The Most Controversial Films Of All Time: Part III

[Movieen]

Psychological Aspects, not psychological media. You stated that shock media is a concept, I stated it as phenomenon which doesn't exist as of yet. And where has this media covers all basis comes from, I am applying my knowledge to the concerning films. And yes, the media does cover all basis, but how much of that can be trusted, not much to be honest, if you believe everything the media gives you, we will revert into an audience which, basically, is like a child being told what to do.

Psychological media, doesn't exist. It a concept within the media concept, odd as it is.

A concept can be a phenomenom, which it is at the moment.
But you're saying the videos of decaptitations, aren't existent?
Wow. You seriously need to read up on Shock media.

[RandomManJay]

Psychological media, doesn't exist. It a concept within the media concept, odd as it is.

You called it psychological media, not me.

A concept can be a phenomenom, which it is at the moment.
But you're saying the videos of decaptitations, aren't existent?
Wow. You seriously need to read up on Shock media.

I haven't said that videos of decapitations aren't existent, I haven't said anything like that. Also Shock Media doesn't concern me at the moment, but from looking over what I have been able to find on it, it appears to just be representation in an extreme physiological form of designed to elicit the same response as 'normal' media representation, and, although it does seem sound at points, it seems to be a cobble together of other concepts concerning extreme stereotype behaviour developed by the media and is not considered a valid media concept for these points and could be considered a proposal rather than a concept.

On a final note, the thread owner has said to stop this debate because it is off-topic which I feel we should respect and apologise for.

[Movieen]

You called it psychological media, not me.



I haven't said that videos of decapitations aren't existent, I haven't said anything like that. Also Shock Media doesn't concern me at the moment, but from looking over what I have been able to find on it, it appears to just be representation in an extreme physiological form of designed to elicit the same response as 'normal' media representation, and, although it does seem sound at points, it seems to be a cobble together of other concepts concerning extreme stereotype behaviour developed by the media and is not considered a valid media concept for these points and could be considered a proposal rather than a concept.

On a final note, the thread owner has said to stop this debate because it is off-topic which I feel we should respect and apologise for.

Dude, shut up! Honestely, SHOCK MEDIA EXISTS, IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH PSYCHOLOGY. Gosh! Shock media are the videos of deaths, sick disturbing videos, get your facts right!

[RandomManJay]

Dude, shut up! Honestely, SHOCK MEDIA EXISTS, IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH PSYCHOLOGY. Gosh! Shock media are the videos of deaths, sick disturbing videos, get your facts right!

I haven't said it is, it is physiological, physical, which, he we have grown desensitised to over the decades of physical gore, horror and disturbed videos being probed into our minds until we no longer are affected by because we have become used to it. I feel I'm repeating myself over and over with no end, it doesn't appear that your reading what I'm typing, it seems you can't differ from the words physiological and psychological.

[Movieen]

I haven't said it is, it is physiological, physical, which, he we have grown desensitised to over the decades of physical gore, horror and disturbed videos being probed into our minds until we no longer are affected by because we have become used to it. I feel I'm repeating myself over and over with no end, it doesn't appear that your reading what I'm typing, it seems you can't differ from the words physiological and psychological.

No no no, you said it didn't exist.
And it is real life disturbing footage.
Get your facts right.

[RandomManJay]

No no no, you said it didn't exist.
And it is real life disturbing footage.
Get your facts right.

I will but it in a concept you would understand:

Shock Media is a 'concept' in your terms, I said it is a phenomenon which doesn't exist as yet which I have searched for hours today and have found virtually nothing in relation other than it being a name for various companies. I had to have a discussion with my teacher about this which took a total of 2 periods to discuss which she related back the same argument I have presented. Now, if it does exist, which you say it is, and you say it is 'real life', real, physical, 'footage'. Then it is physiological text (i.e. a form of media (e.g. Newspapers, movies, TV shows etc.) which, the audience, has grown desensitised to over the decades of physiological texts in the media, we grown accustomed to it, hence we are no longer affected by it in such a dramatic way, if anything, empathy. This means it wouldn't have an affect you have described because of this desensitisation.

[Misawa]

Spectators who can view shock media without being horrified is a minority. The public have not been desensitised to the level of reality.

[Movieen]

I will but it in a concept you would understand:

Shock Media is a 'concept' in your terms, I said it is a phenomenon which doesn't exist as yet which I have searched for hours today and have found virtually nothing in relation other than it being a name for various companies. I had to have a discussion with my teacher about this which took a total of 2 periods to discuss which she related back the same argument I have presented. Now, if it does exist, which you say it is, and you say it is 'real life', real, physical, 'footage'. Then it is physiological text (i.e. a form of media (e.g. Newspapers, movies, TV shows etc.) which, the audience, has grown desensitised to over the decades of physiological texts in the media, we grown accustomed to it, hence we are no longer affected by it in such a dramatic way, if anything, empathy. This means it wouldn't have an affect you have described because of this desensitisation.

Shock media is real, ask anyone. It is the depiction of life.. Sick videos, etc.
Your teacher knows nothing, and it's nothing to do with psychological. You and oour teacher need to learn. So please leave this section, until you have decent knowledge.

[RandomManJay]

Shock media is real, ask anyone. It is the depiction of life.. Sick videos, etc.
Your teacher knows nothing, and it's nothing to do with psychological. You and oour teacher need to learn. So please leave this section, until you have decent knowledge.

Again, I haven't said Shock Media is psychological, I have said it is physiological, which will have a low affect on its physiological desensitised audience.

[RandomManJay]

Spectators who can view shock media without being horrified is a minority. The public have not been desensitised to the level of reality.

What level of reality is this, with access to the internet and various video sharing sites, we are able to watch virtually anything we wish, even reality itself. Without actually being there, the audience would perceive is at being normal physiological texts (taken from psychological issues surrounding the validity of studies concerning demand characteristics, where the audience would not experience the same 'trauma' due to not actually being physically there witnessing it). Also because the audience can be considered active at this time, the audience would have the choice whether to believe it or not, which some lower class SES members and higher class SES members would not trust based on the institution which has released it. This is my opinion of what has been said by you based on my experience with the media and its ties to psychology (psychology being the field itself, not the psychological aspect of the media).