First person shooter

Audience Theory:
Hypodermic needle model:
The hypodermic needle model also known as the hypodermic-syringe model, transmission-
belt model, or magic bullet theory is a model of communications suggesting that an
intended message is directly received and wholly accepted by the receiver. The model was
originally rooted in 1930s behaviourism and largely considered obsolete for a long time,
while big data analytics based mass customization has led to a modern revival of the basic
idea.

The most famous incident often cited as an example for the hypodermic needle model was
the 1938 broadcast of The War of the Worlds and the subsequent reaction of widespread
panic among its American mass audience. However, this incident actually sparked the
research movement, led by Paul Lazarsfeld and Herta Herzog that would disprove the magic
bullet or hypodermic needle theory, as Hadley Cantril managed to show that reactions to
the broadcast were, in fact, diverse, and were largely determined by situational and
attitudinal attributes of the listeners.
In terms of most recent times, I have done some research into Hypodermic Model Theory
more recently, the use of big data analytics to identify user preferences and to send tailor-
made messages to individuals led back to the idea of a one-step flow of communication,
which is in principle similar to the hypodermic needle model. The difference is that today's
massive databases allow for the mass customization of messages. Therefore, it is not one
generic mass media message, but many individuated messages, coordinated by a massive
algorithm. For example, empirical studies have found that in Twitter networks, traditional
mass media outlets receive 80-90 % of their Twitter mentions directly through a direct one-
step flow from average Twitter users. However, these same studies also argue that there is
a multitude of step-flow models at work in today's digital communication landscape.

In terms of linking it to my game, this being Call of Duty as it is a shooting game, this means
that it will cause more violence I the game overall. Due to the game having violent scenes in,
this could mean that people are more likely to react to the game and act like the game as
the hypodermic model influences them. Especially in this game, Call of duty. The Third-
person shooter. Third-person shooter is a subgenre of 3D shooter games in which the player
character is visible on-screen, and the gameplay consists primarily of shooting. This is
particularly aimed at Call of Duty, the point of view shooting game, shows the character
shooting during a battle or fight could be a massive influence on the younger people, even
though the restrictions are is 18+ parents are still letting children play these games, having a
negative effect on them, psychologically and mentally.

Uses and gratifications theory passive or active consumption:

An active consumption is when the audience will engage and discuss media messages that
comes across to them and sometimes question the media messages through life
experiences. Others may interpenetrate the message in a different way or question it, by
doing this the audience will not be as suggestible to tell them what to think. Shows like
Question Time like to get politicians and journalists on the show to discuss worldwide
issues and domestic issues, the audience who ask the questions are more active due to the
deep discussions they have with the panel than people sitting at home. However, people at
home can interact with Tweeter with the panellists and create debates, so Home viewers
become less suggestible and more active as they can get involved in debates.
Uses and gratifications theory is an approach to understanding why and how people actively
seek out specific media to satisfy specific needs. UGT is an audience-centred approach to
understanding mass communication. Diverging from other media effect theories that
question, what does media do to people? UGT focuses on what do people do with media.
This communication theory is positivistic in its approach, based in the socio-psychological
communication tradition, and focuses on communication at the mass media scale. The
driving question of UGT is: Why do people use media and what do they use them for? UGT
discusses how users deliberately choose media that will satisfy given needs and allow one to
enhance knowledge, relaxation, social interactions/companionship, diversion, or escape.
This could have an emotional effect on younger people, emotional and Affective
videogames like Call of Duty are those where player and game interchange affective signals.
They differ from traditional games, which may be designed to cause emotional responses in
users, but seldom have access to the player's emotional state; this state may be accessed by
using biofeedback devices. A particularly simple form of biofeedback is available through
gamepads that measures the pressure with which a button is pressed: this has been shown
to correlate strongly with the players' level of arousal, at the other end of the scale are
braincomputer interfaces.

Reception study:
From my research, I have found out that reception theory provides a means of
understanding media texts by understanding how audiences read these texts. Theorists who
analyse media through reception studies are concerned with the experience of cinema and
television viewing for spectators, and how meaning is created through that experience. An
important concept of reception theory is that the media text, the individual movie or
television program, has no inherent meaning in and of itself. Instead, meaning is created in
the interaction between spectator and text; in other words, meaning is created as the
viewer watches and processes the film. Reception theory argues that contextual factors,
more than textual ones, influence the way the spectator views the film or television
program. Contextual factors include elements of the viewer's identity as well as
circumstances of exhibition, the spectator's preconceived notions concerning the film or
television program's genre and production, and even broad social, historical, and political
issues. In short, reception theory places the viewer in context, taking into account all of the
various factors that might influence how she or he will read and create meaning from the
text.

