Parents should not let their children spend much time watching Research Paper

Parents should not let their children spend much time watching television - Research Paper Example The debate on whether parents should or should not let their children append a lot of time watching TV carries much weight. This is in relation to how much beneficial or adverse extended periods of TV watching are to children and the likely effects to their later lives. As a result, we seek to find reasons as to why parents should not let their children spend too much time watching television, as well as some of the reasons why watching it is beneficial to children. Common arguments among those who are against children watching TV fall on morality. In this light morality carries issues of violence and risk assessment in regard to one’s behavior. The argument they place on the issue lays on the content aired on Television programs depicting the use of violence, and other violent acts, mild or severe, in resolution of conflicts between individuals and groups. This is in cases of religious violence that at times is aired blatantly by some radical organizations in a quest to incit e sympathizers to join them in their fight for goals they hold dear. In some movies and programs that are aired on TV, going by the name of action, tend to contain scenes of violence that are, at times, claimed to be justified. This is by having story lines that claim the perpetrator to have a genuine or righteous cause that should be seen to the end. The cause is usually on the lines of rescuing loved ones or fighting crime, quite literally. Owing to this, those that are against children watching TV claim that these negative behaviors and attitudes may get to their children. In addition, opposers of TV claim that images portrayed to children are not as simple as thought as they produce the opposite of the desired effect. This is in regard to showing children that there is no room for negotiation in wrongdoing and that violence is the only means of resolution of conflicts of interests should other means fail. This is in spite of other options having no chance to prove themselves in clearing controversial or volatile situations. Owing to such programming issues, the more time that a child spends watching TV translates to increased exposure to such rash concepts that adults engage in with little regard for the consequences. The other form of violence that children get exposure to is that of violence expressed towards women. Violence perpetrated against women on TV leads to poor images of women that remain etched in the young and innocent minds of children (Kahlor and Eastin 215). This occurs by labeling males as the dominant human in any situation, in the society. Therefore, to exercise their dominance, men maintain their dominance, when threatened, through violence creating a negative image of women. In addition, through violence directed at women, children gain a wrong perception that the only way to suppress women in their quest to gain an equal status as men is to subject them to acts of subordination. Such actions include sexual assault and sexual violence in the form of rape (Kahlor and Eastin 216). Opposers, in my opinion, therefore, have solid ground on this issue with backing from facts as evidence sustains their arguments In addition to their claims, violence on TV appears as a positive thing that is to be emulated in order to live a full and satisfying life. This is particularly so by using violence by TV stars to gain wealth and live a fulfilling life. Violence of this form and in such levels translates to poor relations with others, as what the child understands is how to use his or her physical strength to enforce decisions, or wishes. This way, children tend to exercise violent acts towards other children in the society and at school; which makes TV viewing a contributor to bad living (Facts for Families). On the moral issue of risk assessment, those that are against watching extended hours of TV for children due effects it has on their awareness of the experiences found in the world. They base this on the idea that, to make decisions on

How should organisation manage psychological contracts during PR Essay

How should organisation manage psychological contracts during PR Scandals - Essay Example Thismakesitessentialfor an organization to manage Psychological contract before theyare affected by publicrelationscandals. Therefore, managingpsychologicalcontract is important during publicscandals like fundembezzlement, falseaccusations of theftorsexualabuse within theorganization (Conway, 2005). In theprocess of managingpsychologicalcontract, an organization should performsomeactions. First, theorganization should be fair to allemployees and customers in terms of promotion, work allocation, payments, forexample, salaryandallowancesand deliverance of goods and services.Employeesalsoexpect to be consulted in making organizational decisions since theyfeelmoreimportant to theorganization. In case of a publicrelationscandal like misconduct of an employee, theorganization should be fair in judging theemployee. Forinstance, theemployee can be suspendedforsometimerather than beingsacked.An example of a real life situation is a case whereby during the presidential debate, KitchenAid tweeted to it fans â€Å"Obamas gma even knew it was going 2 b bad! ‘She died 3days b4 he became president†. The tweet was immediately deleted, and an apology was posted. The apology was posted on behalf of the employee who had tweeted(Male, 2009). Secondly, in case of a publicrelationscandal like an accusation, theorganization should maintaineffectivecommunication with theaffectedparties. Communication within theorganization should flowwell. Everymanager, employee or customer,should getthecorrectinformation within therighttimeschedule. Theemployer should alsoenhanceface to facecommunicationbecausethisgivestheemployee a chance of expression (CPID, 2010). Dialoguealso is a goodway to wintheemployees’ and customers’cooperation. Some companies fail to communicate to their customers effectively hence leading to future scandals. In 2000, executives of Merck failed to recall their drugs after