Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login

Violence in Entertainment: How My Little Pony Can Save the World

I scroll idly through hundreds of TV channels available for my perusal. I take part in America’s favorite sport, channel surfing, and wade my way through flashing lights and obnoxious noises. Nothing seems to stick out; or, perhaps more accurately, everything seems to stick out. After all, no one would find explosions and gore and graphic sex to be boring or ordinary in the real world. I pause momentarily on one channel; a reporter is explaining the known details of the latest school shooting. Shuddering, I continue on, searching not for information but merely for an escape from my ennui. A few channels later, I pause once again; the screen now flickers between scenes at a breakneck pace, tearing me from one bloodbath to another. I have no context, given that it was the middle of the show, but I wonder if context really would have helped my understanding of why such a thing would legitimately appeal to anyone. I remain on this channel only briefly before flipping back to the news. The newscaster continues rambling on about that same violent shooting, it seems, but this time the tragedy hardly affects me, and instead I wonder what could turn a man into such a murderer, stripping him of any semblance of empathy or morality.

Unfortunately, modern entertainment has become mindlessly violent overall. A tool that can be and has been used for information, moral lessons, and improving society has crumbled to a gruesome and shallow state. Common solutions like ratings systems, censorship, and accountability management have failed and will continue to fail to solve the issue. Modern and popular entertainment display violence in a way that desensitizes people to bloodshed and harms society, and the only workable solution is to support moralistic media that remains engaging and entertaining, like My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic.

First of all, violence in entertainment essentially trains people to be violent. Research consistently shows that “[v]iolent media increase aggression by teaching observers how to aggress” (Anderson et al.). Just as Pavlov’s dog was taught to associate a certain noise with food, humans can be taught to associate violence with pleasure; people watch gruesome acts of killing in their entertainment before being bombarded by advertisements for products targeted toward them (Lavers). Brad Bushman, a psychology professor and expert on the causes of human aggression, stated in an interview that in violent video games “you get points for killing people; that’s how you advance to the next level of the game… so you’re directly rewarded for doing that.” The very way violent video games are structured rewards pointless violence and, as Bushman explains simply, “people are more likely to repeat behaviors that are rewarded.” Our media needs to adequately represent the (often more-effective) peaceful solutions to problems, or the majority of society will learn to be aggressive and to accept violent solutions as more and more acceptable.

Disturbingly, violence in media desensitizes civilians to violence just as military training does to soldiers. Instinctively, the majority of people are unwilling to kill other people; even in war, many soldiers refused to actually fire upon visible enemy soldiers. At the time of the second World War, researchers “discovered that only 15 to 20 percent of the individual riflemen could bring themselves to fire at an exposed enemy soldier,” compared with a rate of “over 90 percent” during the Vietnam War (Cagney). The military achieved this staggering result through desensitization, a process mimicked by violent media. As people are exposed to violence on a daily basis, they begin to accept it as normal. The same process that used to train soldiers is inadvertently being applied to children and society at large (Cagney).

Perhaps almost as threatening as media training people to act violently, however, are the actual physical changes caused by consuming violent entertainment. The effects of “priming aggressive cognitions” and “increasing arousal,” as Anderson et al. mention, threaten society nearly as much as “teaching observers how to aggress.” Scientists have measured these physiological effects in particular; a team of researchers discovered that test subjects produced stress hormones linked to aggression in significantly higher amounts even long after the subjects ceased playing violent video games (Hossini et al.). Critics may complain that violent media do not directly cause violence, despite the extensive proof to the contrary. Even so, watching violence has also been shown to decrease the likelihood of an individual helping a victim in a violent situation (“Major medical groups finger H'wood violence”). Desensitization to violence does not just increase the likelihood of aggressive behavior; it robs people of their empathy for fellow human beings, an integral part of humanity and morality.

