The document discusses the debate around whether violence in mass media promotes real-world violence. Some research has found correlations between viewing media violence and increased aggression, citing theories like social learning. However, other research argues this relationship has not been proven and other factors better predict violence. The author concludes that mass media may increase violence in some instances for susceptible individuals, but has not been shown to universally cause violence in all viewers, and other predictors like genetics also influence aggression.

1. VIOLENCE IN MASS MEDIA 1
Violence in Mass Media
Mass Communication and Its Impact on Society
JOUR 2

2. VIOLENCE IN MASS MEDIA
2
PART 1: INTRODUCTION
The term “Mass media” refers to a range of technologies that include but are
not limited to televisions, radios, newspapers and films among others (Ybarra, et al,
2008). The main reason for the invention, continued use and even improvement of
these technologies is due to their inherent ability to reach numerous numbers of
people throughout the world (Murray, 2008). In spite of this fact, the actual effect of
the content of mass media on the behaviour of the recipients has been a very
controversial issue. This has been especially so with reference to the role of mass
media on the escalating levels of violence within the society today throughout the
world (Ferguson & Kilburn, 2009). Whereas there are those such as Plato that think
that mass media is to blame for the aggression being witnessed in society today,
there is also the argument that violence is in no way related to the content of mass
media in the world today (Bryant & Oliver, 2008). The purpose of this study is to
provide an opinion concerning the role of mass media in the violence that is
becoming increasingly prevalent in the world today. This will be done by examining
both sides of the controversies
PART 2: Violence in Mass Media Promotes Violence in Society
Majority of the proponents of the theory that violence of mass media is
responsible for violence in the society are social scientists and academics. Various
studies have presented statistics as evidence for the correlation between violence in
the community. There are theories that have been developed to explain the
transference of violence from mass media to individuals in the community. These
include the social learning theory, the social cognitive theory and the catalyst model.

3. VIOLENCE IN MASS MEDIA
3
The social learning theory is based on the Bobo Doll experiments that were
carried out by Antonio Bandura. In these experiments, children were left with a Bobo
doll in a room after they had been shown a clip where a model beat the doll. The
children beat the Bobo doll just as they had seen the model doing (Bryant & Oliver,
2008). It's therefore suggested that any violence that is shown on television will be
copied without question especially by the younger children. The social cognition
theory is a derivative of the social learning theory that encompasses elements of
learning, priming, desensitisation, arousal and excitation (Ferguson & Kilburn, 2009).
The desensitisation part of this theory is considered particularly important in
describing the role of mass media in violence. In an experiment, teenagers that had
been exposed to violence in video games were less affected by a video of real life
violence. On the other hand, teenagers that had been playing nonviolent
videogames were more affected by graphic videos. The catalyst theory proposes
that exposure to violence on mass media among other factors is to blame for
violence in society (Ybarra, et al, 2008).
Statistically, it has been shown that children that are exposed to violence via
mass media on a daily basis are also more likely to engage in violent and aggressive
acts on a daily basis. Additionally, studies have claimed that individuals that are
exposed to violence on mass media are more likely to engage in violence when they
are adults, Bill Clinton, JD, 42nd US President, said in his Apr. 24, 1999 President's
Radio Address following the Columbine High School shooting in Littleton, CO: "As
Hillary [Clinton] pointed out in her book, the more children see of violence, the more
numb they are to the deadly consequences of violence. Now, video games like
‘Mortal Kombat,’ ‘Killer Instinct,’ and ‘Doom,’ the very game played obsessively by

