The Instigator
Con (against)
0 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
4 Points

Media influences students more than Parents.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/22/2012 Category: Society
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 7,994 times Debate No: 25229
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (4)
Votes (1)




No-parents have the actual remote control of the child,they can decide what their child views,what his interest develops into,they are the ones who lay foundation of morals in a child....and it's their responsibility to look after child in d best way possible!!


As the opening speech failed to address whether the parents had control over the media the child/student views I think for it to be fair to the pro, we shall assume that the parents discussed here are of moderate prudishness and allow their child/student to see most media, they don't willfully censor it due to extreme religious upbringing methods etc.

If the parents are to influence the child/student, it is always by either example or by rules. Both of which are only received in the conscious part of the mind. Parents may teach the child/student life lessons, attempt to impose their moral outlook or maybe even force the child/student, itself, to repeat lines of a certain religious scripture in the hope of reigning the child/student in to their way of life. Parents only influence their child, very rarely will other students be influenced by others' parents.

On the other hand, the media influences students very differently. If one student sees a magazine article, they surely will tell their friends. If one student hears a shocking news story they surely will tell their friends. This way, the media is spread not from a 'superior' perspective to the student but form a peer-to-peer manner in which equal ranking is involved. The media also leaves subconscious messages behind in the student's mind, as seen by the break-out of anorexia after many supermodels started changing from curvy to slender. If the media says that drinking alcohol doesn't harm the student's body, the student will most probably believe it. If the media says that abortion is being voted to be legalized by majority, the student will most likely begin voting pro-abortion (or will, in the future, if under 18).

To round off my introduction, the parent's influence is from only one channel of communication and tends to only affect one student per set of parents. The media is spread via many channels of communication, both visible and audible and from many different people of the student's age group as well.
Debate Round No. 1


But it's quite obvious that parents r d providers of all sort of new techniques,they r d ones who actually mould and craft the designs of child,lets talk abt.all the parents teaching something to their own respective kids,no child is influenced by someone else's parents.
Even parents of present generation are living under illusion that media ,internet is influencing their child's mind...but they are totally undermining their roles and powers.
eg.I have met such a family where there is a positive direction given by parents to their kids when it comes to use internet or watch television.Only some productive that will channelize their kids mentality is given by them to their kids.But these days the parents themselves are at fault wasting their valuable time watching things like daily soaps or some other sort of drama.
If right mould is provided to a child from the very beginning then their not an iota chance of child being influenced by media or peer pressure.Such a kid knows well how to face the world in the best way taking along the sagacious teachings of parents and elders nad has a fully enlightened conscience of his own.He can judge the world himself,he will surely listem to what the common crowd says but won;t blindly march after its the parents who are the ultimate sculptures of a child and not someone else!


Now I would like to rebut almost everything you just said.

You say it's quite obvious that parents are the providers of all sorts of new techniques but do not justify this with even one example, therefore I can confidently say that it is not obvious at all since it hasn't even been brought up in the debate so far.

Also, you seem to think that parents mold and craft the designs of their child. I'm sorry fellow debater, but until the technology for 'designer babies' comes around, parents have no say in the form that becomes their child apart from perhaps its face and eye color, but even then albinos are born.

You say that parents are under some sort of illusion regarding media's influence on their children. You then give a random example of people you've met but no objective, solid, facts to prove that it is an illusion and not the true reality.

The example you gave breached the outlines of the debate which I requested we abide by. I said that the parents we are discussing are ones who "are of moderate prudishness and allow their child/student to see most media" yet the parents you gave as an example were literally censoring media as mild as soap operas to control their child's intake of it. This is not the norm of students of our generation and thus is not to be used to counter my arguments.

In fact I cannot further debate since you did not even have the decency to rebut even ONE, SINGLE point I raised in my opening speech. This neglect of my opening speech will simply be returned with a short, sharp finish to my speech.
Debate Round No. 2


Firstly I would like to admit that I am naive at the art of debating ...but I have definitely learnt something from my fellow opponent (techniques of debating .
I would like to ask if parents do not provide us with all those sort of facilities as intranets,mobiles ,then who does provide it??No example is needed to prove it and I thought it was a kind of fact known to all!

