Sign on Options
Theme: [Light Selected] To Dark»
25Jan 13

smoking gun

It is not often that a small-time blogger such as myself would risk his head by sticking it into the hornets nest that is the gun crime debate, but when American President Barack Obama introduced new measures to fight gun-related violence, a response was warranted. Among a wide array of new measures, Obama called for the US Congress to invest 10 million dollars into researching a possible link between gun violence and the depiction of violence in media, such as video games[1]. Unsurprisingly, the suggestion sparked outrage among gamers. The implication that their favourite pastime might be related to the recent bloodbaths is a tough pill to swallow for the millions that grew up on games such as Mortal Kombat and Doom without ever having hurt a fly. Though the vast majority of the gamers will have rejected the presidents words immediately, a more thorough analysis makes his proposal seem even more bizarre.

"It would be sensible to save the 10 million dollars for more fruitful scientific endeavours."

Should Congress heed Obamas call for more research, the subsequent study would not be the first attempt to establish a link between virtual and real-world violence. Those who witnessed the media coverage of the Columbine shooting will surely remember how the shooters affinity for Doom was presented as a possible cause of their violent actions. Even more recently, the fact that Norwegian mass-murderer Anders Breivik owned a copy of Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 (along with 22 million other people) spawned the rumour that he used the game to practice before he went out to kill 69 people. However, perhaps unsurprisingly, these and similar claims have never been substantiated, likely because they were motivated by the necessity of a clear scapegoat rather than factual information.

iron blood
Do video game developers have blood on their hands?

Still, Obamas main argument in favour of more research we dont benefit from ignorance implies that a link between violent behaviour and violent games has never been taken into consideration before. Given that there have in fact been numerous studies on violent video games, it would be sensible to save the 10 million dollars for more fruitful scientific endeavours. Out of the countless studies that have been conducted on the subject, some found basis to speculate on (temporarily) augmented levels of aggression in gamers, whereas others saw no reason to further explore the hypothesis that violent games cause violent behaviour. At any rate, the ignorance mentioned by the President says more about his own obliviousness to decades of research than the existence of a scientific niche.

"One would think that there is no better time than now to stop beating around the bush."

Curiously, it is still unclear how serious the suggestion of Obama will turn out to be. The 10 million dollar research was but one of many ideas, and it could well be that it was solely intended as an attempt to appease vociferous opponents of gun control by offering a broad range of measures, as to demonstrate that the White House is taking everything into consideration. After all, in the wake of the Sandy Hook elementary school shooting, the National Rifle Association was quick to point its trigger-fingers at films and video games[2]. Moreover, the Presidents desire for more research does not explicitly mean that he believes there is indeed a link, let alone that the conclusions of the research will lead to censorship. After all, the idea that virtual violence could be a decisive factor in Americas current gun crime epidemic seems far-fetched when you realise that the same games are being played all over the world without necessarily causing similar patterns of violence. As such, it is to be expected that the President of the United States is wise enough to realise that restricting the depiction of violence in video games is unlikely to contribute to a drop in gun-related crime.

GTA Lost & Damned
Games such as Grand Theft Auto are often accused of promoting violence.

However, even if Obamas plans turn out empty shells, he has insulted not only gamers, but also the academic community. It is not without reason that Dutch video game researcher and journalist dr. David Nieborg described the words of the President as a slap in the face[3]. For to suggest that decades of thorough scientific research have resulted in ignorance displays a lack of either knowledge of or respect for the many academics who have dedicated their careers to investigating the possibility of a link between virtual and real-world violence. Moreover, now that gun violence is sweeping across America, one would think that there is no better time than now to stop beating around the bush and address the problem with measures that will harvest results rather than votes. A red herring may temporarily boost approval rates, but it will surely not prevent more lives being lost.

Draugen

Links and sources:
[1] http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/01/17/obama-calls-for-10-million-video-game-study_n_2493716.html
[2] http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2012/12/21/nra-press-conference-blame-video-games-and-movies-not-guns/
[3] "Barack Obama begrijpt niets van game-onderzoek", nrc.next 7, no. 216, p. 16. 18-01-13

Also posted on System Wars Magazine.

