 42 (2), 7-9

Schoenbach, K. (2001). Myths of Media and Audiences. European Journal of Communication. 16 (3), 361-376.

Tal-Or,N Cohen,J Tsfati,Y C. Gunther,A. (2010). Testing Causal Direction in the Influence of Presumed Media Influence. Communication Research. 6 (37), 801-824.