Sociology essay

[beccaelizabeth]

Haha!  
For once I have finished an essay with more than an hour to spare!  

So, this time, I can post it here and ask for feedback.  I *think* I covered all the theories, pulled out bits of research that fit, and made it all tidy and precisely within the word count (though I might end up having to argue that, for it only fits if you [don't count these in here]).  I am in fact actually happy with an essay for once (albeit mostly because I'm tired and feel sick and now don't have to be doing anything academic until tomorrow).  But... that makes me worry...  

So, anyone pointing out I missed out a whole chunk of theory would be golden.  But people reassuring me I haven't just typed 'I am a fish' a few thousand times would also be most welcome...  
;-)

 Outline and evaluate the different models of the relationship between media and violence

 

Sociology has always been interested in the effects of the mass media. It is commonly believed that portrayals of violence in media lead to real crimes. Sociological theories and research examine this apparent link and attempt to explain or refute it.

 

The manipulative model imagines the effects of media messages are hypodermic – injected straight into the minds, and therefore actions, of the audience. They see violence, therefore they do violence. Simplistic and overdeterministic, ignoring all other factors, institutions, and social context. But a lot of research has looked for this effect. Bandura's Bobo doll experiments claimed to find it. Children were shown a video of an adult beating up a clown doll, then they went and beat up the clown doll themselves. However, this research is highly artificial, concentrating on short term effects, and may not translate to real world violence. Research claiming to find long term effects had methodological flaws and very small effects [Cumberbatch, 1997]. And the vast majority of audiences don't go out and kill.

 

It has been claimed that computer shooting games teach both the skill and the will to kill, resembling the training given soldiers [Dispatches: Video nasties, 2000]. Children playing video games shoot humanoid targets, then go into school and shoot their classmates. Could it be because they cannot tell that school is not a game?

 

Postmodernism posits a media saturated world, where the media are crucial, defining all other institutions. Viewers choose their values, identities and lifestyles from those seen in the media. If that includes violent identities and lifestyles, that makes them available to choose, and possibly to live out. Baudrillard's theory of hyperreality, where the distinction between reality and representation breaks down, has disturbing implications when applied to theories of violence.

 

The case of Ronnie Zamora apparently presented just such a breakdown. As a 15 year old he murdered his neighbour; his defence lawyer said he was “unable to tell real life from the TV” [Eysenck and Nias, 1980], and a psychologist claimed that television “had blunted his awareness and his capacity to understand his actions” [Cumberbatch, April 1997]. There were problems in the internal logic – Zamora identified so strongly with Kojak he asked to have his head shaved, apparently demonstrating how he chose an identity from the media. But Kojak is a good guy, and wouldn't murder, so even a strong identification wouldn't explain his actions. The jury did not accept his defence, and found Zamora guilty.

 

The biggest problem with both these theories is that, while lawyers and the media often raise the idea that a crime was committed in imitation of a specific media product, the connections are often tenuous. A 1988 investigation into 6 cases found none were supported by the evidence. Investigation by the British Board of Film Censors, which looked into claims whenever they were made, up until 1994 had found no cases where someone imitated a video and committed a serious crime. [Cumberbatch, April 1997] This suggests that media violence is not imitated in such a straightforward way.

 

Dr Susan Bailey studied 40 child murderers and concluded that 10 of them had watched a lot of violent videos, and 'many' of those had shaped their methods to reflect the films content - a boy interested in samurai films used a samurai sword. However, even in her unrepresentative sample, ¾ had not seen videos and some of the remaining ¼ did not imitate them [The Guardian, 20 March 1993]. Further, there's the problem of causation – did the boy watch the films and they made him want to do samurai style violence, or did his pre-existing interest in violence lead him to choose those films?

 

The latter theory better fits the pluralist model of media effects. In that model, the media is a neutral broker providing diverse and unbiased content that reflects society. The consumer is king, and chooses media products to suit their own interests. So, there is violence in the media because there is violence in the world it reflects. Consumers choose violent media to meet their existing needs, and interpret it through their pre-existing beliefs. People who wish to do violence could choose media products that legitimise their impulse. Alternatively, they might choose violent media for its cathartic effect – they watch violence in order to achieve emotional release of potentially violent tensions and therefore not do violence.

 

Media is also used as something to talk about. Discussion contributes to interpretation. Influential opinion leaders have far more impact on action than the original media message. Studies [Lazarsfeld et al 1958, in Haralambos] have shown that media messages have no impact on voting, people tend to vote the same way as their spouse or parents. Surely then the opinions and actions of parents to violence would have more effect than media portrayals. Pluralist models figure that the impact of any media message is limited, violence included.

 

However, the poor and powerless can't buy very much, so aren't an attractive audience, and few make content for them. So the media may be a distorting mirror, reflecting more of particular, dominant, groups. This is theorised by the hegemonic model.

 

The media present the world through systems of 'common sense' beliefs, taken-for-granted ideas that become invisible, yet structure understanding. Ideologies of dominant groups become dominant ideologies. Their actions, and values, are seen as normal and natural. Other viewpoints exist, but have to struggle for space in biased media. Their alternative meanings are marginalised, made fun of, made to seem nonsensical.

 

Studying the effects of media violence skips over the rather important question of what is actually seen as violence. This will be shaped by the culture of the media producers, and audiences. Viewers from different social positions will interpret meanings differently based on their subculture, class, gender, ethnicity etc. The news is more likely to be seen as unbiased by white middle class males, and seem biased or irrelevant to other groups [Haralambos p841]. Dominant media messages might define violence in ways that support the interests of the poweful. Youths damaging property might be seen as violence, but rich corporations acting in ways that damage the health of thousands would not. Terrorists do violence, but governments wage war. All these differences shape the discourse. Research starts with the questions already defined by ideologies. Given the differences in interpretation and definition, effects are complicated. Long term effects might include desensitization, accepting violence as normal, or sensitization, becoming aware of consequences so violence scarier.

 

So can we say the media causes violence? No. The media is one influence among many. It might encourage or shape the form of violence among already vulnerable groups, but then again it might encourage good behaviour, discourage violence by showing punishments, or present alternative models of conflict resolution. It's far too complicated to simplify to causation.

 

 

 

Bibliography

 

Edgar, A & Sedgwick, P (2002) Cultural Theory The Key Concepts Routledge

Haralambos & Holborn (2004) Sociology Themes and Perspectives 6^th ed. London: HarperCollins

Lawson, T. & Garrod, J. (2003) Complete A-Z Sociology Handbook, 3^rd ed. Hodder Arnold

 

Media Violence Pack

 

“Media Violence: Science and common sense” Guy Cumberbatch, Psychology Review, April 1997

 

'Sociology in Focus', says the extract is [Adapted from Eysenck and Nias Sex, Violence and the Media, 1980, p36]

 

Griffiths, Mark, Violent Video Games: Are the harmful? Psychology Review, April 1998

Comments

[pinkdormouse.livejournal.com]

I like your conclusion there.

[beccaelizabeth]

thanksyou :)

if I had more than 1000 words to play with it would have been longer

short essays are tricky

[spacedoutlooney.livejournal.com]

I finally got the time to read this. I really liked it. Well done.

[beccaelizabeth]

thanksyou :)

Sociology

[(Anonymous)]

Good work.

It was straight to the point!

Re: Sociology

[beccaelizabeth]

:-)

[beccaelizabeth]

65%