The author of my argument and persuasion draft is a man by the name of Richard Rhodes. He is also a successful graduate of Yale University. Rhodes recently published an article in the September 17th, 2000 issue of the New York Times. The article was called "Hollow Claims about Fantasy Violence", which was based from a dispute over media violence. The argument was focused on whether media violence provokes reality violence or is media violence innocent.
The author of this article gives arguable information both sides of the argument. Rhodes' reveals researched data from reliable sources such as the American Academy of Pediatrics, The American Medical Association, and the National Institute of Mental Health.
Each of these institutes, somewhat support media violence by explaining that there is no "true link" between media violence and reality violence. Rhodes also finds more information through college physiologists' claim who also support the institutions' beliefs. But, Richard Rhodes also show information on how "mock violence" has some influence on reality violence. He explains the critique of a great British Scholar by the name of Martin Barker. Barkers' claim is that "materials that can be judged harmful can only influence us by trying to make us the same as them" But, Rhodes later in the article questions Barker's ideas by wondering if his critiques can be compared in this particular argument.
The author does not only use researched data to justify these arguments of media violence or "mock violence"; he also displays some opinions and beliefs of his own, toward these arguments as well. Rhodes discusses his ideas of politicians' impression of media violence as a scapegoat because they do not have control over violence in America. He also gives a good critique in my opinion by saying " Violence is on the decline in America, but if we want reduce even further, try protecting children from real violence in their real lives."...