Secondly I was shocked by the statement of yours-'parents have no say in the form that becomes their child apart from perhaps its face and eye color' Great parents bring up great kids. Parents' s contribution is not only of the flesh and bones as you think person's life develops a void in it if parents fail to provide conducive environment to him!!Great intellectual minds always provide that sort of direction to their next generations!!So its so wrong to pigmy the role of parents to such a minuscule!

thirdly,we can never ever reach the experience our elder ones have..they know much worldly affairs and always seek our best some form of restrictions or censor are definitely good as allows us to focus more and more on positivities.
Absolute Freedom could prove quite harmful! Restrictions teach one discipline!!

May be its my traditional thinking that triggers me to give the highest position to elders,parents or teachers!
shall look forward to the views of my worthy opponent!


I would like to clear up a misunderstanding in my interpretation of your comment "Parents mould and shape their children" I thought you meant physically but clearly you have no highlighted that you meant emotionally and personally. Perhaps they do indeed contribute a large amount to this moulding of children but it is with no doubt in my mind that I say that media does so to a higher degree.

Regarding your point about censorship I am afraid that if you are debating that parents who are restricting the media their child's views to the extent that the child only sees the media that the parent agrees with well then you would be on the correct side of the debate. However we are discussing students as a whole and of the current generation (of 2012) thus I would assume that the general strictness levels in terms of censorship should be the ones we base our debate on. Most parents allow their children to see most media. The only issues that most parents of 2012 students would have issues with would be pornography, crudeness and perhaps extreme gore/violence.

Students are subjected to media of all kinds during their life until they are full fledged working adults. They are subjected to newspapers, magazines, Television news as well as programs, movies, games and radio (some other forms are less common and are irrelevant to bring my point across). The point I wish to raise is that parents are only one medium whereas the plural of medium is media! Media in itself is of a greater quantity in terms of how it can influence students as opposed to parents. The truth is that students will actually spend more of their life away from parents than with them during the working weeks of school and college/university so unless we are discussing holiday or vacation times I believe that students are in fact not only open to more forms of influence in regards to media but also open to their peer's gossip in regards to media for more time per annum than to their parents' personal views (assuming we are not discussing home-schooled students).

The psychology of a teenager, especially past the age of 15, is to assume you know as much as, if not more than, your parents. However, the most influential people in the late teenage years of a person's life are their peers. What their peers read, they will try to get to read, what their peers think due to their reading, they will try to imitate. It is natural fo students to conform to one view (of course there are outcasts in any school but generally they are outnumbered by the norm that conform based on what they seem to be told by their friends is the right way to live, to think, to dress and to act. How is this influenced? Well teenagers do not usually hold Nelson Mandela or Gandhi as an idol. They tend to hold footballers or pop-stars as their idols, this can be seen from any poll regarding popularity of these people among teens with names such as Taylor Swift, Lady gaga, Justin Bieber, Christiano Ronaldo and Lionel Messi being a few who come to mind. Anything they say or do, they want to mimic right? Thus, influences via media largely influence their behaviour and thoughts, far more so than their parents.
Debate Round No. 3


ok for all the matter put up by you ...i have a single answer...though its pretty philosophical!Every child has a basic mentality which is architected by parents undoubtedly.His actions ,his temperament ,his attitude towards the worldly matters rests upon those basic set of of values or teachings imbibed in him by parents.When a child gets exposure of media or net ,he perceices their influence according to that 'basic mentality'.So ultimately parents have primary influence on kids ,media's inluence is secondary in nature!!

i would like to tell you we shall be deviating from our debate if we discuss whether parents controlling of media for their kid is good or bad!!I would refute ur view--you yourself said "Most parents allow their children to see most media."So its up to parents , they want their kids to enter into the world of music that's ruled by craze for Gaga,Bieber then its absolutely fine.Its they who decide and happy with it.And on the contrary ,there are parents who have made such sort of values in their lives that their kids too step into their shoes and many kids even today treat Gandhi or Mandela or Martin Luther or APJ Kalam or Dalai Lama as their inspirations, as they are thought upon in the same way in their famillies!!So there are two parties i have discussed and i have no right to choose which one's better.Both are good one their parts!! its just a way i thought is good to prove that parents are the ultimate influencial forces.

