Positive
effects
Before TV, it can be considered that
printing was the medium considered the main
channel to access information and knowledge.
[edit] Positive effects of televison on
children
Children in certain age can learn
and discover many new things by Television. Many television programs are
developed to open a new horizon and vision to children by teaching and showing
them the places that they have never been or imagine. The important thing is to
choose the right and useful channels and programs. For example Quinn Medicine helps the children to learn
about the family values and also helps to develop their imagination. More,
television can bring the family together that parents and their children can
talk about the TV programs and discuss about new thing. They can have the
opportunity to be together by the help of TV. Also, watching documentaries can
build up a perspective about the worlds in kids minds and cultural programs can
provide children to learn about their own culture or the other nations'.[1]
[edit]
Social surrogacy hypothesis
Current research is discovering that
individuals can employ television to create what is termed a parasocial or faux
relationship with characters from their favorite television shows and movies as
a way of deflecting feelings of loneliness and social deprivation.[2] Just as an individual would spend
time with a real person sharing opinions and thoughts, pseudo-relationships are
formed with TV characters by becoming personally invested in their lives as if
they were a close friend [2] so that the individual can
satiate the human desire to form meaningful relationships and establish
themselves in society. Jaye Derrick and Shira Gabriel of the University of
Buffalo, and Kurt Hugenberg of Miami University found that when an individual
is not able to participate in interactions with real people, they are less
likely to indicate feelings of loneliness when watching their favorite TV show.[3]
They refer to this finding as the
Social Surrogacy Hypothesis. Furthermore, when an event such as a fight or
argument disrupts a personal relationship, watching a favorite TV show was able
to create a cushion and prevent the individual from experiencing reduced
self-esteem and feelings of inadequacy [2] that can often accompany the
perceived threat. By providing a temporary substitute for acceptance and
belonging that is experienced through social relationships TV is helping to
relieve feelings of depression and loneliness when those relationships are not
available. This benefit is considered a positive consequence of watching
television as it can counteract the psychological damage that is caused by
isolation from social relationships.
[edit]
Educational advantages
Main article: Educational
television
Several studies have found that educational
television has many advantages. The Media Awareness Network, explains in its
article, The Good Things about Television, that television can be a very
powerful and effective learning tool for children if used wisely. The article
states that television can help young people discover where they fit into
society, develop closer relationships with peers and family, and teach them to
understand complex social aspects of communication.[4] Dimitri Christakis cites studies
in which those who watched "Sesame Street" and other educational
programs as preschoolers had higher grades, were reading more books, placed
more value on achievement and were more creative. Similarly, while those
exposed to negative role models suffered, those exposed to positive models
behaved better.[5]
[edit]
Negative effects
There are many pejorative terms for
television, including "boob tube" and "chewing gum for the
mind", showing the disdain held by many people for this medium.[6] Newton N. Minow spoke of the "vast
wasteland" that was the television programming of the day in his 1961 speech.
Complaints about the social
influence of television have been heard from the U.S. justice system as
investigators and prosecutors decry what they refer to as “the CSI Syndrome.” They complain that, because
of the popularity and considerable viewership of CSI
and its spin-offs, juries today expect to be “dazzled,” and will acquit
criminals of charges unless presented with impressive physical evidence, even
when motive, testimony, and lack of alibi are presented by the prosecution.[7]
Television has also been credited with
changing the norms of social propriety, although the direction and value of
this change are disputed. Milton Shulman,
writing about television in the 1960s, wrote that “TV cartoons showed cows without udders and not
even a pause was pregnant,” and noted that on-air vulgarity was highly frowned
upon. Shulman suggested that, even by the 1970s, television was shaping the
ideas of propriety and appropriateness in the countries the medium blanketed.
He asserted that, as a particularly “pervasive and ubiquitous” medium,
television could create a comfortable familiarity with and acceptance of
language and behavior once deemed socially unacceptable. Television, as well as
influencing its viewers, evoked an imitative response from other competing
media as they struggle to keep pace and retain viewer- or readership.[8]
According to recent research,
conducted by John Robinson and Steven Martin from the University of
Maryland, people who are not satisfied with their lives spend 30%
more time watching TV than satisfied people do. The research was conducted with
30,000 people during the period between 1975 and 2006. This new study slightly
contradicted previous research, which concluded that watching TV was the
happiest time of the day for some people. However, prof. Robinson commented
that watching TV could bring a short-time happiness, which would be just a
result of an overall dissatisfaction.[9]
[edit]
Psychological effects
There is a theory that when a person
plays video games or watches TV, the basal ganglia portion of the brain
becomes very active and dopamine is released.
