Many people say there is much violence promoted in mass media. What is your opinion?
A.I. Score
Each colour is one skill. Tap a colour to hide it. Tap it again to show it.
Violence in mass media has become a persistent public concern as audiences are exposed to films, television programmes, video games, and online platforms that depict aggression as normal behaviour. In my opinion, violence is actively promoted by mass media rather than merely reflected, and its widespread normalisation creates serious social risks that justify regulation and stronger media literacy among people.
Firstly, mass media frequently packages violent content as entertainment and spectacle that attracts large audiences. Television action dramas and online video games reward aggression, while news programmes repeatedly replay brutal footage to maximise viewer attention. Consequently, such media framing gradually desensitises people, particularly younger audiences, weakening their emotional resistance to real violence and shaping attitudes towards aggression over time.
Furthermore, producers in mass media make deliberate editorial choices about the intensity and frequency of violent content. When violence dominates prime-time television schedules and social media algorithms, people are exposed to far more aggression than they would encounter in everyday life. For instance, immersive video games and short-form social media videos that reward shock and violent behaviour amplify this effect, influencing how audiences perceive violence across society.
Admittedly, some people argue that media violence mirrors real social conflicts and may provide catharsis. However, this view overlooks the commercial incentives driving mass media decisions. Television networks and online platforms profit from violent content because aggression generates audience engagement and advertising revenue.
In conclusion, mass media substantially promotes violence through commercial incentives, repetitive exposure, and selective framing. People, particularly young audiences, are harmed by normalised media violence. Stricter content standards, age-appropriate television distribution, and education in critical media viewing are necessary to reduce these social costs.
- Fully addresses the prompt in depth, showing full command of the argument by reformulating the issue in the writer's own words and expanding important points with specificity.
- The argument is supported convincingly with subsidiary points and relevant examples throughout the response.
- Has an effective logical structure, flows smoothly, and can be followed with ease.
- The argument is clear and cohesive and developed systematically at length; a well-developed introduction and conclusion are present, and ideas are organised cohesively into clear, logically sequenced paragraphs.
- Uses a variety of connective devices effectively and consistently to convey relationships between ideas.
- A variety of expressions and vocabulary are used appropriately to formulate ideas with ease and precision throughout the response.
- No signs of limitations restricting what can be communicated.
- Errors in language use, if present, are rare and minor, and meaning is completely clear.
- Shows consistent grammatical control of complex language. Errors are rare and difficult to spot.
- Good command of a broad lexical repertoire, idiomatic expressions and collocations.
- Correct spelling.
- Length is within the required 200 to 300 words.