|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 864 days) Posts: 2339 From: Socorro, New Mexico USA Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Should the Public Airwaves be More or Less Censored? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2197 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: No. If I found out he was letting the 6 year old watch Top Gun, though, I think I'd take him aside and confront him about it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2197 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
The first link you mention is just a catalogue of the violence in children's television. It mentions nothing at all about the effects of the violence. It simply assumes that it's harmful but doesn't support that assumption.
Your second link was a mixed bag, with no clear link either way. Some excerpts from your link:
One study last year found a 25 percent decrease in violence in a San Jose, Calif., grade school where kids received classroom lessons in media awareness and were asked to watch only seven hours of TV a week for several months. Media awareness, rat. You know, that "supervision" and "guidence" that we've been talking about in this thread. To my thinking, parents should be doing that. You seem to want the government to do it for you.
Adolescents who watched more than one hour a day of television - regardless of content - were roughly four times more likely to commit aggressive acts toward other people later in their lives than those who watched less than one hour. Of those who watched more than three hours, 28.8 percent were later involved in assaults, robberies, fights, and other aggressive behavior. So, regardless of what the kids watched, they were more aggressive if they watched more TV.
quote: If one of your 6 year olds ever walked in on you and your wife in an intimate moment, should we call social services on you? If your neighbor took their 6 year old to a museum that had nude art, would you call social services on them? If your neighbor had their 6 year old watch a sex education program that included nudity and depictions of the sex act, would you call social services on them? Edited by nator, : No reason given. Edited by nator, : No reason given. Edited by nator, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2197 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: What, private schools are biased nowadays? We'll have to throw out the Harvard and Yale source material then.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2197 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: 57% of Americans believe in the existence of ESP.
A really good article about scientific illiteracy in the US and Europe. It isn't good news Does that mean that ESP really exists, or does it only mean that people believe it does? At one time, a majority of Americans believed that Saddam Hussein was responsible for the World Trade Center attacks, but that didn't make it true, now did it? Reality is not determined by majority belief.
quote: Hold on, now. Violence is indeed harmful to society. Real violence. But what we have been talking about is violence in children's programming on TV, and if it has a harmful effect upon children, not all violence in society. Please do not move the goalposts.
quote: You have not demonstrated that children seeing violence on TV results in more violent behavior, or damages children in any way. I am not saying that it doesn't harm them, by the way. I am open to the idea that it isn't good. You have simply not supported your claim, that's all. Until you do, anything you say is not based upon fact but upon nothing more than your biases and prejudices.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2197 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: We have proceeded with this discussion assuming your memory of this incident is accurate, but I am not so sure. What can you remember about it, and can you find any reference to it on the internet? Surely, if this really happened on a sunday afternoon, many, many people would have contacted the network to complain and it would have been reported. I think it is likely that you are misremembering.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2197 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: No, actually, they don't. that's because I don't frigging have TV in my house. They are making money off of YOU, riverrat, because you do.