So far, the primary system to combat entertainment media’s harmful effect on society has been through unsuccessful ratings systems. Although good in theory, entertainment ratings systems have failed. Their primary purpose, to let parents make smarter decisions about what media to expose their children to, has been shown to be inadequate. A group of researchers asked parents whether or not they thought particular movies, television shows, and video games were appropriate for certain age groups and compared this feedback to the industry standards; the results were less than stellar. Parents were asked to rate various pieces of entertainment; a “green light” signified that the rater thought that a given game, movie, or show was appropriate for a given age range, a “yellow light” signaled uncertainty (i.e. parental guidance suggested), and a “red light” showed that the given entertainment would not at all be appropriate for a given age range. “[P]arent raters disagree with industry usage of many of the ratings designating material suitable for children of different ages” concludes the study, showing that our current ratings system does not line up with what parents expect. TV-shows rated for teenagers in particular were given the “red light” of definite disapproval by over half of parents surveyed (Walsh). At best, these ratings systems provide a tiny tool for responsible parents to monitor their children’s entertainment intake. Although this may give slightly more power to parents, such a system is completely useless when parents do not make use of it. In addition, such a ratings system may have the opposite of the intended effect; the Vice President of West Coast Entertainment himself admitted that “the violence warning that appears on the Sega Genesis ‘Mortal Kombat’ actually sparked sales,” stating that “[k]ids were clamoring to get that game because of the publicity” (qtd. in Goldstein). Ultimately, our current solutions to the problem of violence in entertainment harming society are not good enough.

The most obvious and most tried solution is censorship: government stepping in directly to outlaw or restrict violence in media with legal penalties for disobedience. Censorship of video games has been tried, before the Supreme Court no less, but the court in its wisdom rejected it. When California tried to pass a law restricting the sale of violent video games to minors, the Supreme Court determined in Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Assn. that although “a few limited exceptions for historically unprotected speech, such as obscenity, incitement, and fighting words” had been made, “a legislature cannot create new categories of unprotected speech simply by weighing the value of a particular category against its social costs.” Regardless of how harmful violent video games may be, the court determined that censorship in this situation would still be unconstitutional. Essentially, calling for the government to just magically zap away the problem is not an option.

With government essentially out of the picture, one has to wonder who ought to be accountable for the problem of excessive violence in the media. The President of the Ethics Resource Council argues that “[c]orporate leaders, in spite of what the market may be willing to entertain or even want, have a responsibility to the quality of the programming they put out and the effect it has on our children and on our culture” (qtd. in LaBarre). Although this may be true to some extent, and consumers ought to call the producers of violent media out on their blunders, this in and of itself is not sufficient. Corporations generally care more about profit than people, and they will sell almost anything to make money. Ultimately, it is every individual’s duty to monitor what sort of entertainment oneself and one’s children consume. Parents especially need to control to some extent what TV shows and movies their children watch and what video games their children play.

Remember, however, that entertainment media is neither inherently evil nor limited to only negative effects. Much of young children’s television tends to be morally educational in nature, and entertainment has encouraged charity and good behavior. Although many video games can cause antisocial behavior, a good video game could have the opposite effect. One study concluded “exposure to prosocial video games increased the accessibility of prosocial thoughts,” meaning that playing video games (or music, or television) with positive messages can encourage kindness and other good behavior, even in adults (Greitemeyer). Simply limiting the hours children spend exposed to entertainment media and prohibiting particularly violent video games is not enough. All of society needs to encourage and support prosocial entertainment for all ages and to pull away from violence as our primary source of mirth. People need to actually go out of their way to find truly high-quality entertainment.

