An often debated topic is whether media should be banned as media reports on violence are increasing. Personally, I reckon that news coverage of violent crimes should be limited; however, I do not think the media is solely responsible for high crime rates.
On the one hand, media coverage of violent crimes can lead to copycat effects, which occur when criminal acts inspired by a previous crime. By saying this, studies have suggested that crime related news, especially, in the case of mass shootings can lead to copycat behaviour. For example, if potential criminals see violent cases getting so popular over the media, they may be motivated to commit similar acts for fame. In addition to this, continuous exposure to violent images and stories might desensitize the public leading to a culture where violence is normalized.
On the other hand, the media plays a crucial role in maintaining one of the core principles of democracy; free speech. Therefore, banning media coverage of violence could be seen as an infringement on these rights and could set an example for limiting the press’s ability to report on these issues that are important for public awareness. In relating to this, media reports on violence are often essential for bringing attention to systemic issues, such as war, human rights and so on. Limiting coverage could allow these issues to remain hidden from the public view.
To sum up, news related on violence might have drawbacks such as prompting potential perpetrators to act the same, however, banning the media coverage on this issue is not the solution, as it raise the public awareness.