Summary: Columbine: Whose Fault is it?, by Marilyn Manson

            In the article Columbine: Whose Fault is it?, by Marilyn Manson, talks out after a Colorado School shooting, after the news said that he was a huge contributor by the kids listening to his music, and says that since the beginning, we have been violent. Marilyn hates the fact that Time magazine puts killers on the covers just the same as they would put in a celebrity. Our society is so violent, that we applaud the creation of a bomb whose only purpose is to kill all of humanity; but it not about how much more violent we've become, it how much television time the violence gets, and in all reality, what else is on instead of something violent.

            When something so violent happens, especially when its kids killing other kids, the media doesn't blame the children who killed, explains Manson, but rather try to find a scapegoat to make the killers look like victims rather than the ones who did wrong.

            America’s media has a role to play off any violent and sad act as entertainment, and it come to a point that, because there’s so much of it on TV, it's become a normal thing to see, and in fact, even sought after; and then we wonder why our society is so much more violent than any other country.

Summary: Weinstein, Tarantino and the standoff over movie violence

In the article Weinstein, Tarantino and the standoff over movie violence, but Andrew O’Hehir, talks about how Harvey Weinstein, a huge deal in the ‘violent’ movie industry, want to take a step back and discontinue making violent films that, may or may not, have influence to how violent children become when viewing them. Despite how Weinstein feels about how violent his movies are and how they contribute to violence in society, the author says, that there still in a rise in the graphic violence in the movie industry; and despite how it is explained, it doesn't seem healthy.

Weinstein even says that he would not mind making a war movie, because there is a difference between a real story and just a violent movie.

The author states that we, as Americans, feel that violent movies are as harmless as “hamburgers or whiskey; ok in small doses, but may be problematic if taken too much of”. So if we take into consideration of how much violence we see in the media, as much as we watch what we eat, then, as said by the author, the rates should not increase, and instead, should decrease.

A summary:

Weinstein, Tarantino and the standoff over movie violence

 By : Andrew O’Hehir

This article starts by pointing out that Henry Weinstein is very passionate and devoted to each movie that he makes. Whether that movie is a best seller or if does horrible in the box office Weinstein is just as devoted to it. He believes in his work. The author claims that Weinstein unintentionally turned utterly violent movies such as “Dejango Unchanged” into icons. He has questioned whether or not he is responsible for making violence “hip.” The author debunks this by saying that it would have happened with or without these violent flicks. He points out that the thought has occurred numerous times to Weinstein that he is advocating violence with his movies. There apparently has been many meetings with other Hollywood elites about the subject. He applauds Weinstein for having the courage to take the heat head on about the controversial issue. Henry Weinstein made a public statement saying: “In fact, “Lone Survivor is just as much a masturbatory fantasy as “Django Unchained,” just with a different audience in mind.”

This statement caused much controversy, but the author sees the statement as honest. It is pointed out in the article that social scientists have no proven facts that aggressive violence is a direct correlation to violent films. In turn stating that the “public’s apparently unquenchable appetite for media violence, which strikes me as a more profound and important question.” What to take away from the article is to simply moderate. Don’t over expose yourself to media violence.  

Summary: Violent Video Games: The Effect on Youth, and Public Implications; by Douglas A. Gentile and Craig A. Anderson

       The article Violent Video Games: The Effects on Youth, and Public Policy Implications, by Douglas A. Gentile and Craig A. Anderson, is about how violence seen in media, video games, movies, and even in person has a negative affect on aggressive behavior seen in children. As video games became more and more violent, Senators Joseph Lieberman and Herbert Kohl open Congressional hearings to look at the marketing of violent games. The hearings were looking at if violent and ‘R-rated’ video games were being sold to children. As a result to the hearings, video games now feature a rating system. With a rating system now in place, Lieberman and Kohl thought that the violence in video games would decrease, but they only rose due to the rating system, they didn’t have to appeal to a general audience.

       There were three different types of studies that were used to in the study: experimental, correlational, and longitudinal. For the experimental studies, over a dozen experiments and been done, all of which shared 4 similar key characteristics: a sample size of 200 people or more, violent and nonviolent games rated on difficulty, violent game and nonviolent games that are truly violent and nonviolent, and a clear measure  or aggression and aggression-related variables for the participant. The major study, overseen by Anderson and Dill in 2000, that was experimental was a study that randomly assigned college students to play either a violent or a nonviolent game. The games were organized by their stimulation and frustration levels. The results showed that playing a violent game increased both aggressive behavior and aggressive cognition.

