reception theory- people can interpreter the films in their own way
cultivation theory- people that are more desensitized wont be upset and disgusted by it
user and gratification- we seek out particular media forms to match what we are like. such as violent people will go and watch violent films
hypodermic needle theory- they will watch the violent films the ideology will be injected and they will copy.
possible relationship between violence on screen and violence in real world
in making decision BBFC concerns are:
- portrayal of violence as a normal solution to problems
- heroes who inflict pain and injury
- callousness towards victims
- encouraging aggressive attitudes
- taking pleasure in pain and humiliation
reception theory
users and gratification
cathartic effect:
means cleansing
media violence can be positive
people releasing violent inclinations by seeing them portrayed
socially positive action:
media portrayals of violence can be increase awareness of social problems
aggressive stimulation theory:
media-depicted violence has potential to cue real-life violence
Bandura
criticized for overstating cause-and-effect connections
causality is over stated
conclusions are simplistic
much evidence is anecdotal
other factors could be involved
aggressive people may gravitate towards violent media
media trigger violence only when certain non-media factors are also present
violence is rewarded
media exposure is heavy
violent person meets a certain profile
violence is realistic and exciting
violence rights a wrong
violence includes characters and situations similar to viewers own experiences
violence is far too complex to be explained by a single factor
effects of media violence vary from person to person
desensitizing theory
people becoming hardened by media violence
societys tolerance for antisocial behavior is increasing
what is the cathartic effect
what is the socially postive action?- does it increase awareness of any social problems?
had the film been linked to any real life crimes?