I think it is likely that you are misremembering. quote: I am not suggesting that you forgot. I am suggesting that you are misremembering. Like you said, it was many years ago. It is very easy to embellish such a memory and to get details wrong, such as time of day. I have done it myself, many times, for events much more recent than "many years" in the past. Everyone does it, because that's the way memory works. You could easily be constructing a false memory and have conflated two or more incidents into one, for example. That's why I asked you to report what you remember about it. For example, what year was it? What teams were playing? What time of year was it? What was the nature of the "head blowing off" broadcast; news story or ad for a program? If it was a program, which one was it? If it was a news story, was it local or national? Why are you so sure your memory is accurate?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2197 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Presumably, you have read one or more of these studies. Exactly what are the effects of this violence, both long and short term, according to the studies? Please list them. Edited by nator, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2197 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
100% of people used to believe the Earth is flat. They were wrong. A survey showing how many people, even if it's the majority of people, feel or believe a certain way is evidence only of how they feel. It has no relationship whatsoever to reality. quote: So by your logic, if 100% of the people believe the Earth is flat, it really is flat. All we have to do, then, is get 100% of the people to believe that we never invaded Iraq, and then those thousands of people will have never died. Rat, can you please learn to correct yourself? Every thread descends into you wasting everyone's time stubbornly defending your asinine mistakes as others are forced to explain (over and over) how you were in error.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2197 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Oh, so you like and accept studies that you think support your personal opinions, but reject and hate those studies that don't.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2197 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: No Rat, this is what happened. You said, "TV violence is bad for kids." We said, "Prove it. Show us the statistics or the studies." You then provided a link to a survey of American people's opinions and beliefs about the harm TV violence does to children. That's not actual evidence, rat, that's just people's beliefs. YOU posted it when we asked for evidence to support your claim that TV violence caused harm to children. Why did YOU post it if YOU didn't think that people's opinions constituted evidence of the sort we were requesting?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2197 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
I did, and I come to the same conclusion.
You said that you "hate" and distrust studies in general. So, I am confused. Are you posting the study because you believe it supports your argument, so therefore you think it is valid? Or do you think it is just as invalid as all of the other hated studies, but since your opponents value studies, you thought you'd see if we accept it?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2197 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
In other words, the evidence does not prove causation, but it does demonstrate a strong correlation.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2197 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Actually, you posted it in response to our repeated requests for evidence that TV violence causes harm to children. As has been repeatedly pointed out to you, that source doesn't do that.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2197 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: We know you think that, rat. But you haven't demostrated that what you personally believe reflects reality. Lots of people believe astrology works, that there are canals on Mars, and that Saddam Hussein was responsible for the WTC attacks, but just becasue people believe it doesn't mean it is true. And I do hope you stop going to conventional doctors, since their knowledge and ability to cure cancer and other diseases is based upon all of those hated studies that you reject. Good luck with the psychic surgeon and the faith healers.
quote: Of course. However, when others attempt to replicate your study, they will see how much you "tweaked" your numbers and if you "tweaked" them too much, your study's claims will be considered invalidated and it will fade away, never to be cited or built upon by any other researcher.
quote: Yes. That is because the evidence does not justify that conclusion.
quote: Everyone has the power to do something about it. You turn the TV off, or you don't have it in your house in the first place, or use the VChip. Or, you make sure you are with your kids when they are watching so you can discuss what they see. You know...make parenting choices that put your kids first and your own desire to have TV in your home second.
quote: ROTFLMAO!!! Causation means that one event is a direct cause of another event. Correlation means that one event is associated with the incidence of another event but that the second is not directly caused by the first. For example, one of the studies posted in this thread showed that kids who watch a lot of TV, no matter what the content, were more likely to be violent. Now, is that because they were not expending enough energy, or they were not learning social skills, or were extremely sensitive to any violence in ALL programming, or what? Don't know.
quote: If it is discovered to be true that ANY TV watching increases violent behavior in kids, will you get rid of your TV?
quote: No, but it doesn't show that it is. You seem to want to maintain your bias regardless of little evidence to support your beliefs.
quote: Sure, especially when the parents don't notice that the kids are watching a martial arts film, and don't talk to the kids about what they are seeing in the highly-choreographed stunt scenes, about the physical and mental discipline and control that martial artists must study for years to attain, about how it is all pretend and that the camera angles look like they are hitting each other but they are really missing, etc. When parents don't parent, bad things can happen from many different sources. Why do you blame it on Hollywood when nobody forced you to invite Hollywood into your home? Nobody forced you to plop your kids, unguided, in front of the TV to watch a martial arts film. Edited by nator, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2197 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: They can already do that by blocking channels. TV exists for everybody and did so before parents started using it as a babysitter. It would be like not allowing the violence, sex, and swearing in R-rated movies because some parents drop their kids off at the theater and don't care what movies they see. Edited by nator, : No reason given.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024