Violence In Question
There are key elements to analyzing an essay. When attempting to prove a point, an author tries to use several arguments. Premises, or reasons that support the conclusion, aid in these arguments. The premises can be weak, strong, fallacious, or unnecessary. Accuracy of the premises is another critical factor as well. In the article, "TV Violence: Does It Cause Real-Life Mayhem?" written by Susan R. Lamson, her writing appears to be lacking in certain information and sprinkled with fallacies to be more convincing. Lamson begins the second paragraph of her article with a premise stating that, "Televised mayhem is seen as a leading cause of America's epidemic of violent crime" (255). This is an example of a weak premise because there is no statistical proof identifying who sees televised mayhem as America's leading epidemic of violent crime. It is strictly Lawson's opinion. Also, depending on the audience "televised mayhem" and "epidemic of violent crime" may be defined in completely different terms stemming from issues such as culture, religion, education, and social standing. Mayhem, as well as "violent crimes," could be exemplified by watching Charlie's Angels, which includes lots of street fighting as well
) This is yet again another case in which the premise is weak and contains numerous flaws. But the violence is like a drug: Viewers develop a tolerance for it, so media 'pushers' give them steadily more" (256). If all NRA members and gun owners do their part in this fight, we can cut into the TV destruction that so gravely threatens both our children and our Bill of Rights" (258). She is then inferring that shooting up on heroin and watching TV is similar because they can make someone addicted. The reader does not know the underlying extremities of what created these averages therefore variables such as channel selection and show time can affect the average. She raises a compelling idea and is strong in her opinion but needs to deliver more factual information and actual effect. Additionally, Lamson alludes to the hidden assumption that if someone is watching a TV program that contains violent acts, they will become addicted. Watching a person get run over by a car or gunned down has become so familiar to viewers that violence has grown to be a part of our society. This is a false analogy fallacy because the author is comparing two separate issues, violence and drug abuse. Lamson concludes her article by saying, "In the end, only you-as a consumer, TV viewer, and voter-can demand an end to the televised violence that's bloodying our society. On the other hand, the statistic can include violent acts such as people being murdered. Just because someone watches a show with violence does not mean that they agree with or condone it. And a recent TV Guide study counted 1,845 acts of violence in eighteen hours of viewing time, an average of 100 violent acts per hour, or one every thirty-six seconds" (256. Another premise located within the article is when Lamson reported, "the National Institute of Mental Health found 80 percent of all television programs contain violent acts.
Common topics in this essay:
TV Guide,
Additionally Lamson,
Susan Lamson,
Bill Rights,
Mental Health,
,
Black Hawk,
Charlie's Angels,
School Communications,
violent acts,
televised mayhem,
violent crime,
lamson's article,
epidemic violent,
Real-Life Mayhem,
epidemic violent crime,
mayhem violent crimes,
tv history,
violent crimes,
drug abuse,
mayhem violent,
real-life mayhem,
statistic include violent,
violent acts recent,
|
Acceptance Essays