       For the correlational studies, several studies were done, and they all shared the characteristics of at least 200 people in each study, a good measure of exposure to violent video games, and a measure of aggressive cognition. The major study, overseen by Krahé and Möller in 2004, that was correlational was a study that sampled eighth graders in Germany. They reported that there was a specific correlation to between physical aggression and violence, for those that played violent video games.

       For the longitudinal studies, two took the main focus. The first one, overseen by Ihori, Sakamoto, Kobayashi, and Kimura in 2003, studied 807 Japanese fifth graders and sixth graders twice during a singly school year. They found that the amount the children were playing video games, although weak results, was related to physical aggression later on. But there were two problems with the first study that doesn’t make it as reliable as the second study. The second study, overseen by Anderson, Gentile, and Buckley, assessed 430 third, fourth, and fifth graders. Like the first study, the students were also surveyed at two points in the same school year. The results of the study was that students who played more violent games had a more violent and aggressive outlook on the world. The children who were more exposed to violent video games changed to become more physically and verbally aggressive. It increased violent behavior, but at the same time also decreases compassionately helpful behavior.

       In conclusion, there has been too little attention to how much violent video games, and any violence in movies and media as well, can affect children’s behavior into making them have a more violent and aggressive themselves.

Summary: Columbine: Whos Fault Is It?

The article starts with a part from the bible and how human disposition made Cain bash Abel's brains in. It argues that media played no part in this as they had none. but it is up the reader to decide to believe in it.
The article then cover the fact the we glorify murderous outlaws on national media. (Marilyn Manson and Jesse James).
The article talks about how media always has a role to play in any violent act. televising Funerals, finding scapegoats for murders, and the public hunt for the blame. They Blame media, music, famous people, anything and everything. it brings the attention to responsibility and war.
An icon to blame and but all the guilt on and what American media loves to do. This article again comes down to there cannot be a proven link between corrupt youth and modern media even thought many want to place the blame in that general direction.

A Summary: 

Violent Video Games: The Effects on Youth, and Public Policy Implications

BY:  DOUGLAS A. GENTILE AND CRAIG A. ANDERSON

The article starts by pointing out how years of research has proven that violence at young ages brings negative outcomes later in life. The violence could be seen in real life or seeing it in the media. The authors point out that parents take measures to make sure their children do not witness physical violence at home, however less attention is payed to making sure they do not see violence through media. With such evidence on how violence affects adolescence, it is astounding to the author that parents are loose with what their children are viewing through television, or video games.

The article then goes on to cover a time line of video games, starting with Pong as the earliest and most docile video game. It wasn’t until the 90s that video games turned rapidly more violent. With each new game snowballing violence off the other, almost in competition. We look at video games today, where you are pretty limitless on what you are able to do in them. It is a substantial difference than Pong, and not necessary for the better.

There are multiple studies on how video games may make a person behave more violently than someone who does not play those types of games. There is no one answer.

The author stresses that there are no serious implications on how to stop companies from making such violent games. There is some controversy on whether or not it can be scientifically proven that violent video games are a direct correlation to violent adolescences. The article does imply that there should be public actions taken to set guidelines for such games. 

Summary: Violent Video Games: the Effect on Youth and Public Policy Implications

This article brings up a discussion years in the making. With one real question the article tries to address, Do violent video games correlate to violent behavior?
Video games have been around for decades now and with the video games becoming more and more advanced so does the violence. The article starts with how there may or may not be a direct link to violence and video games. Then it moves to the history of video games, that started with Pong and are now on to high resolution gaming. For example, high resolution games are games such as Call of Duty and Grand Theft Auto V.
The author discusses if video games are linked to violent acts of aggression in children. The article goes into depth about video games and the updates on how society attempted to handle them in the past (video game rating system). and how in once the video game ration system was placed it only allowed for makers to become more violent because of suggested ages on games. The articles goes deeper in depth about research and the possible connection between aggression and violent video games. This article then goes on about the possible links and media and violent acts. the article also attempts to end with how there is no direct link to video games and violent acts.