Although people often associate entertainment teaching moral values with small children’s television, it is quite possible for a show to be high-quality and entertaining for adults. My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic, for example, is a humorous but incredibly moralistic cartoon which has reportedly “become one of the most popular cartoons among grown-ups” (Weinman). My Little Pony generally ends each episode with a basic secular moral message, making it accessible to people of all ages and backgrounds. Despite each episode being essentially an Aesop at heart, however, the cast is complex and well-characterized. “Unlike other cartoons with grown-up fans, My Little Pony makes almost no concessions to them,” remaining innocent and lacking innuendos intended to go over kids’ heads (Weinman). My Little Pony has gained its popularity by its own right; it is just a good show, despite (or perhaps partially because of) its lack of pointless, gruesome violence.

That being said, My Little Pony does not pretend that violence does not exist or that it is something only a super-villain would consider, unlike most stereotypical moralistic “children’s entertainment.” On several occasions, one of the main ponies is confronted with a situation and immediately jumps to violence as a solution, only for this decision to backfire. Nevertheless, there was one instance when violence was shown to be acceptable; in the second season finale, the ponies’ country is invaded by a foreign army, and when it is clear that negotiation is not an option, the ponies do defend themselves against the threat. Overall, My Little Pony provides a balanced and accurate picture of violence: something that is only a last resort and only for defending oneself and one's loved ones, a picture far more peaceful than that of most modern TV shows and video games.

Ultimately, an iron fist and tight legal restrictions will not save America, but a grass-roots cultural revolution can. While censorship may seem to be a viable option to combat gruesome violence in entertainment, such a lazy solution does not truly treat the problem. People must transform the way they think, not simply what they are allowed to do. More entertainment like My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic must be encouraged in order to combat the evils of modern media. Together, everyone must stand up against violence and say “no” to the desensitizing violence of modern entertainment.

Works Cited

Anderson, Craig A., and Brad J. Bushman. "Effects Of Violent Video Games On Aggressive Behavior, Aggressive Cognition, Aggressive Affect, Physiological Arousal, And Prosocial Behavior: A Meta-Analytic Review Of The Scientific Literature." Psychological Science (Wiley-Blackwell) 12.5 (2001): 353. Academic Search Complete. Web. 16 Jan. 2013.

Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Assn. 564 U. S. ____ (2011). Retrieved from….

Bushman, Brad, and Duke Ferris. Infidel Guy. Infidel Guy, 2012. Web. 31 Feb. 2013.

Cagney, Mary, and David Grossman. "Trained to kill." Christianity Today 10 Aug. 1998: 31+.
Gale Power Search. Web. 10 Jan. 2013.

Goldstein, Seth. "Ratings for vid game violence debated; VSDA proposes voluntary industry system." Billboard 18 Dec. 1993: 6+. Gale Power Search. Web. 16 Jan. 2013.

Greitemeyer, Tobias, and Silvia Osswald. "Playing Prosocial Video Games Increases The Accessibility Of Prosocial Thoughts." Journal Of Social Psychology 151.2 (2011): 121-128. MasterFILE Elite. Web. 16 Jan. 2013.

Hossini, Fatemeh, Reza Rezaeeshrazi, Mir Hamid Salehian, and Amir Dana. "The Effect Of Violent And Non-Violent Computer Games On Changes In Salivary Cortisol Concentration In Male Adolescents." Annals Of Biological Research 2.6 (2011): 175-178. Academic Search Complete. Web. 16 Jan. 2013.

LaBarre, Polly. "Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil: media violence emerges as the next frontier in the ever-expanding realm of corporate social responsibility." Industry Week 21 Aug. 1995: 92+. Gale Power Search. Web. 10 Jan. 2013.

Lavers, Daphne. “Media Violence: Ugly and Getting Uglier.” World and I Mar. 2002: 68. Gale Biography In Context. Web. 15 Jan. 2013.

“Major medical groups finger H'wood violence.” Hollywood Reporter 26 July 2000: 8. Gale Power Search. Web. 10 Jan. 2013.

Walsh, David A., and Douglas A. Gentile. "A Validity Test Of Movie, Television And Video-Game Ratings." Pediatrics 107.6 (2001): 1302. Health Source - Consumer Edition. Web. 16 Jan. 2013.