Now you also mentioned teenagers have more influence of peer group.I agree that to some point peer pressure too exists.But again while making friends what ultimately guides us--that basic mentality!!Its quite obvious that we choose the kind of friends who's have the same kind of thinking like us.And again i'll repeat parents are creators of that basic thinking!!If one is sitting in asame kind of group like oneself's views are,,then of course one can put up his independent views rather being always influenced by peer views!!


Since I have no more points to raise I will merely question the con's points since I do not believe even one of them has any foundation to it.

Question 1) What exactly is this basic mentality of students that you mention and where does it come from? If it comes from how the parents raise the child then what exactly is basic about the thinking?

Question 2) What makes you think that teens make friends with people similar to them, as opposed to trying hard to become similar to the norm of their peers in the society in which they live?

Answer these two questions fully because at the moment I can't even understand the points you are raising. It could be my stupidity or fundamental misunderstanding but honestly it did not make sense to me, your round 4 debate.
Debate Round No. 4


Ok...what i meant by "basic mentality" is the thinking that makes base of every decision we make,it could be called foundation of our thinking..every person responds to a particular situation in different ways from others.So every one has that difference in thinking.And this basic structure of mindset is given firstly and most importantly by parents and family.One views the world keeping that basic perspective in his mind even many a times one is unaware that he makes such decisions due to those imbibed values.

Then i will say that yea its true we make friends whose thinking is near to similar with us.People seek out others who are similar to them because the interaction is smoother and more pleasant.
So i said what i felt personally after interacting with many of my knowns or friends on this issue.Hope you agree!!


I fail to see how my opponent justified why it's not media as opposed to parents that influences one's decisions in life, or shapes one 'basic mentality' (whatever that is supposed to mean).

Again I must re-iterate that media has many forms of influencing the mind and that the message of media is spread through communities and peers and through what people say and people will naturally conform to the opinion of masses. People, unless they are good little mummy's boys or daddy's girls, will not go around ranting what their parents told them nearly to the same extent as what they just rea din a magazine article or saw about their great idol on the news.

Media is the ultimate influence of students these days, parents are but a mere molehill compared to the mountain, that is media, beside it in the influence of students' minds.
Debate Round No. 5
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by RationalMadman 4 years ago
LOL adontimasu <<3
Posted by RationalMadman 4 years ago
LOL adontimasu <<3
Posted by Arsh 4 years ago
But that was exactly the title of Debate I read somewhere thought to put it up for parley......and ur right there are double connotations hidden in the title ..on 1 hand it tries to convey the role of media or internet in a student's life n on the other hand its comparing the influence of parents n media in child's life.All three concepts have been finely interwined in it!
Posted by GenesisCreation 4 years ago
Confusing debate terms.
The resolution dictates that the debate is about "who influences the child more".
Your 1st round discussed "the moral responsibility of a parent to their child."

Different topics entirely. You would essentially force the opponent to argue that the media is responsible for raising your children and that parents have no obligation. That's quite the "devil's advocate" position for Pro.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by adontimasu 4 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct and reliable sources are tied, as both were civil and no sources were used (unfortunately). Spelling and grammar goes to Pro, as Con would shorten words like "are" as "r" or "the" as "d". Arguments go to Pro, as Con did not attempt to combat most of his arguments, and the ones that he did attempt to combat were combated through philosophical or completely baseless arguments, even on a logical level.