Many people believe that the icreased presence of violence in flms and television thesed ays is resposible for the rising incidents of violent crimes among youth in society. They argue that governments have a duty to control the media so as to reduce this

In recent years there has been a rise in violence among young population. Many people believe that it can be connected with the increase of aggressive content shown by the mainstream media. Therefore, some argue that the government should take more control over what is shown on TV. In my opinion, the government is responsible for making people safe and should in fact have control over the TV content. I feel this way for three main reasons, which I will explore in the following essay.

Firstly, it has many times been proven that preventing the damage is much more cost effective than dealing with its effects. Censoring TV programs is less expensive than paying for the hospital bills for consequences of violent acts among young adults. For example, when there is a mass school shooting, victims don’t only suffer from physical consequences, but they also suffer emotionally, for which they need an expensive psychological treatment. Considering what was said before, I think that the government should invest its money in certain measures that forbid or at least censor violent and aggressive content on tv.

Secondly, numerous experiments done by psychologists and sociologists have shown a connection between long-term exposure to violent content and aggressive behavior in the future. In other words, youth that are often spending their time in front of violent news and movies tend to be more aggressive towards their peers. In fact, one study has shown that children that spend more than four hours per week in front of violent content are displaying more aggressive behavior patterns, compared to their peers who only spend less than two hours.

Thirdly, children are the most vulnerable and fragile members of our society and the government has a responsibility to enable them to grow into fully functional and stable adults.
More importantly, children’s brains before reaching adulthood are like a sponge, meaning they will soak all around them and take it as a parameter of their future behavior.
It is important to mention that countries that had censored their TV program have seen a decrease in violent behavior in youth.

It can be concluded that the government should allow censorship over TV programs to prevent violent content being presented, in particular to youth. In my opinion, the reasons why I agree with this statement are: governments’ responsibility for its youth, the benefits of prevention compared to its consequences and finally the numerous experiments showing the positive correlation between aggression in youth and exposure to violence on TV.

Compare and contrast your way of your life with that of your parents. Which way of life do you think would be more satisfying for the next generations?

In today’s world things and technology change rapidly and people oftentimes experience many different eras over the course of one lifetime. My generation and the generation of my parents seem so different that one could assume they are hundert years apart. The rise of technology, many human rights movements, much faster way of living - this all happened in just 50 years. In my opinion life in the era of my parents was healthier and more satisfying than life today.
This essay will discuss why I think that it is more beneficial for the future generation to experience my parents type of life and not my own.

First of all, life in the era of my parents was happening on the streets and in the nature, in contrast to our life in front of the screens today. My parents had more face to face interactions among themselves than we have today. Furthermore, not only did they know their neighbours, but they actually hanged out with them on a daily basis. In the present era, people communicate as well, but more through the screen than in person. For example, when I lived alone, oftentimes I would just type on my computer for few days straight, without real conversation occuring, which at the end made me feel unhappy. And since I value happiness as the most important part of life I think that future generations would be happier in the previous era.

Secondly, the era of my parents was much simpler. Those times were mindful and more peaceful, mainly because people didn’t have so many choices as we have today. Contrary to general opinion that more choices equals more satisfaction, studies have shown that it is in fact the opposite. In other words, more opportunities often times mean more stress when making a decision. So I would love the future generations to experience the times when people actually had less choices, but explored them deeper and with more attention and gratification.

All this being said, I think that people of the future would benefit much more from the lifestyle my parents had, than from the lifestyle I maintain. To sum up, they wouldn’t be surrounded with computers, but with real people which leads to higher levels of happiness and they would live a simpler and more attentive life than we live today.