Gerard Jones Violent Media Is Good For Kids

According to Gerard Jones’s “ Violent Media Is Good For Kids,” violent media indeed has a remarkable influence upon the minds and general growth patterns of children. Jones argues that violent media can actually have positive effects on young people.

From infancy onward, parents and teachers have drilled into the young generation that violence should be avoided at all costs. They have preached cooperation, tolerance, and “using one’s words” as tactics to combat difficult situations. Although those lessons are valid, Gerald Jones claims there is an alternative way. In his essay, “Violent Media is Good for Kids,” Jones argues that “creative violence- bonking cartoons, bloody videogames, toy guns-gives children a tool to master their rage” (Jones). In other words, media violence, used correctly, can serve as an alternative method for powering through adolescence. By reading and writing violent stories, children are able to express

Violent media; a strikingly relevant phenomenon millions are becoming captivated by. It’s everywhere you go, on your phone, the TV or on the computer. As much as people try to avoid it, they soon realize it’s ineluctable. Gerard Jones, a comic-book author, released a brief report, “Violent Media Is Good for Kids” that argued violent media is not only beneficial to children but also inspiring. He goes on to support his claim by sampling his own personal experiences. However, not all forms of violent media are necessarily helpful. Some are more preferable while others can harm them. To an extent, violent media can help children by helping them release built up emotions, learn lessons regarding the real world, as well as create something for themselves.

Violent Media is Good for Kids, by Gerald Jones; a persuasive article written by a comic book author that analyzes how exposing children to violent media has positive effects in shaping a person. This article was written as a counter-argument to the negative response media received after a horrific mass shooting that took place at a high school. Jones defends violent media by telling of his own personal experience with it, thus glorifying it in the process. Jones argues in his article that violent media is a helpful resource for children and it does not necessarily harm them. Jones’ argument was effective and very convincing. He defends his stance by continuously stating the positives that violent media has had not only on him, but his own son as well.

“Violent Media is Good for Kids” is an article which makes many claims to support the argument that a controlled amount of violence could be good for a developing child. Even though this article is controversial the claims serve to support the argument. Throughout the analyzing process logos, ethos, and pathos are searched for and scrutinized. The rhetorical strategies are what makes a paper effective or not. In this case the author uses, what I believe, is just the correct amount of each and fulfills his goal for writing the article. Although this article is written more as a story it still provides information backing up the argument.

When it comes to the topic of violent media, some of us would readily agree it’s a controversial subject as to whether kids should or shouldn’t be exposed to it. This is because many children who view violent media react negatively rather than not being affected at all. Where this agreement usually ends, however, is on the question of what effects does it have on children. Whereas some are convinced that it is a healthy alternative for kids to express themselves, others maintain that it causes kids to become more aggressive and contributes to juvenile crimes.

Overall Gerard Jones article, “Violent Media is Good for Kids” is acceptable by providing childhood anecdote and how he evokes pity to draw the audience in. He also does well in displaying his sentiment beliefs by sharing his son’s experiences and challenges. Most of Gerald Jones arguments are valid, but some are repetitive. For example, when he shares about Melanie Moore Ph.D. She is a psychologist that shares the same views as Jones, but does not argue anything different what he already shares. This part of the article is where he fails to provided stronger support for his

In the writing of Gerard Jones “Violent Media is Good for Kids” is very interesting essay in which he describes how violent media can help kids to overcome obstacles, but whether it is convincing or not, I am not truly sure because the way the essay is written is biased. Jones as writer is making this controversial topic to gain more audience to read his writings, in addition, this essay fails in detail, it needs more statistics to support the examples that Jones addresses in his essay. Also, we need more information about what is the opinion of parents of these kids that believed violet media is good so, we need the statistics of the studies of the psychologist that support the idea of good

Gerard Jones is the author of the essay “Violent Media Is Good for Kids”. This essay is a very interesting piece about how violent media can actually help young kids get through stressful points in their life. I truly enjoyed reading this piece and it was very entertaining, but it didn't really convince me that violent media is good for young kids. I have two reasons why the author didn't convince me. The first is statistics, he didn't use any data or studies on the subject , and the second reason was the types media.

In society, video games have been criticized as an inducer for violent in children. The ongoing debate instigates research on the correlation between video games and violence. In Craig Anderson’s article, “Violent Video Games and Other Media Violence, Part II”, the author criticizes the opposing side and states that violence in media reflects violent behaviors in children. John Glynn’s article, “Guns and Games”, reasons on the benefits of video games and points out the true perpetrator for violent behaviors of youth in the United States to be the gun culture.; While Glynn’s article contains some form of pathos, there is a lack of pathos in Anderson’s. Both articles utilize logos and ethos. However, Glynn offers a more well-rounded argument to support that video games are beneficial and are not the true cause of aggression in children.

While it gives the impression that Gerald Jones could be wrong in his arguments, there is an aspect of truth at least from his case studies he took in his research. In addition, while no one would support exposure of the young children to violence and violent scenes, not at least in a stable civilization like America, it is quite evident that violent media provides the children and the young people in the society with certain message in life. It becomes clear that the

In the article, “Violent Media Is Good for Kids”, the author, Gerard Jones, begins by providing background information about himself. As a child, Jones was taught that violence was wrong, and as he grew up, he learned that violent comics and stories aided him to become an action movies and comic book writer. In his article, the author addresses why violent media are good for children. He points out that it helps them transform better socially, explore and conquer their feelings, and improves self-knowledge. Jones purpose is to inform readers about the positive use of violent media on children. The author uses rhetorical appeals of pathos and ethos, and stylistic techniques such as allusions and repetitions to create his argument.

The article on violent media is good for kids By: Gerald Jones was a fantastic article. In the article Jones talks about how certain forms of violent media is good for children. There are all a lot of points that go with his statement, or go against it. In this paper I will be talking about Jones’s ideas and point of view on his article.

In 2000, Gerard Jones “ Violent Media is Good for Kids”, was published by MotherJones.com. Jones concludes that violence is beneficial to kids in many ways, including rage management, building confidence, and allowing children to meet their emotional and developmental needs. He also argues that when parents attempt to shield their kids from violence it is more likely that they grow up to be passive and easily manipulated. Based on my knowledge and personal experience, I have found many of his points to be true and logical.

My initial response to Violent Media Is Good For Kids written by author Gerard Jones was a mixed reaction of sorts followed by a more suited neutral feeling. To explain this response I’ll just say that when I began reading the first page it felt relatable in a sense, the writing digested easily with me, even found myself smiling a little ways into the fourth paragraph. Then, suddenly, the sixth paragraph came smashing through with heavy shmuck and with that last-line-hitter, I really felt how cliché and cheesy this article really was going to be. Basically the typical points could have been made with out all the fluffy feel good input of do-good kids beating the odds in my opinion. Though extremely good points were made that children need an outlet to deal with natural instincts that are so often suppressed. This article still candy coats the truth and science of rage and the crazy