Some scientists believe that release of high amounts of dopamine reduces the
amount of the neurotransmitter
available for control of movement, perception of pain and pleasure and
formation of feelings,[10] although this remains a
controversial conclusion. A study conducted by Herbert Krugman found that while
viewers are watching television the right side of the brain is twice as active
as the left which causes a state of hypnosis.[11]
[edit]
Physical effects
Studies in both children and adults
have found an association between the number of hours of television watched and
obesity.[12] A study found that watching
television decreases the metabolic rate in children to below that found in
children at rest.[13] Author John Steinbeck describes television
watchers:
"I have observed the physical symptoms of
television-looking on children as well as on adults. The mouth grows slack and
the lips hang open; the eyes take on a hypnotized or doped look; the nose runs
rather more than usual; the backbone turns to water and the fingers slowly and
methodically pick the designs out of brocade furniture. Such is the appearance
of semiconsciousness that one wonders how much of the ‘message’ of television
is getting through to the brain."[14]
The American Academy of Pediatrics
(AAP) recommends that children under two years of age should not watch any
television and children two and older should watch one to two hours at most.
Children who watch more than four hours of television a day are more likely to
become overweight.[15][16]
TV watching and other sedentary
activities are associated with greater risk of heart attack.[17]
[edit]
Alleged dangers
See also: Media violence
research
Legislators, scientists and parents
are debating the effects of television violence on viewers, particularly youth.
Fifty years of research on the impact of television on children's emotional and
social development have not ended this debate.[18][19]
Bushman & Anderson[18] among others have claimed that
the evidence clearly supports a causal relationship between media violence and
societal violence. However other authors[19][20] note significant methodological
problems with the literature and mismatch between increasing media violence and
decreasing crime rates in the United States.
A 2002 article in Scientific
American suggested that compulsive television watching, television
addiction, was no different from any other addiction,
a finding backed up by reports of withdrawal symptoms among families forced by
circumstance to cease watching.[21] However this view has not yet
received widespread acceptance among all scholars, and "television
addiction" is not a diagnoseable condition according to the Diagnostic and
Statistical Manual -IV -TR.
A longitudinal study in New Zealand involving 1000 people (from
childhood to 26 years of age) demonstrated that "television viewing in
childhood and adolescence is associated with poor educational achievement by 12
years of age".[22] The same paper noted that there
was a significant negative association between time spent watching television
per day as a child and educational attainment by age 26: the more time a child
spent watching television at ages 5 to 15, the less likely they were to have a
university degree by age 26. However recent research (Schmidt et al., 2009) has
indicated that, once other factors are controlled for, television viewing
appears to have little to no impact on cognitive performance, contrary to
previous thought.[23] However this study was limited
to cognitive performance in childhood. Numerous studies have also examined the
relationship between TV viewing and school grades.[24]
A study published in the Journal of Sexuality Research and Social Policy
concluded that parental television involvement was associated with greater body
satisfaction among adolescent girls, less sexual experience amongst both male
and female adolescents, and that parental television involvement may influence
self-esteem and body image, in part by increasing parent-child closeness.[25] However a more recent article by
Christopher Ferguson, Benjamin Winegard, and Bo Winegard cautioned that the
literature on media and body dissatisfaction is weaker and less consistent than
often claimed and that media effects have been overemphasized.[26] Similarly recent work by
Laurence Steinbrerg and Kathryn Monahan has found that, using propensity score
matching to control for other variables, television viewing of sexual media had
no impact on teen sexual behavior in a longitudinal analysis.[27]
Many studies have found little or no
effect of television viewing on viewers[28] (see Freedman, 2002). For
example a recent long-term outcome study of youth found no long-term
relationship between watching violent television and youth violence or bullying
[29]
On July 26, 2000 the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Medical Association, the American Psychological Association, the American Academy of Family Physicians, and the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry stated that "prolonged viewing of media violence can lead to emotional desensitization toward violence in real life."[30] However, scholars have since analyzed several statements in this release, both about the number of studies conducted, and a comparison with medical effects, and found many errors (Block & Crain, 2007; Freedman, 2002)
[edit]
Propaganda
Television is used to promote
commercial, social and political agendas. Use of public service announcements
(including those paid for by governing bodies or politicians), news
and current
affairs, television
advertisement, advertorials and talk shows are used to influence public
opinion. The Cultivation Hypothesis suggests that some viewers may begin to
repeat questionable or even blatantly fictitious information gleaned from the
media as if it were factual. Considerable debate remains, however, whether the
Cultivation Hypothesis is well supported by scientific literature, however, the
effectiveness of television for propaganda (including commercial advertising)
is unsurpassed. The US military and State Department often turn to media to
broadcast into hostile territory or nation.[31]
[edit]
Politics
While the effects of television programs
depend on what is actually consumed, Neil Postman argues that the dominance of
entertaining, but not informative programming, creates a politically ignorant
society, undermining democracy: "Americans are the best entertained and
quite likely the least-informed people in the Western world."[32] However some broadcasters do
offer Americans intelligent political narrative and argument. This offers
otherwise ignorant viewers, who may not read about politics elsewhere, the
opportunity to access current or historical political views, for example.
