Analysis of “Parents should be able to control what kid watch” by Leland Y Essay Example

and parental rights (Yee, 2005).

Writer's Assumptions

The author assumes universal agreement among parents, the game industry, and the judicial system regarding the negative impact of extremely violent video games on children. Their credentials as a child psychologist and research from reputable sources like the American Psychologists Association are expected to persuade people about the influence of these games on behavior change (Yee, 2005). Additionally, it is assumed that parents tend to purchase violent video games during holiday shopping seasons which is why this period is emphasized.

He assumes that all minors are capable of watching extremely violent video games, therefore assuming that the justice system will rule in favor of his petition. Consequently, his writing lacks chronological order, with the article lacking an introduction and the thesis statement appearing in the middle, prior to the conclusion. Additionally, although his information is supported by evidence from credible scholars or sources, he fails to effectively quote them. For example, he states, "As a child Psychologist, I have reviewed the research. Exposure to..." (Yee, 2005). In this instance, he should have properly quoted or used a connector like 'that'.

The Emotional Appeal of the Argument

The author pleads with parents to address the issue of video game content when shopping for the holidays, recognizing their important role in this process. The text highlights the situation in California, where measures have been implemented to protect children from the harmful effects of violent games. In addition, respected sources such as the American Psychiatric Association, Journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics, and American Psychological Association are referenced for research evidence. These sources have all concluded that playing extremely violent video games leads to increased

aggression in adolescents. The author also shares personal experiences and challenges faced while opposing the production of such games. Lastly, detailed information about ongoing case proceedings in the United States is provided.

The text highlights the significance of an impending case in the Supreme Court and its potential consequences for both the violent game industry and children. The author, a child psychologist, demonstrates his commitment to tackling this issue by partnering with esteemed organizations like the American Academy of Pediatrics in California and the California Psychological Association to submit a petition to the High Court. The author argues that there is a correlation between exposure to media violence and heightened aggression. Additionally, he underscores society's requirement for valid reasons to restrict minors' access to violent video games. (Yee, 2005)

The article discusses the court's expectations regarding parents' responsibility in monitoring their children's exposure to violent video games, rather than placing blame on game producers. The author, a Ph.D. in child psychology and an expert on the impact of such games on children, has a strong background in child development. In 2005, they even authored a law with the intention of limiting the sale of excessively violent video games to minors. However, this law faced criticism from the game industry and is currently being reviewed by the U.S. Supreme Court. While it is unclear if the author is affiliated with any psychological association according to the journal, it is mentioned that they collaborated with organizations like the American Academy of Pediatrics in California and the California Psychological Association when submitting their petition to ban violent video games for minors to the high court (Yee, 2005).

Therefore, it can be

inferred that his fellow colleagues in the field recognize his contributions to child psychology.

In conclusion,

The writer effectively convinces the audience that minors should not be exposed to extremely violent video games and argues that parents should have the authority to determine which video games their children can play. Although lacking a chronological order, he takes a social perspective on the issue by referring to the situation in California and uses credible sources such as the American Psychological Association and other scholars who educate parents about the impact of these games on adolescents. Additionally, Yee, being a child psychologist with affiliations to reputable organizations like the American Academy of Pediatrics in California and the California Psychological Association, is a reliable source for advocating laws regulating the sale of excessively violent video games. Furthermore, his position as a Senator significantly influences how the audience perceives his arguments.

In his argument, he supports his claims by referencing his research and reiterating his main point. He expresses optimism that the court will rule in favor of his petition, thereby persuading his intended audience. However, while he successfully convinces parents about the drawbacks of video games, he presents a biased perspective that could spark controversy among minors, particularly adolescents. Moreover, the lack of a logical order in his arguments may raise doubts about the reliability of the document.