| Augen said:
Our distant ancient ancestors had none of our modern media, yet were incredibly brutal and violent to the point of sadism in many cases. |
The mere conceptions of basic human rights hadn't been invented yet. Outside that, if you look at the media they did have at the time. The plays and such, they were pretty much nothing but gore with some dirty jokes thrown in.
Additionally, there is currently more value in the economy that's been created in the last 40 years or so, then had existed prior.
In otherwords, people are a lot more rich.
Advances in techology.
There are really tons of reasons, a good example though is Somalia, and what that is like without the wealth and human rights... it's not really any different then that era, outside the weapons they use.
To suggest that media doesn't have any effect on violence is essentially argueing that every person lives completely outside the social mores of society. Society and propaganda doesn't actually have any effect on people.
Violence in videogames really isn't any different then say, racism in or movies or anything else.
Media is a reflection of the culture that then reinforces it. It's one of the most basic tenants of sociology.
Like I said, banning isn't really a solution, bans only tend to reinforce.
but recognition of the patern is a good start to it, as is understanding WHY that is the case.
Would society really be as violent in a world where violent media basically didn't exist because nobody wanted it, because they recognized what it represented.
If people were basically in the mindset Spec Ops: The Line was supposed to put you in basically.
Seems unlikely... and even if it was the case. It seems like it'd be easier to know who to keep an eye on.
