Posts by Brent Jackson
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
My pet peeve is the increasing use of "orientated", a back derivation from "orientation", when the perfectly serviceable (and shorter), "oriented" could (should ?) always be used.
-
Fascinating Weston. Thanks for the link.
-
Thanks for the heads up on Riverbend.
And also on the netdisaster site (the chainsaw option is way cool ...).
I am not sure why the Maxx map makes you giggle, unless its because they have a 20 minute walk timed to take 43 minutes. But the route is the easiest route from Three lamps to the Westmere shops.
It's interesting that the times that Maxx give do not include waiting time. So the 14 minute bus journey should really be 14 to 44 minutes.
There is a third route option, for $1.60 and 20 minutes, you could take the bus to the bottom of West End road, and walk the last stretch.
Cheers,
Brent. -
Richard said :
(and dunno how youse all do that flash indented RE: thing above!)
To the left of the "Post a reply..." box is a handy little reminder of formatting that is possible. The one you want to use is the "Quote:", namely, put the text between HTML quote tags.
Cheers,
Brent. -
The Dalmatian Society Ballroom ? Would that be at 10-14 New North Road then ?
-
Great explanation Matthew. Thanks a lot for taking the time to share it with us.
-
David Hamilton wrote :
The impact of media violence isn't a fruitless discussion, but I feel is a bit of a red herring compared to other factors. US Surgeon General David Satcher in 1999 said "we clearly associate media violence to aggressive behavior. But the impact was very small compared to other things. Some may not be happy with that, but that’s where the science is" (Wikipedia video game controversy article). The article goes on to say "This was also the conclusion of a meta-analysis by psychologist Johnathan Freedman, who reviewed over 200 published studies and found that the majority did not find a causal link."
However, that same Wikipedia article also states :
The American Psychological Association summarizes the issue as "Psychological research confirms that violent video games can increase children's aggression, but that parents moderate the negative effects."[3] Craig A. Anderson has testified before the U.S. Senate on the issue, and his meta-analysis of these studies has shown 5 consistent effects: "increased aggressive behavior, thoughts, and affect; increased physiological arousal; and decreased prosocial (helping) behavior"
But anyway, it is not the violence in games per se, that I am vilifying. The thing that really annoys me is how the entertainment industry (especially TV) constantly portrays violence as a valid (often desirable) means of conflict resolution. Almost always without showing the realistic outcome of such a course of action. (Often with the built-in sub-text that the victim deserved it because they were a "baddie").
It appears that some people have interpreted my comments as a call for censorship. I do not think that censorship is a viable solution.
The only helpful solution I can come up with, is to spend more money on making New Zealand programs that accurately portray violence and its effects, so that children can see the difference between the "real life" of NZ society, and the fake life of American TV which does not apply in our society.
As everyone keeps saying, there are no easy solutions, but something has to be done.
-
Ironically, I leave here for stuff.co.nz and get the latest headline :
"Fight on Air NZ flight stopped by former All Black"
Does this mean the violence in rugby can be a good thing ? :-)
-
I would like to heartily agree with Mikaere :
The first one is that violence is an acceptable mechanism of conflict resolution. Just watch any action movie. Violent people are heroes.
The second, and perhaps most important, is that violence has virtually no consequences. This meme is constantly reinforced by our popular media.
I suspect that much of the killing and maiming in our society can be traced to people using violence to get what they want, and who never intended to kill or maim.
We must stop condoning violence as entertainment, especially the unrealistic violence that has no consequences that is the staple of so many movies, TV programs, and computer games.
American sit-coms portray it as acceptable to punch out a guy because he asks your girlfriend out on a date. Such behaviour should result in your appearing before the courts - it never does on American TV.
However, whenever people suggest reducing violence on TV, et al, there is always a hue and cry along the lines of "I watch X hours of TV/watch heaps of movies/play violent computer games and I am not violent". People seem unwilling to sacrifice any violent entertainment to aid our society.
Ask yourself this : how many violent TV programs / movies / computer games would you be willing to forgo in order to save 1 child from this sort of abuse ?
I know that the studies comparing TV watching with criminal violence have mixed results, but studies have definitely shown that people who view violence regularly are less likely to intervene to aid a victim of violence.
As a society there must be many things that we can try in order to reduce the violence in our society. Lets start trying some of them ...
-
Graeme,
Fiona wrote :
I've only gotten up to Wednesday so far; more to come.