Argument Essay 5
The following is from an editorial in the Midvale Observer, a local newspaper. "Ever since the 1950's, when television sets began to appear in the average home, the rate of crimes committed by teenagers in the country of Alta has steadily increased. This increase in teenage crime parallels the increase in violence shown on television. According to several national studies, even very young children who watch a great number of television shows featuring violent scenes display more violent behavior within their home environment than do children who do not watch violent shows. Furthermore, in a survey conducted by the Observer, over 90 percent of the respondents were parents who indicated that prime-time television?programs that are shown between 7 p.m. and 9 p.m.?should show less violence. Therefore, in order to lower the rate of teenage crime in Alta, television viewers should demand that television programmers reduce the amount of violence shown during prime time."
The given argument is from a local newspaper known as the Midvale Observer. It refers to the supposed increase in teenage crime in the country of Alta, and links it to the increasing pervasiveness of violence on television. The argument uses references to some ambiguous surveys to justify its view that teenage crime in the region can be reduced by reducing the amount of violence shown on primetime television.
The paragraph refers to how the increase in crimes by teenagers in Alta has paralleled the increase in violence on television. At a cursory level, a few flaws in such a stance spring to mind. Primarily, the time period refers to the region post-1950. Let us consider a hypothetical, but reasonable situation at this point. Two distinct events could have occurred after 1950 - one is the increase of the number of televisions in the average household, and the other could have been an increase in advertising (that is, a growth in the capitalist market in Alta) which accompanied a downturn in the economic status of the population. This would have led to a lot of jealousy and covetuosness among the most susceptible group, teenagers; and consequently to an increase in crime as these teenagers would resort to any method, legal or otherwise, to claim what they want.
One of the arguments stated in the given excerpt is a reference to "several national studies" that showed that "even" young children became more violent if they watched violent shows . The explanation of these surveys is so insufficient that very many pertinent questions can be raised here. Firstly, how can the change in behavioral patterns of admittedly young children, be extrapolated to include teenagers? It is commonly known that teenagers are unique in their behaviors, due to various reasons; they cannot justifiedly be analogized to young children. Secondly, the quality and relevance of these "national studies" can be questioned. Insufficient information has been provided on the credibility of such surveys, and reasonable weight can be given to them only if additional details on these surveys were made available. A generalization is always hasty if its foundations are not strong.
The yardstick for measuring how children became more violent is not indicated, so we cannot be sure of its validity. There is also the question of who the young children became more violent than. Children are probably more susceptible to television as they are yet too young to differentiate between fact and fiction, and thus this increased tendency of violence among young children who watched violence acceptable from some point of view. Its relevance to teenage crime, though, again comes into question.
The indigenous survey conducted by the Observer is also quoted in the editorial as a supporting argument about the cause of teenage crime in Alta. The survey raises many inconsistencies. It states that over 90 percent of the respondents were parents who wanted less violence shown. It does not state who the survey was for. It could be very possible that the survey was designed in such a way that only parents interested in voicing such an opinion bothered to register an opinion - the rest of the parents could have been uninterested in doing so, thus leading to a biased survey group. Also, the age of these parents' children is not indicated - it would really be relevant only if all these parents had teenaged children. The question as to why these parents want less violence, is also not answered. It is very possible that these parents want less violence as a personal preference that has nothing to do with their status as mothers and fathers! There is, lastly, the obvious question - of the parents surveyed by the Observer, how many of their children actually watch primetime television? If any significant percentage of their children do not, it would mean that the violence shown on primetime television would have almost no relevance on the issue of teenage crime.
The excerpt provides insufficient information to a conclusion like the one provided in its last lines. Furthermore, the ambiguity of the entire excerpt and the irrelevance of the arguments to the conclusion reached, tend to make the whole argument give the impression of having been very badly constructed. Consequently, no definite conclusions can be made from the given paragraphs.
The content within italics was added after I exceeded the 30 minute time limit.... I took 8 minutes more, which is far too much, in my personal opinion.