Weinman, Jaime J. "Men who love 'My Little Pony': don't mess with guys who want to talk about Pinkie Pie and pretty pony tea parties." Maclean's 12 Sept. 2011: 80. Gale Biography In Context. Web. 18 Jan. 2013.
This was written February of 2013 for a major research paper grade in my English Language and Composition class. We were supposed to research and write a scholarly paper on a real-world problem in our community, country, or the world. I chose violence in entertainment with a focus on MLP:FiM. We had to get our topics pre-approved by the teacher and she was incredibly hesitant to approve mine. She claimed that My Little Pony was not scholarly enough and that although she would tentatively approve it, she thought it was unlikely that I could write an A+ paper with that topic. When she handed back the papers, I received a 100% A+ (and this teacher is not a lenient grader!). As she passed me the paper, she said the word "humility" under her breath.

My mother, who has professional editing experience and read early drafts of this paper, thought it was so good that it ought to be published. I opted to put it on deviantArt. Unfortunately, deviantArt for some reason forbids .doc files from being uploaded to literary categories. As such, this paper has been altered from its original MLA formatting.

Any feedback is welcome, and although major changes are at this point unlikely, I will take any suggestions into account in my future writings.
Add a Comment:
MermaidNinja Featured By Owner Apr 6, 2015
Brain over brawn!
Compassion over cruelty!
Tolerance over hate!
RGM2011 Featured By Owner Aug 25, 2014
I have long stopped watching anime altogether. The bloody violence was one of my reasons. I was too scared to last one episode into Baccano! because the violence made Mortal Kombat look tame. Texhnolyze had a main character I couldn't get invested in at all, so by the time his limbs were severed early into the series, I decided to move on. And don't get me started on Attack on Titan...err, People Argue and Occasionally Titans Show Up.

For action, I now watch Power Rangers/Super Sentai instead. You won't be seeing anything gruesome there, and the power of friendship saves the day too.
majicfrog Featured By Owner Aug 25, 2014
I've long disliked all the anime my friends showed me until they showed me Ouran Host Club. I'm not far into it, but it's a very slice-of-life style anime.
Kegger98 Featured By Owner Dec 1, 2013
So, your saying we should censor violence at the expense of story telling?
majicfrog Featured By Owner Dec 4, 2013
Raw, pointless violence detracts from story-telling. A good story treats violence in an appropriate manner. So, no.
Kegger98 Featured By Owner Dec 6, 2013
What would be a bad to treat violence?
majicfrog Featured By Owner Dec 6, 2013
Media that show violence as a terrible thing with horrible consequences and as a last resort, albeit one that is occasionally necessary, treat it well.

The glorification of violence is harmful. Realistic violence that is passed off as regular and acceptable is generally harmful. Essentially, we need shows that actually treat violence in a mature manner and not simply as a happy bloodbath. 
Kegger98 Featured By Owner Dec 6, 2013
Could give an example of bad use of it?
BookLoverTwilight Featured By Owner May 2, 2013  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
this is an impressive work. i think you address the issue properly, depict what needs to be done, and find solutions to the problem very well. overall, i have no negative comment on this. and you should indeed get it published. its that amazing.
majicfrog Featured By Owner May 2, 2013
Thanks a bunch! Glad you enjoyed it.
BookLoverTwilight Featured By Owner May 5, 2013  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
My mother read it and said SHE liked it! (my mother graduated from Stanford and now runs five different businesses. my mom's seal of approval is what you might call hard to get) so yeah.
majicfrog Featured By Owner May 5, 2013
Wow! Glad to hear it's good enough for a proper scholar and businesswoman. My own mom actually bugged me to put it out for others to see after she read it, and I initially rejected her idea. Glad I posted it.
Xeregon Featured By Owner Apr 28, 2013
I have mixed feelings about your paper, and it's difficult to say why.

