Chapter 14 - Passive mediums are more effective than active mediums.

I believe a more passive medium, such as television, is more effective than a more interactive medium, such as video games.  I believe so because of the level of energy and attention required to sufficiently absorb the information delivered is much less with passive mediums.  While watching television, it is likely you will still obtain information even if you are not fully paying attention, or doing something else simultaneously.  While playing a video game, you must be fully involved in what is going on to process the information.  Whether you are watching a show with your full attention or not, the show will still go on.  With video games, you control whether or not the game continues.  The "hypodermic needle" theory heavily supports this argument.  If someone is watching television, somewhat paying attention, somewhat glazed over, they are less likely to refute what is being stated.  The information will be processed but not question.  This is similar to how you may be subliminally influenced by a message you do not fully recognize and have the ability to refute.  Another example supporting this claim is the "mean-world" syndrome.  This states that after seeing thousands of acts of violence portrayed on television, such as murders, we are lead to believe the world is actually as dangerous in reality as it seems on the screen.  Although this may be applied to interactive mediums such as video games, these games do not have real humans acting out the scenes, rather animations of characters, which makes them less realistic.  Although video games and other interactive mediums may be effective to a certain extent, they do not stack up to the effectiveness of passive mediums, such as television.

http://www.cracked.com/article_18856_6-shocking-ways-tv-rewires-your-brain_p2.html