28 comments
fortnight1066
fortnight1066

Nice post. The assertion that "gun violence is sweeping across America" seemed rather over the top to me, but I agree with the overall sentiment of the piece. It seems like some of those in power are only interested in being seen as doing something. I would bet there will be more red herrings to come as far as this debate goes.

fortnight1066
fortnight1066

One more thought - hyperbole/sensationalism/fearmongering perpetuated by the pathetic excuse of a fourth estate we have today add to a knee-jerk demand for action to be taken on hyped up issues. This adds to the pressure to take actions that will only result in the temporary approval boosts alluded to in the last paragraph rather than anything meaningful.

Gazdakka
Gazdakka

I think society would stand to make great gains if they elected people who actually know anything about the shit they dither on about as governors.

SlowMotionKarma
SlowMotionKarma like.author.displayName 1 Like

Great article. Well thought out and well written.

With the advent of news media, more specifically MODERN news media, which is sensationalist and concerned more about ratings than reporting accurate and unbiased news, this type of situation keeps popping up. 

My family has had the pleasure of knowing/being related to numerous law enforcement officials throughout the years. In addition to that there is a wealth of information online regarding tragedies such as Sandy Hook. This isn't anything new. There are documented reports from the 1900's (and I even found one from the late 1800's) where people shot and killed multiple people in schools. There are also numerous times when law enforcement or fire fighters or emergency personnel were baited by a fire or other emergency, only to be shot and killed. It's terrible and tragic but it isn't anything new.

Modern media, along with worldwide news coverage and the internet has delivered all of this tragic news to the masses. These people, previously without access to worldwide news now see it all. From their perspective, all of these terrible things have just started happening. That's incorrect. It's just that they are only now being exposed to it. This ignorance breeds fear and people or companies like Obama and news corporations use the people's ignorance to increase their popularity.

Video games have only been around for the last 30 years or so (wow, am I THAT old?), and "violent" video games roughly the last 20. How do people explain why massacres and murders happened before that?

What's more, as you so eloquently stated, there have been numerous studies on the relation between violent entertainment media and real-life aggression/violence. Not a one has shown any firm correlation between the two. In fact, many of the studies actually showed a trend of LESS aggression after someone plays a violent video game.

But those ignorant masses don't know this. All they know is what the media tells them; what so-called "officials" tell them. In their ignorant fear, they cry out for someone to do something. Obama then provides a laundry list of steps he's going to take to stop the violence and the masses love him because he set their mind at ease. That's all this is.

Jake518
Jake518

@SlowMotionKarma I agree with you that the media is sensationalist. Also, now with today's communication technologies, we can hear of events more quickly and hear more of them, making it seem that the planet is approaching Armageddon or that things are getting worse.

NedDaVdeoGamGuy
NedDaVdeoGamGuy

Hahahaha! It takes some courage to call the President ignorant. Thanks for the article.

In Obama's defense, you can blame him for not doing more research into what studies have been conducted in the past, but you can't blame him for publicly calling for more research. "Core" gamers are still somewhat of a niche in America. Informed core gamers are even more of a rarity. Even though there is decades of research out there, no average Joe american has ever heard of them. And he made this decision in the wake of the deadliest year in American history (concerning domestic violence and massacres). So when the question of violent videogame research came up, can you blame him for saying "Citizens, I will do everything I can [including doing some research that may not be necessary] in order to prevent more tragedies," instead of saying "Citizens, you may be shocked and in mourning, but it is time for you to take responsibility and do some of your own research," ?

Although I do think we need to hear that second statement, saying things like that wouldn't have gotten him re-elected.  xD

Bamul
Bamul

Obama's reaction is not surprising. Come on, let's not forget that this is the same politician who used terms like "Polish death camps". This guy obviously doesn't know anything.

Jake518
Jake518

Very good article. It focused on the game aspect of the controversies. I respect that you also tried to stay mostly out of the gun debate. I agree that there need to be some changes such as background checks to make it harder for mentally unhealthy people to get a hand on them. I think another thing that my nation should focus on is dealing with mental health. The perpetrator of the shooting in CT definitely needed help. Again, great article! 

Rotondi
Rotondi

Kudos to the article Draugen.  Can tell you did a lot of research, not to mention it was well written and presented a lot of great information.  But there was no voice.  After hearing the news and reading up on the issue, how do you feel about it?  You said you were worried about sticking your head in the hornets nest, but sticking your head in there while wearing a beekeeper's mask sort of defeats the whole purpose.  You're sort of just there to observe with no chance of getting stung.   Takes the fun out of it.