On the prospect of violent video games, I think the video games themselves aren't as much a problem as they are symptomatic of something related. Society as a whole seems to relegate the darker side of people's personalities to either demonised or glorified. You either get a news bulletin that compares the latest shooter to previous ones -- like a high score screen on national television, see TotalBiscuit's VLog on the topic -- or you get the standard reaction that violence is bad and must never be tolerated. I think that your implication of the latter is worrying, even if you didn't intend it to be.

Hatred and aggression are human emotions, just like love and fear are. Trying to suppress them and pretend they don't exist only makes it harder to deal with them when they sneak past our defenses. Owning up to one's dark side and accepting that we are all capable of violence lets us see these things coming and maybe acknowledge that we are capable of this for a reason. Kind of quoting 'Using Beauty and her Beast to Introduce the Human Shadow' here, but it's a recurring thing in Jungian psychology, I think. Not an expert in the matter.

See, this is where My Little Pony differentiates itself: the actual morals of the episodes. The Aesop that's quoted and the lesson that adults take from the show in general aren't the same. You quote someone who says the show doesn't have innuendos that go over kids' heads, but... it does. Check what is on screen and you'll see it. By design or not, the limp horn in Bridle Gossip has its associations. On other occasions, you get references to films that no little child has any business watching, and the Internet is keen to point them out whenever it can.

My point is: the recurring moral of MLP is 'You are more than your gimmick'. Just because a character is used to fulfilling a certain social role (shy, aggressive, anti-social bookworm) does not mean they cannot adopt a different role if the situation calls for it. The clearest examplles include Fluttershy in Dragonshy, Twilight in Winter Wrap-Up (where one of her biggest flaws turns out to be a good thing), but it keeps coming back. It's shown, but rarely if ever told or pointed out.

Now, this moral is appealing to college age adults because that's the age we've learned that the social roles we've lived through high school just don't cut it anymore. We get tired of being the jock or the nerd and seeing any show where this development is encouraged is highly appealing. The fact that it's got a wide array of character archetypes adds to the appeal, since that shows it's really everyone who can break out of their rut like that. Another big difference in MLP is that they do acknowledge that violence can and will happen. But they don't condemn it, they own up to it and try to work with their flaws. This was especially true for Season 2, where every one of the main characters had at least one episode where a major personality flaw was central to the plot. These flaws were never removed -- read: suppressed and destroyed, despite being a part of themselves -- but compromises were found where needed.

That said, violence in media certainly doesn't help. Over-exposure to violence will deaden one's senses to it, but a society where all violent impulses are treated as being inhuman and 'turn the other cheek' is the answer for any sort of bullying problem will still suffer the same problem. Frustrations need to be vented somehow, and better to have them vented in a virtual reality than on a live target. And when the rage is spent, maybe then a little introspection will help get to the bottom of the problem.

My thoughts on helping? We need a show that's just a little darker than MLP, not scared to show blood, but still with a colourful cast. Violence needs to be implied as present, heavily, but not shown that much. Conflicts need to be presented with their roots and resolved with compromise without everyone immediately 'making friends' with the enemy.

In other words, we need a series or at least a short movie with the very clear moral 'Just because you don't like someone doesn't mean you need to make their life miserable'.

My two cents.
majicfrog Featured By Owner Apr 28, 2013
Yes... that bit about no references going over kids' heads was outdated, I'll admit. I think at the time of that article it was accurate... eh, a rather minor point anyway.

As I've tried to get across, MLP's treatment of violence is one great part of MLP. It shows both good guys and bad guys reacting violently but makes it clear that in the majority of circumstances violence is ineffective and a last resort for any problem. As for the flaws? The characters did develop, that is, their flaws lessened, but you are right that they were never entirely removed. Instead, they have (for the most part) been lessened and dealt with to an extent that they are no longer major flaws but perhaps begin crossing into the territory of just normal character traits instead.

