Blood, guts, cuts, bruises, scars, decapitations, shootings, guns, knives, nudity, sex, expletives, bad role models and freedom of speech. Is that what you think of when you think about the content of the mass media? Has the media gone too far? Is this violence in mass media affecting our children? Some people would disagree while others would strongly agree. Is the idea of "freedom of expression" being taken to another plateau or are we just letting the media take control over the First Amendment and deciding what is and what is not appropriate? Many years of research have proved the theory that violent content in film and on television bring out violent acts in children. Ann Oldenburg said in an article she wrote for USA Today on July 26, 2000; "viewing violent entertainment can lead to increases in aggressive attitudes, values, and behavior, particularly in children". A report given at a health summit in Washington this previous summer gave evidence that points "overwhelmingly to a causal connection between media violence and aggressive behavior". Should the content in the mass media be limited? Should we, the citizens of the United States, take charge and set a standard that defines quality programming? Would that be unconstitutional? Many people believe that the media is hiding behind the cloak of the First Amendment of the United States of America's Constitution. However, the media is not totally covered by freedom of speech. In a court case in 1942, Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, the court ruled that "fighting words the utterance of which inflicts injury or is likely to incite a breach of peace, are unprotected by the First Amendment". From the start, the media has had its hands full with censors and limitations but they have always pushed the envelope on what they can get away with.
             The First Amendment of the United States Constitution states that "Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press,...