doubt or an indisputable fact; all studies that are contrary to these findings must be erroneous. Therefore, the text is leading to the reader to reject any studies not presented, studies that may oppose or contradict some of the negative assertions formulated by the research that is present. This particular form of of how discourse can become manipulation confirms Foucault’s assertion so effective in executing its power (Foucault 1989:25). Throughout the article there is an appeal to authority: author Craig A. Anderson, a “lead psychology professor at Iowa State University and director of its Center for the Study of 2008). The pre-modifying nouns used to describe the researcher are Violence” (George: ‘lead which immediately connotes someone who is a front-running authority in his field. To author,’ further buttress his authoritative status he is named a and of a ‘psychology professor’ ‘director’ of It is clear that the journalist wants to lead the reader to think in a particular ‘Study Violence’. way rather than allow him/her to make up their own mind by empowering them with other studies that oppose the argument under discussion. In another article the only experts referred to were those who argued that violent video games can have terrible effects on people who play professor who trained at the them: “psychology University of and Anderson, an Iowa State University psychology professor California” “Craig who is among the top scholars studying video-game argue that "[t]hings that we would violence” never allow on television, and probably not even in the movies, we have them in video games," (De Vise 2005) Notwithstanding the fact that films like the and on ‘Hostile’, ‘Saw’ ‘Nightmare are filled with bloody and gruesome murders. The only two experts Elm Street’ franchises referred happen to be in agreement with each other. To find an opposing argument within the text we must look to a young man who is not an expert but a in an ‘subject’ participating
doubt or an indisputable fact; all studies that are contrary to these findings must be erroneous. Therefore, the text is leading to the reader to reject any studies not presented, studies that may oppose or contradict some of the negative assertions formulated by the research that is present. This particular form of manipulation confirms Foucault’s assertion of how discourse can become so effective in executing its power (Foucault 1989:25). Throughout the article there is an appeal to authority: “lead author Craig A. Anderson, a psychology professor at Iowa State University and director of its Center for the Study of Violence” (George: 2008). The pre-modifying nouns used to describe the researcher are ‘lead author,’ which immediately connotes someone who is a front-running authority in his field. To further buttress his authoritative status he is named a ‘psychology professor’ and ‘director’ of a ‘Study of Violence’. It is clear that the journalist wants to lead the reader to think in a particular way rather than allow him/her to make up their own mind by empowering them with other studies that oppose the argument under discussion. In another article the only experts referred to were those who argued that violent video games can have terrible effects on people who play them: “psychology professor who trained at the University of California” and “Craig Anderson, an Iowa State University psychology professor who is among the top scholars studying video-game violence” argue that "[t]hings that we would never allow on television, and probably not even in the movies, we have them in video games," (De Vise 2005) Notwithstanding the fact that films like the ‘Hostile’, ‘Saw’ and ‘Nightmare on Elm Street’ franchises are filled with bloody and gruesome murders. The only two experts referred happen to be in agreement with each other. To find an opposing argument within the text we must look to a young man who is not an expert but a ‘subject’ participating in an
Games%20and%20Play%20%281%29.docx