I think I would love a show like the one you've described. The closest thing I think I've found so far to what you've described, as I've told several other people, is Doctor Who. Still, we need more entertainment that treats violence in a realistic but pro-social manner.
Chimpso Featured By Owner Apr 11, 2013
I had written several paragraphs in response to this, but then the backspace key decided to take me back to the previous page and I lost everything >.<, so I'll just have to summarize what I wanted to say.

I don't think that the fact that a lot of us are desensitized to violence is the problem, I think the problem is and always will be people who act on violence. Think of it like religion. Although religions like, for example, Islam, incite many people to violence, many more follow Islam but are not violent and do not act unruly because of it. Despite the fact that a lot of violence does come out of it, I think you'll agree with me when I say that censoring and outlawing Islam would be a very bad idea. Desensitization is not the problem, acting violently is the problem. And we already have ways to combat that (rules and laws in society).

MLP provides moral lessons. Violent media provides entertainment. There is a difference, and we have to remember that MLP is also incredibly idyllic, it is simple too simple to provide insight on, as EGE stated, things like egregious human rights violations and atrocities. They simply do not exist in that world. Violence in media is usually designed for entertainment. The makers of Mortal Kombat weren't trying to get everyone to think about the implications of violence, they were trying to make an entertaining game to turn a profit. Same thing with Grand Theft Auto. Just because people like Jack Thompson come around and say that "this-or-that school shooter was inspired by Grand Theft Auto" it doesn't mean that Grand Theft Auto should be banned, it means that the person should be jailed (once again, refer to my religion example).

Just my thoughts. A well written piece deserving of the grade nonetheless. :D
majicfrog Featured By Owner Apr 11, 2013
Desensitization to violence is one of many roots of the problem. People don't act violently without reason, and although desensitization to violence in and of itself usually will not cause true violent behavior (except, perhaps, in the very young), it does contribute. There are, at the very least, strong correlations that need to be further investigated. Our knowledge about our own minds is unfortunately rather limited. As I explained in the paper, censorship is not usually a good solution, however. What we need is a cultural shift away from encouraging violence as entertainment. A major point of this paper is that something can be both moralistic, encouraging good social behavior, and incredibly entertaining (MLP:FiM being my prime example). I believe that if people pushed for it, the entertainment industry could and would come up with high-quality entertainment that encourages pro-social behavior.

Unfortunately, there aren't many examples among adult-oriented entertainment. In an early draft of this paper, I included a segment on one particular Doctor Who episode, /The Beast Below/, which had a rather moralistic message. There are a few other similar Doctor Who episodes. In general, the Doctor does not advocate violence, for instance, except when it is absolutely necessary (although the Doctor is imperfect and prone to the occasional slip-up). Modern media treats violence as the first and best solution in many cases when it should be treated as it is in real life: a costly option best used as a last resort.

Thank you for your feedback!
EternalGeekExposed Featured By Owner Apr 11, 2013
Your paper is very well written and organized, for sure. I do think it is odd to compare a children's show (even one that has many adult viewers) to obviously-adult movies, shows, and video games. The fact remains that MLP is not going to appeal to the majority of adults because adults are capable of handling more complex and dark topics, and they are free-thinking enough to draw morals and opinions out of adult media. MLP cannot offer comparative morals and values (for example, Friendship is Magic can talk about sharing or dealing with peer pressure, but it can't really tackle the full scale and depth of the topic of war atrocities.) Thus, I don't think shows like MLP are the answer to violent media. I think violent media is perfectly acceptable and sometimes necessary, although it should be rated appropriately so that people unable or unwilling to handle the content can be warned. And are you protesting news coverage as being unhealthy if it covers violence? I was not sure about that, so I don't want to jump to any conclusions. =P

Out of curiosity, you discussed censorship, but you didn't state whether or not you support it. Do you support media censorship of violent media/books?
majicfrog Featured By Owner Apr 11, 2013
Hm. In retrospect I did sort of dance around censorship, though I thought I had made myself clear. Censorship is not usually a good solution; I agree with the Supreme Court on this one.

