In Rhodes’ article “The Media-Violence Myth,” Rhodes made a strong argument
that media does not cause violence simply because there are no specific, convincing
evidence that support this claim.
Rhodes’ article, “The Media-Violence Myth,” is not only listing numerous
accusations of media violence, but also the tolerable beliefs society has seems to be
taking into part. There are accusations like the two factor model, that points to
television exposure and economic conditions playing a positive impact on the rates on
media violence and murders. But recent studies has showed that “entertainment media
are therapeutic, not toxic.” (1) With this saying so, Rhodes argues that “To become
violent, people have to have experience with real violence. Period. No amount of
imitation violence can provide that experience.” (2) Therefore this can conclude that
Rhodes’ believes that without evidence, even though there are some, these type of bias
indeed does not play significant roles. There are so many different statistics and science
out there that involves with this genre, it makes the standard issue even more risky to pin
point. With no convincing evidence in sight, viewing violence on television and other
entertainment media, does not cause aggression or violence whatsoever.
In Rhodes’ article, The Media-Violence Myth,” Rhodes has firmly stated upon the
fact that media does not cause violence or crime. If anything it is due to the careless
made science everyone has sought out towards. This states a characterizing yet
conflicting debate. The on-going debate on how everyone makes different point of views
on media violence and what truly is to be the blamed for it, sure broadens up a conflicting
perspective. However, Rhodes then argues that violence is not caused from the media.
Instead he finds it to be a great deal of nonsense to say that mock violence is...