4. VIOLENCE IN MASS MEDIA
4
the two young men who ended so many lives in Littleton, make our children more
active participants in simulated violence”. The Columbine High School
massacre which occurred on April 20, 1999 in Columbine, Colorado, two senior
students, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, murdered a total of 12 students and one
teacher. They injured 24 additional students and the pair then committed suicide. The
massacre sparked debate over firearms and gun violence involving youths, teenage
Internet use and violent video games. Remarkably, aggressive children that are not
exposed to violence in mass media rarely ever become violent adults. Another
instance that may demonstrate the powerful role of mass media in violent behaviour
is the Marilyn Monroe effect (Bryant & Oliver, 2008). This is a situation whereby the
number of suicides that are reported after the suicide of a high profile individual rise
exponentially for two weeks after the event.
PART 3: Violence in Mass Media Does not Promote Violence in society
The other school of thought as far as violence and mass media is concerned
claims that the violence that is depicted via mass media is not sufficient to cause
violence within society (Savage & Yancey, 2008). Just like the advocates of the
theory that mass media has a role to play in violence within society, there are
theories as well as statistics that have been put forward. The most popular theory in
this area is the moral panic theory.
As mentioned earlier, the view that societal violence can be directly linked to
mass media existed even in the days of Plato (Ferguson & Kilburn, 2009). The moral
panic theory proposes that new inventions in human societies are often met with
negative sentiment. In today’s age, even the scholars such as the social scientists
and the academia have been accused of possessing this sentiment (Bryant & Oliver,

5. VIOLENCE IN MASS MEDIA
5
2008). This is in opposition to establishing facts as they are by consulting widely and
by carrying out scientific studies. Other theories that are often used in support of the
fact that societal violence is related to mass media violence have been discredited
for various reasons (Hopf, Huber & Weir, 2008). The social learning theory is
discredited on the basis of Bandura’s experiment. The Bobo doll experiment had
been criticised on grounds that the children involved may have been motivated to
please the researcher. The social cognition theory has been rejected frequently in
the recent past on account of its age; it has been used for many years and is
deemed outdated. The catalyst model on the other hand is relatively recent and is
not well accepted as it has not been well studied (Ybarra, et al, 2008).
The studies that have been done in a bid to relate mass media aggression to
violence within society have been criticised for various reason. The first reason has
been the concentration on mass media by researchers as a pointer for aggression
whilst ignoring the fact that there are numerous other factors that determine
aggression (Bryant & Oliver, 2008). Additionally, there are technical issues that have
been identified among individuals that have studied this issue. The first of these
issues is the researchers’ generalisation and failure to design the treatment well in
cases where violent and nonviolent material is given to subjects for assessment
(Murray, 2008). The second issue has been the failure of researchers throughout the
world to establish measures that may be used to quantify violence depicted on mass
media as well as measures of aggression in individuals (Ferguson & Kilburn, 2009).
This has raised the issue that researchers may be presenting results that are
convenient for their own scholarly needs (Ybarra, et al, 2008).

6. VIOLENCE IN MASS MEDIA
6
PART 4: MY OPINION
in conclusion, it seems most plausible that mass media may promote violence
in various instances. To begin with, there are numerous predictors of violence in an
individual such as genetics, drug abuse, mental illnesses and violent peers among
others (Bryant & Oliver, 2008). Additionally, it has not been proven beyond
reasonable doubt that violent behaviour occurs among all people that watch violent
content on mass media. Further more, it has not been clearly established that
partakers of nonviolent content on mass media are completely incapable of engaging
in violence. Therefore, it may be important which individuals are at risk for violent
behaviour upon exposure to mass media violence as well as the conditions
necessary to evoke violence from them.
References
Ferguson, C. J., & Kilburn, J. (2009). The public health risks of media violence: A
meta-analytic review. The Journal of paediatrics, 154(5), 759-763.
Bryant, J., & Oliver, M. B. (2008). Media effects: Advances in theory and research.
Routledge.
Ybarra, M. L., Diener-West, M., Markow, D., Leaf, P. J., Hamburger, M., & Boxer, P.
(2008). Linkages between Internet and other media violence with seriously
violent behavior by youth. Paediatrics, 122(5), 929-937.
Savage, J., & Yancey, C. (2008). The Effects of Media Violence Exposure on
Criminal Aggression A Meta-Analysis. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 35(6),
772-791.

7. VIOLENCE IN MASS MEDIA
7
Hopf, W. H., Huber, G. L., & Weir, R. H. (2008). Media violence and youth violence:
A 2-year longitudinal study. Journal of Media Psychology: Theories, Methods,
and Applications, 20(3), 79.
Murray, J. P. (2008). Media violence the effects are both real and strong. American
Behavioural Scientist, 51(8), 1212-1230.