RE: media violence

From: Steve Drew (
Date: Wed Apr 17 2002 - 20:02:24 BST

  • Next message: Steve Drew: "Re: Bush's War on Terrorism"

    Received: by id UAA20788 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Wed, 17 Apr 2002 20:10:54 +0100
    X-Originating-IP: []
    User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.2509
    Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2002 20:02:24 +0100
    Subject: RE: media violence
    From: Steve Drew <>
    To: <>
    Message-ID: <>
    In-Reply-To: <>
    Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
    Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
    X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Apr 2002 19:04:42.0885 (UTC) FILETIME=[BB5E8B50:01C1E642]
    Precedence: bulk

    Hi Scott

    > Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 18:40:03 -0400
    > From: "Scott Chase" <>
    > Subject: RE: media violence
    > My dispute isn't necessarily with whether media can have adverse effects of
    > people's behavior, but if so, *what* should be done about it. If media
    > violence can lead to actual individual acts of violence does this mean that
    > legislation needs to be adopted to rid ourselves of the dangers of media
    > violence? I say no. I'm not against rating motion pictures and having
    > certain TV shows (like "South Park") aired at times when chances are lowered
    > that children will see these types of entertainment. I'm OK with reasonable
    > standards. I draw the line somewhere and I'm afraid of the "thought police"
    > running rampant and using published studies as a bully pulpit for
    > unprecedented legislation impacting the media. I wasn't a big fan of the
    > PMRC (Tipper Gore et al) campaign and I was a bit concerned about some of
    > the rhetoric coming from the types who are coming after the media, whether
    > they be religious conservatives or neo-liberals. I thought the whole 2Live
    > Crew debacle a total circus at the time, which ended up acomplishing little
    > more than free publicity for Luther Campbell.
    > Movies could have deleterious impacts on individuals. Wasn't it the "Taxi
    > Driver" that led *inadvertantly* to Reagan getting an assassination attempt
    > made upon him? People can get carried away with movies. I like the
    > "Terminator" flix, but hope nobody takes them too seriously and develops a
    > Sarah or John Connor complex, thinking they've gotta save the world from
    > computers before they become self-aware.
    > Even sans violence or other bad impacts like that, I've known people who
    > have gotten way too wrapped up on big movies like "Star Wars" back when I
    > was a kid. Nothing worse than having lunch boxes, T-shirts, action figures
    > and all the assorted items associated with the movie and watching it more
    > than a dozen times before it finished its first run in the theaters. I've
    > known folks that have gotten way into "Star Trek" too. I wonder if anyone
    > has tried to pass off Klingon as knowing a second language ;-)
    > I do take some offense to the obligatory hybridization of blockbuster films
    > and fast food merchandising, but that's just my pet peeve.

    I can agree with this.



    This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Apr 17 2002 - 20:22:19 BST