Part of the reluctance on the part of film theorists to turn to reception studies is based in
the historical uses of audience analysis. Beginning in the early twentieth century, research
on how films were being interpreted by audiences was used to advocate censorship.
Reformers worried that spectators, especially children, were negatively influenced by what
they saw onscreen, and they fought to ensure that the messages in films would be
appropriate, in their view, for impressionable viewers. Later, the film studios turned to
audience research in the form of demographic information to learn how to market their
films. However, although the use of reception analysis for the purposes of censorship and
marketing has contributed to film theorists' distrust of reception theory, reception theory
has recently gained acceptance and is now acknowledged an important method of analysing
how audiences experience and interpret films.

Effects Debates:
Effects of exposure to explicit sexual or violent content:
From my research, there can be many effects on people, male and female on the effects of
exposure to explicit sexual or violent content. People are geared up to think, what they
watch is almost okay to do in real life. The gratifications towards a listener or watcher can
inspire people to commit these crimes in real life, similar to videos or games that they have
watched. Most movies and games out there now have violent/sexual scenes.

In my research for this effects debate, I have found out some information and another
debate that is going on. Sex and violence are at an all-time high in the movies our children
watch, the music they hear, and the games they play. In addition, in bad news for moms and
dads a new study, published recently in Paediatrics, suggests that it is parents who are
unknowingly dropping the ball. The researchers asked 1000 parents of children between 6
and 17 years to watch eight movie clips in a random order. Each clip contained either sexual
content or strong violence. Parents were asked what age their children would have to be
before being allowed to watch these scenes. The first clip was always rated as being suitable
for an older child. The final clip was always rated as being appropriate for younger children.
Regardless of the order of viewing, parents consistently reduced their age
recommendations as they watched more clips. The more of a particular kind of content we
watch, the greater the level of desensitization we experience. What was once shocking
eventually barely registers. Like a drug, the more violence or sexual content we take in, the
more of it we need to get the same shock factor. Do not watch the news for a couple of
months, and then sit through a full bulletin. It will assault your senses. Is there really a
problem with our children seeing sex and violence? Does it really affect them? In my work, I
regularly speak with parents of children as young as six do who are watching Game of
Thrones, The Wire, or Breaking Bad. Their parents wonder why their child is having
behaviour issues. Many adults claim that they have watched violent movies all of their
lives, played violent games, and never killed someone. In fact, they have never even acted
aggressively. They will say the "wowser-brigade" is making mountains out of molehills. They
will point to all the things we watched as children that never affected us because we never
understood it. What is the harm of allowing a 6-12 year-old to see sex and violence in their
lounge room? These arguments persist in spite of hundreds of studies over several decades
showing that sexual and violent content are genuinely influencing our behaviour and our
morality. We may not kill people because we watched Bruce Willis or Arnold
Schwarzenegger shoot bad people by the thousands.

However, research tells us that violent and sexual content do affect the way we behave
towards others. As one neat example, a 2009 study demonstrated that exposure to
gratuitous violence in either a game or a movie led to a reduced willingness to help
someone who was in pain. Participants in two different experiments took longer to come to
the aid of an injured victim, saw a violent act as less serious, and were less likely to even
hear that a fight was occurring when compared with those who played a non-violent video
game or watched a non-violent movie. Additionally, according to the American Academy of
Paediatrics, prolonged exposure to violence increases agreement with the idea that violence
is an acceptable way of solving problems. It also promotes acceptance in children of
the "mean world" syndrome a belief that the world is a dark and sinister place. Ongoing
exposure to sexual and violent content is empirically proven to have a desensitizing impact
on both children and adults. The more we watch it, the less concerned we are about it
and the greater the potential impact on us, on our children, and on our society. We may not
become violent or sexual, but our behaviour and our responses are impacted by what
we have seen. Empathy is reduced. Objectification is increased. Morality erodes. Our digital
diet is desensitizing us. The violence and sex we see is glamorized, and often consequence-
free. Nevertheless, there are consequences we are not aware of. We need to wake up. By
not only enduring it, but also embracing it and endorsing it for our childrens
entertainment we act to their detriment.

Effects of advertising:
Similar to the effects of exposure to explicit sexual or violent content, my research has led
me to the effects of advertising. We all know that advertising can be annoying, however,
this is something we have to watch, and some of the advertisements are often educational
as we learn something from each one of them, whether it is a product that is being sold or a
movie advertisement. Some scenes on an advertisement can be have an effect on the
viewer. A big topic that is used now is body image on an advertising as this can have a big
effect on young people and older people for that matter. Researchers, ranging from
psychologists to marketing professionals.

