Sample content
Week 3 DQs
DQ1
How reliable is anecdotal evidence that movie violence causes violence in real life?
Anecdotal evidence means that acts found in a movie is further portrayed in life by easily influenced people. Hence, it proposes that people are motivated to reestablish and copy actions shown in movies. On the other hand, Rodman (2006) states, “Anecdotal evidence is disgracefully undependable…For each person’s life replicating an act from the movies, other movies are responsible for that act even if they did not take part on it”(Rodman, 2006).
While there are various court cases regarding this matter, these can only be a waste of time and money to arbitrate the case. These cases are normally brought up by families to the studios who made the movies under litigation. Studios usually win the case according to Rodman (2006)
Anecdotal evidence is a version of rumor that seldom wins in court. In this matter, I believe that anecdotal evidence is the effect of coincidence. However, what are true statistics? Will it be known? I am a doubtful person and consider that coincidences do occur, but I suppose that people are sensitive and their minds can easily be changed; therefore, differences in behavior.
Reference:
Rodman, G. (2006). Mass media in a changing world: History, industry, controversy. Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Week Three DQ2
Many early television programs came over directly from radio. As these programs became visual, how would the family viewing experience differ? What kind of effects might this have had on family life?
In a radio program, family viewing experience varies because you could enjoy the show by making loud the volume without having to be actually in the room. Several programs have now been shifted from radio to television and as television shows progresses, you could no longer stay in another place and enjoy the program. Families today have to
2. How reliable is anecdotal evidence that movie violence causes violence in real
life?
Anecdotal evidence means that acts found in a movie is further portrayed in life by
easily influenced people. Hence, it proposes that people are motivated to
reestablish and copy actions shown in movies. On the other hand, Rodman (2006)
states, “Anecdotal evidence is disgracefully undependable…For each person’s life
replicating an act from the movies, other movies are responsible for that act even if
they did not take part on it”(Rodman, 2006).
While there are various court cases regarding this matter, these can only be a
waste of time and money to arbitrate the case. These cases are normally brought
up by families to the studios who made the movies under litigation. Studios usually
win the case according to Rodman (2006)
Anecdotal evidence is a version of rumor that seldom wins in court. In this matter, I
believe that anecdotal evidence is the effect of coincidence. However, what are
true statistics? Will it be known? I am a doubtful person and consider that
coincidences do occur, but I suppose that people are sensitive and their minds can
easily be changed; therefore, differences in behavior.
Reference:
Rodman, G. (2006). Mass media in a changing world: History, industry,
controversy. Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Week Three DQ2
Many early television programs came over directly from radio. As these programs
became visual, how would the family viewing experience differ? What kind of
effects might this have had on family life?
In a radio program, family viewing experience varies because you could enjoy the
show by making loud the volume without having to be actually in the room. Several
programs have now been shifted from radio to television and as television shows
progresses, you could no longer stay in another place and enjoy the program.
Families today have to
http://uopexam.com/product/com-340-week-3-discussion-questions-dqs/
