In response to the point of view that exposure to media violence causes children to act with aggression and violence, opponents of this argument have highlighted research studies that disprove the causal relationship between media violence and violent behavior. Moreover, researchers such as Jonathan Freedman (2002) have challenged the validity and logic of the research methods and data of research studies that support this causal hypothesis. Apart from his discussion on the research studies on the effects of media violence, Freedman (2002) also debunked arguments that have been used to support the causal relationship between aggression and media by highlighting the flaws in these perspectives. Other opponents of the argument such as Todd Gitlin (1994) have argued that media violence has merely been employed as a scapegoat for politicians to divert attention from the actual social causes that have contributed to the perpetration of violence in society. The simplistic association of exposure to media violence and aggression has also been questioned by other researchers. Finally, some opponents such as Gerard Jones (2000) have even contended that media violence is a positive factor that enables children to cope with their dark and self-destructive feelings without resorting to actual violence. The following section will present these perspectives in a concise and comprehensive fashion.
Several laboratory experiments conducted to investigate the nature of the relationship between media violence and aggression in children have not proven the validity of the causal hypothesis that media violence causes violent behavior displayed by children. In the first study, Hapkiewicz and Stone (1974) assessed the effects of various films on the level of aggression of 180 children who either watched aggressive films or non-aggressive films. After their viewing of the films, the children were observed in free-play situations. In contrast to t...