These days we know that the media and body image are closely related, have studied the
effects of advertising on body image. Particularly, the body image advertising portrays
affects our own body image. Of course, many other things influence our body image.
Parenting, education, intimate relationships, and so on. The popular media does have a big
impact, though this is because thousands of advertisements contain messages about
physical attractiveness and beauty, examples of which include commercials for clothes,
cosmetics, weight reduction, and physical fitness. Researchers have conducted studies in an
attempt to see if such advertisements have effects on teenage body image, and what those
effects might be.
As well as body images, the way beauty is portrayed in the media tends to cause
dissatisfaction and negative thoughts about oneself when those results are not achieved.
Sociocultural standards of feminine beauty are presented in almost all forms of popular
media are bombarding women with these unrealistic images that portray what is considered
to be the ideal body within this society. Such standards of beauty are unattainable for most
women the majority of the models displayed on television and in advertisements are well
below what is considered healthy body weight. Mass media's use of such unrealistic models
sends an implicit message that in order for a woman to be considered beautiful, she must
be unhealthy. The mind-set that a person can never be too rich or too thin is prevalent in
society, and this makes it difficult for females to achieve any level of contentment with their
physical appearance. There has been a plethora of research to indicate that women are
negatively affected by constant exposure to models that fulfil the unrealistic media ideal of
beauty.

The pictures above, clearly show us that sometimes we are spoon fed by the media and
from my research, we are often to act how the advertisement would act, in the sense of
what we eat, and if we exercise. The image on the left shows a young boy with plenty of
food around him circulating the image, however, this may not be the problem but the media
have been quick to react in passing the blame towards the young child. The image on the
right, tells the story exactly how you see it. The media is spoon-feeding the man, sat on the
chair using the contrast of being an obese generation as well as the media deciding what is
best for everyone and what is not. In my game Call of Duty, people may see these adverts
and think that it is ok to play these violent game which could spark them in real life.

Health concerns:
The health concerns could come from trying to be like someone on the advertisement.
There are lots of reasons and factors for these health concerns, especially from advertising
which also pump feeds the younger generation, as well as the old. This is having a catch 22
effect on people that are watching these adverts. For example, KFC, a fast food restaurant,
packed with fatty foods have created an advert which is aired, throughout the day and
especially aired more around lunch time when people are the hungriest. In addition to this
however, people see these adverts and crave these fatty foods, to the extent where they go
out and buy them. Another company that does this is Domino is which a pizza store is for
those that do not know. They are particularly clever because they sponsor The Voice UK
which air there show from 7:30 pm 9 pm on a Saturday and Sunday nights, yes, you
guessed it, this is the most convenient time to ring up an ask for a pizza and you dont even
have to cook it! Convenient yes but this is having a reverse effect on health concerns in the
UK and well as USA and other countries.

It is clear that Americans are getting fatter, both children and adults. A primary cause of
increased obesity is the effect of advertising of food products, which translates into changes
in eating. Advertising causes people either to eat more food in general or to eat a less
healthy diet than would otherwise be consumed. Although it seems as if children are the
main targets for fast food advertising, adults are also seeing the effects of this. If children
are being fed these high-calorie, high-fat meals, then the parents are most likely consuming
them as well. However, there is increasing interest in the effect of sedentary behaviours
such as television viewing the media, computer use, and electronic games on obesity. In an
article, researchers now suggest that 60 percent of the extra pounds Americans have put on
may be caused by a decline in the physical demands of work brought about by the arrival of
computers and the like. The other 40 percent is due to technological innovation in
agriculture, which has driven down real food costs. This double whammy has left 60
percent of Americans overweight and a quarter technically obese.

As people are always on the game Call of duty, chatting to mates and so on, then this could
mean that the obese generation rises, because of this they do not do as much exercise and
therefore become fatter.
Censorship debates:
Censorship is the suppression of speech, public communication, or other information that may be
considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, politically incorrect or inconvenient as determined by
governments, media outlets, authorities or other groups or institutions. From my research, I have
found some pros and cons or negatives and positives if you are looking at it in another way.

A positive would be that it keeps people from watching things that they should not watch,
censorship is good. Censorship is a good thing; it keeps children from hearing and seeing
inappropriate things. I for one like the censorship because children do not need to hear a slur of cuss
words, or see body parts of others. I also do not want to hear or see it either, so I appreciate it.

A negative for this matter is that it should not be the government's choice Censorship is not always
bad, such as blocking cuss words or sex scenes. When censorship extends to, entire books, movies,
and TV shows, is when it should be stopped. The government does not have the right to decide what
is acceptable for people to see and hear, even kids. Why, do you think, should the government
regulate what kids see Shouldn't it be the parents job to keep their children away from these bad
things The parents of these kids should be parents and keep the bad things away from their kids, not
the government.

Governments, private organizations and individuals may engage in censorship. When an individual
such as an author or other creator engages in censorship of his or her own works or speech, it is
referred to as self-censorship. Censorship could be direct or indirect, in which case it is referred to as
soft censorship. It occurs in a variety of different media, including speech, books, music, films, and
other arts, the press, radio, television, and the Internet for a variety of claimed reasons including
national security, to control obscenity, child pornography, and hate speech, to protect children or
other vulnerable groups, to promote or restrict political or religious views, and to prevent slander
and libel.
Conclusion
In conclusion, I felt that my research and information is based from facts and the
information is not manipulated by me. I feel that some of the headings and topics above is
something that needs dealing with from professionals, in the sense of health concerns and
so on. Overall, my work is given in context to make it is good as possible, giving facts and so
on. My work and words is added by illustrations to show this.