The comparison isn't perfect, I'll admit. I'm going to copy+paste a bit I wrote for a previous reply:

I believe that if people pushed for it, the entertainment industry could and would come up with high-quality entertainment that encourages pro-social behavior. In an early draft of this paper, I included a segment on one particular Doctor Who episode, /The Beast Below/, which had a rather moralistic message. There are a few other similar Doctor Who episodes. In general, the Doctor does not advocate violence, for instance, except when it is absolutely necessary (although the Doctor is imperfect and prone to the occasional slip-up). Modern media treats violence as the first and best solution in many cases when it should be treated as it is in real life: a costly option best used as a last resort.

Basically, I don't want all adult-oriented entertainment to be like My Little Pony, I just want it to be more "pro-social," if you will. Much modern media glorifies violence when violence is really a terrible thing. You're right that MLP can't tackle the full scale and depth of a topic like war atrocities, but the problem is that neither does entertainment geared towards adults! Instead, video games and TV skim the surface, glorifying mass killing /without/ diving into the deep problems of war atrocities and such things. MLP can only go so deep, but unfortunately, adult-oriented entertainment, which is capable of going deeper, does not. My problem isn't so much violence being portrayed so much as it is with how it is portrayed.

As for news agencies: this is a bit of a different problem. News needs to cover terrible atrocities. That's part of its job. On the other hand, covering things that don't really matter and can't be changed, and bringing them to national attention when they really don't need attention, desensitizes people to when it really matters. One woman allegedly killing her children, a single oddball case that we as a society can't really do much about, gets national attention for months; kids being shot in the streets of our cities gets nearly no attention, even though it is an on-going problem that we can probably do something about.
EternalGeekExposed Featured By Owner Apr 12, 2013
Ah, good to see you are against censorship. We are in agreement there! Also, I understand your concern for making media more pro-social. I do think it would be nice, primarily because I enjoy watching things that have a decent message behind them (and there are various films/shows that do deal well with topics like war atrocities) but they are, indeed, in the minority. Honestly, I think film may actually be improving in this respect compared to the past decade or two (with the exception of the horror genre but... duh) but video games are likely regressing. Since I'm not a gamer myself, I can't really discuss much about that. In conclusion, I have mixed feelings about violent media. I enjoy an action flick as much as the next person, but I'm also mature enough to handle the content as fictional entertainment and nothing more. And I also have my limits regarding how much violence I want to see and how it is portrayed. I suppose that is not true of everyone, and I suspect video games are problem even worse, given they are in a first-person perspective.

As for news agencies, yes, I think it is frustrating how they present such a skewed vision of world events, based on what is sensational. Obviously, that is good marketing, but it leaves so many completely clueless about the actual reality around them. In addition, I wish more local news sources would keep me up to date on some of the policies and referendums happening in my state legislature. I really have to dig to find these things, but the stuff they are doing is important! And usually makes me head-desk.
majicfrog Featured By Owner Apr 13, 2013
We have similar views, it seems. In my research I did discover that researchers and psychologists believe video games are likely worse because the person playing the game is actually participating in simulated killing rather than just witnessing it. I've never been a fan of first person shooters and the like. Although I am guilty of playing World of Tanks... mostly to play with my friends. No blood, no guts, just empty-looking tanks exploding, though xD

The news industry is in desperate need of serious changes, I'll say that much.
EternalGeekExposed Featured By Owner Apr 13, 2013
Yeah. I wouldn't know how to fix the news industry, though, without changing the culture that perpetuates it, and I don't see that happening... ever. =/
Add a Comment:

Featured in Collections

Litarary Works by AtlantaTheAristocrat


Submitted on
April 10, 2013
File Size
15.2 KB


16 (who?)