> But I've always been uncomfortable with the opposite extreme position, the implicit reaction to the moral panic. The argument where TV, movies, games, social

> But I've always been uncomfortable with the opposite extreme position, the implicit reaction to the moral panic. The argument where TV, movies, games, social media, it's not possible for them to have any real effect on their viewers psychologically, regardless of content, even when they're exposed to dozens of hours a week in some extreme cases. Hard agree. The example that won't leave my mind is product placement: As a marketing concept it revolves around the idea that consumers seeing your product more than others means your product will come to their mind first and therefore purchase it more. It's why so many characters use brand name goods on TV. Companies spend good money on this - they wouldn't do that if they didn't think it worked. And if seeing our favorite character enjoy Coke makes us more likely to be Coke, why wouldn't be influenced by other things? Who says you have to 'sell' a physical product for this to work?