[edit]
Technology trends
In its infancy, television was a time-dependent,
fleeting medium; it acted on the schedule of the institutions that broadcast
the television signal or operated the cable. Fans of regular shows planned
their schedules
so that they could be available to watch their shows at their time of
broadcast. The term appointment television was coined by marketers to
describe this kind of attachment.
The viewership's dependence on
schedule lessened with the invention of programmable video recorders, such as
the Videocassette
recorder and the Digital video
recorder. Consumers could watch programs on their own schedule once
they were broadcast and recorded. Television service providers also offer video on demand, a set of programs which
could be watched at any time.
Both mobile phone networks and the Internet can give us video streams; video
sharing websites have become popular.
The Japanese manufacturer Scalar has
developed a very small TV-system attached to the eyeglasses, called
"Teleglass T3-F".[33]
[edit]
Gender and television
While women, who were “traditionally
more isolated than men” were given equal opportunity to consume shows about
more “manly” endeavors, men’s feminine sides are tapped by the emotional nature
of many television programs.[34]
Television played a significant role
in the feminist movement.
Although most of the women portrayed on television conformed to stereotypes,
television also showed the lives of men as well as news and current affairs.
These "other lives" portrayed on television left many women
unsatisfied with their current socialization.
The representation of males and
females on the television screen has been a subject of much discussion since
the television became commercially available in the late 1930s. In 1964 Betty Friedan claimed that “television has
represented the American Woman
as a “stupid, unattractive, insecure little household drudge who spends her
martyred mindless, boring days dreaming of love—and plotting nasty revenge
against her husband.” As women started to revolt and protest to become equals
in society in the 1960s and 1970s, their portrayal on the television was an
issue that they addressed. Journalist Susan Faludi suggested, “The practices and
programming of network television in the 1980s were an attempt to get back to
those earlier stereotypes of
women.” Through television, even the most homebound women can experience parts
of our culture once considered primarily male, such as sports, war, business,
medicine, law, and politics. For the last since at least the 1990s there has
been a trend of showing males as insufferable and possibly spineless fools
(e.g. Homer Simpson, Ray Burone).
The inherent intimacy of television
makes it one of the few public arenas in our society where men routinely wear
makeup and are judged as much on their personal appearance and their
"style" as on their "accomplishments."
From 1930 to 2007 daytime television
hasn’t changed much. Soap operas and talk shows still dominate the daytime time
slot. Prime time television since the 1950s has been aimed at and catered
towards males. In 1952, 68% of characters in primetime dramas were male; in
1973, 74% of characters in these shows were male. In 1970 the National
Organization for Women (NOW) took action. They formed a task force
to study and change the “derogatory stereotypes of women on television.” In
1972 they challenged the licences of two network-owned stations on the basis of
their sexist programming. In the 1960s the shows I Dream of Jeannie
and Bewitched insinuated that the only way
that a woman could escape her duties was to use magic. Industry analysis Shari
Anne Brill of Carat USA states, “For
years, when men were behind the camera, women were really ditsy. Now you have
female leads playing superheroes, or super business women.” Current network
broadcasting features a range of female portrayals. This is evident in a 1999
study by Lauzen and Dozier showing that "43% of all major characters on
television are female".[35]
0 comments:
Post a Comment