And Saito, Gerber and his colleagues postulated that the extensive amount of television viewing is a factor that contributes to a homogenized view of the real world and which process they then term mainstreaming (Gerbner et al., 1980, 1986 cited in 2007, p.512). Gerbner and his colleagues believe that the individuals that spend more time on television viewing which happens to be the heavy viewers are more likely to believe the the television version of reality. And they also noted that the individuals who consumed extensive amount of violence television programmes can develop the “mean world” syndrome and have the tendency to fuel and held exaggerated beliefs about the amount of violence in this society. As the researchers put it, “People who watch more violent television believe the world is a more dangerous place than those who watch less TV” (Gerbner & Gross, 1976; Morgan, 1983 cited in Harris and Karafa, n.d., p.5). The heavy consumption of violence television programmes cultivated the perception of the individuals that the world is hostile and mean, and it is more violent than the reality is.
But nowadays it is all changed upside down. To attract the attention of people news is published in an over the top manner and this questions the ethics of journalism. Media plays destructive role instead of being constructive. The people who reads these kind of news or see violence on television they tend to trust less and assumes the world is dangerous than it is. POSITIVE EFFECTS Media also gives positive effects on people and society.
As explained by Murphy-Jallali (2017), the Hypodermic or ‘effects’ model relates directly to what exactly it is that media do to their audiences. The audience in this case is seen to be almost hypnotized by the media, which is where the power lies. This model assumes that the media effects the audience negatively, which stems from a position of moral panic. The effects model ultimately portrays the media in a negative light. It portrays the media as a predominantly unfavourable entity which either encourages inactivity and laziness, or encourages unsavoury behaviour such as violence and sex.
Violence is a negative effect on society and media because violence can cause real emotion, and change the attitudes of many civilians when put in a serious situation where people need help.“Prolonged viewing of media violence can lead to emotional desensitization toward real violence and real victims which may result in callous attitudes and a decreased likelihood that desensitized individuals will take action to help victims when real violence occurs”(Wartella 3). To compare, violence is a bad side of media and social networking because it creates the fear effect. Fear is an unpleasant emotion caused by the belief that someone or something is dangerous. Violence on TV and video games promote the violent behavior and can lead to the fear effect. “Viewing violence may increase your fear of being victimized, leading toward self-protective behavior and an increased mistrust of others”
The popular phrase “What you see is what you become” properly summarizes the effect that television might have on people. The biggest debate around media today is the propagation of violence through mass communication and the extent of it. The advocates of this notion believe that violence portrayed via media influences its audience who perceives the violence on television or other media as an acceptable notion and leads to an aggressive and violent behavior and thus viewers of media violence are more likely than the non-viewers to engage in criminal activities. The portrayal of superheroes fighting crimes and their acceptance as role models in society is an indicator of the receptiveness of media violence. The violence percolates not only through the minds of individuals but also through gender and race.
While I would not argue against the notion that there is some transference of real-life schemata to infer meaning for on-screen actions, Bordwell does not address that, even though film try to emulate realism, in the end they will be fiction – even if they are documentaries as well. Films have a constraint in relation to time, they simply cannot emulate the depth of a real person and the spectator can only do so much to fill in the blanks for characters on-screen, to fulfill the depth of a real person. To give credence to this transference of real schemata, we can look at Theory-of-mind (find source!). A key development as a human to fully develop the social understanding of the intentions of others, which is needed in society. It seems logical then, that this understanding is applied to the fictional characters on-screen.
The primary proposition of cultivation theory states that the more time people spend 'living ' in the television world, the more likely they are to believe social reality portrayed on television. Signorelli points out that under this umbrella, perceptions of the world are heavily influenced by the images and ideological messages transmitted through popular television media (2003). Cultivation theory suggests that exposure to television, over time, subtly 'cultivates ' viewers ' perceptions of reality. Television is a medium of the socialization of most people into standardized roles and behaviors. Its function is in a word, enculturation.
Exaggerated perceptions of violence and the overrepresentation of police activity and lawyers on TV proved to skew how heavy viewers see the real world. For example, when asked about the number of people in society working in law enforcement heavy viewers believed 5% (TV answer) as opposed to light viewers who believed only 1%(closer to the real-world figure) were involved. A similar pattern in attitudes was obtained when looking at perceptions of violence and the trustworthy nature of people in society. In both cases, heavy viewers proved to have a more correlated understanding of the world around them with the view that was presented by the TV world. The findings of this early cultivation research were significant for future studies as it provided a framework and basis for further expansion of the
Nowadays, we are all surrounded by different sources of information. Television, in particular, is one of the greatest achievements of humankind. However, the importance of its value is interpreted variously. Personally, I think that it definitely has improved our lives. First of all, it cannot be denied that television provides us with a wealth of entertainment.
2.1 Television-induced tourism (TV-induced tourism) 2.1.1 Definition With the advancement of technology, we are able to get different kinds information all over the world through watching television. What the media display as trendy, attractive, or sensational is often transferred to the perceptions of the viewer (Kim et al, 2008),