Summary: "Weinstein, Tarantino, and the Standoff over movie violence"

     The article "Weinstein, Tarantino, and the Standoff over movie violence" talks about how after the Sundance film festival, Harvey Weinstein, a movie producer, wants to turn away from featuring ultraviolent films. The author discusses Weinstein's desire to change how violent media, which may or may not have any affect, affects society. The article addresses how media violence may, or may not, have affect on violent acts in society. It talks about many controversial violent acts such as sandy hook and Aurora. A modern day society, with media saturated youth, its hard to contain the violent media.
     also discussed is the fact that America is the number one society in terms of gun to people ratio and how the amount of guns may, or may not, be connected to the level of violent acts.
     In the end the author claims that we cannot decide that guns don't cause violence. long story short there is one direct link to violence.

Summary on Weinstein, Tarantino and the standoff over movie violence

    "Weinstein, Tarantino and the standoff over movie violence," is an article about movie violence and how it may trigger aggression. Harvey Weinstein went on CNN to discuss a matter that is important to him after many years of making violent movies while also being known for helping Quentin Tarantino become a big name director.
    Weinstein talked about how he was going to vow against making any more ultra violent movies. He wants to try and reduce the amount of kids seeing these movies and prevent aggression from media. Although there is no direct link to aggression from any violent media, it is considered that it may lead to it. It is also stated that the amount of guns we have in America, along with the violence in media, is why we have such a high crime rate, but it hasn't been proven true either.
   Since, guns can't cause violence, we are told to regulate our intake of violence, like we would with fast food and alcohol, to reduce possible aggression.

Summary on Violent Video Games: The Effects on Youth, and Public Policy Implications

    The article, "Violent Video Games: The Effects on Youth, and Public Policy Implications," talked about how video games can lead to aggression in children. It listed subjects like the history of violence in games, political standpoints and what came from the politics.
    Aggression, is considered as anything causing verbal or physical abuse to someone. There is a spectrum of aggression that has violence as high severity, while things like a week slap would be mild severity. Video game sales began to soar higher when violence became introduced to games. The first video game that had violence in it was Death Race, a game in which you drive and run over as many stick people as possible. After you ran them over, a tombstone would appear where they stood.
    As many other video games followed with increased violence, more children became exposed to them. A couple of senators, Joseph Lieberman and Herbert Kohl, noticed this trend and brought together hearings on how to keep video game violence away from the eyes of children. Thus created the Entertainment Software Ratings Board (ESRB). The ESRB created a rating for video games such as the common ratings: "E" for everyone, "T" for teen, and "M" for Mature (17+).
    When the ratings were introduced, it allowed game developers to add more gore, sex and violence since they wouldn't have to worry about kids playing them as much. The same thing happened when movies first received ratings.
    Even with the new ratings, they were not being enforced by retailers as found out by a sting operation that was conducted by National Institute on Media and the Family. Half of the children, some who were as young as 7, were able to go and buy a rated M game without parental supervision. Now, it is always policy to card or ask for parental supervision before the sale of a mature game, just like how you would be carded for other things that require a certain age.
    Studies were performed later on to try and determine if video games truly played a part in developing aggression in children. It showed that male children who played violent video games often, had lack of parental involvement were involved in more physical fights than others.
    As time has passed, governments have started putting restrictions on items such as "snuff" films and many other materials. With these restrictions, it is also stated that the debate over whether or not media plays a part in child aggression is over.

A summary on “Columbine: Whose Fault Is It?” By: Marilyn Manson

The author starts the article by making statements on how evil and violence was always apart of human nature.  Quoting “The day that Cain bashed his Brother Abel's brains in, the only motivation he needed was his own human disposition to violence.” He further goes on to state that America idolizes killers by putting them on covers of magazines or on the front page news, like they would any celebrity. I got the sense that he was saying as consumers, we buy into it. The writer claims that Times has not gotten more violent over the years but that America is now allowed more access to such stories by watching the news. The author is conveying that America as a whole is responsible for the Columbine shooting. That we spend time pointing fingers on whose fault it may be. He backs this up by saying, “Man's greatest fear is chaos. It was unthinkable that these kids did not have a simple black-and-white reason for their actions.” He is pointing out that people spend time trying to find reasoning and where to put blame, when in reality there is no specific reason that these acts of violence happen. Each person is responsible for their actions and theirs alone. The author himself chooses not to feed into what people blame him for. He also states that he chooses not to defend himself on that same matter. “In my work I examine the America we live in, and I've always tried to show people that the devil we blame our atrocities on is really just each one of us. So don't expect the end of the world to come one day out of the blue – it's been happening every day for a long time.”

Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/news/columbine-whose-fault-is-it-19990624#ixzz3kLwpKglL 
Follow us: @rollingstone on Twitter | RollingStone on Facebook