DraugenCP
DraugenCP

@Rotondi Thanks. I think the last paragraph more or less sums up how I feel about it. It isn't as explicit as it could have been, but I didn't think it was warranted here. The reason why initially hesitated to touch upon this subject is not just that it's a hornets' nest, but also that, to me, it's a foreign issue (I'm from Holland) and I don't think I would feel comfortable dictating another country how to solve its problems. So I decided to stick to the part that concerned me as a gamer.

Rotondi
Rotondi

@DraugenCP @Rotondi It does, I guess.  But you need to be more clear, on all your points. For example, as a reader I still don't know where you stand on the subject.  Is Obama making the wrong decision in spending money on researching the connection between gun violence and video games?   If he is, then say it.  ...But maybe I'm just rambling here.  Maybe you just want your article to be neutral, kind of like a fact presenter.  

Derpalon
Derpalon

Couldn't agree more with this piece.

pokecharm
pokecharm like.author.displayName 1 Like

I don't think there is anything wrong with research and investigation, I honestly wasn't offended by his suggestion, glad to see he's willing to see for himself instead of listening to the voices that want to outright ban gaming now - I mean, I pay taxes...I don't see this as a hit against gaming, but a way for gaming to, once again, prove it isn't the cause of 'the crazies' - but just something parents should monitor for their kids...my two cents.

spoonybard-hahs
spoonybard-hahs

@pokecharm $10 million is a lot to spend when the government has already spent money in the past on  this same research.

DraugenCP
DraugenCP like.author.displayName 1 Like

@pokecharm Thing is, there already has been plenty of research into this subject, whereas Obama's claim that "we don't benefit from ignorance" implies there isn't.

razeak
razeak like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 2 Like

The ban on drugs hasn't stopped people from getting drugs. A ban on guns won't stop them from getting guns. An attempt at a ban on video games is an attack on the 1st Amendment. The violence resides in the perpetrator and we should be holding them accountable instead of trying to blame everything else.

DiamondDM13
DiamondDM13

It just occured to me... Are most people responsible for gun crimes even owners of gaming devices? I mean, it does take some money to get both consoles/PC's and games... Most criminals don't have access to these...

The US just needs to understand how wrong it is to not control guns... Most of these crimes would never happen if the criminal had a knife instead of a gun... You put a knife in the hands of a criminal and he might kill some 5 people, unless he's an expert. Not put a gun in the hands of that same criminal...He can kill 20+ people, 100+ if he's an expert.

Oh, and games as practice for shooting? Seriously? Even PSMove shooters are nothing like real guns, even with shooting attachment. But it's clear they know not what they're talking about...

Jake518
Jake518

@DiamondDM13 But remember that most murders don't end in massacres. They usually have one victim.

DiamondDM13
DiamondDM13

@Jake518 @DiamondDM13 That high depends on the motive. Revenge might make only one victim... Other motives might make massacres...But the point still stands, for guns are way more deadly than knives.

Jake518
Jake518

@DiamondDM13 @Jake518 I'm personally not afraid of someone owning guns. The vast majority of gun owners are sick or act on petty grievances. No doubt we should make sure the potential purchaser go through background checks and make sure he is mentally fit. But I don't believe we should outlaw every law abiding citizen from owning a gun because of the rare possibility of a massacre occurring. 

DiamondDM13
DiamondDM13

@Jake518 @DiamondDM13 It's it's impossible to stop those personal murders. However, if banning guns can reduce massacres, I think it's worth it... 

Personal murders is usually due to something you did, which granted might not be a bad thing, and just a crazy guy taking revenge for something that's not even wrong. (Not that I find personal murders okay).

But massacres, just about everyone of the victims has no fault in the criminal's problem. I mean, seriously, what could those 20 kids have done? Nothing, and if banning guns can prevent this, I think it's more than worth it...

Jake518
Jake518

@DiamondDM13 But most motives usually end with one victim. Massacres are pretty rare. Banning guns might reduce the rare massacre but I doubt that it'll reduce the personal murder.

Bad_Gamers83
Bad_Gamers83

Some good points.  I'd say the main issue both the people and the government should be focusing on is treating the mentally disabled and whether or not media violence (not just video games) actually do cause violent tendencies in them.  I think a certain responsibility does fall on our shoulders to not be ignorant as to what these games etc. contain.  Ignorance is not an excuse and I'm fed up with people copping out and making scapegoats.  I'm not saying the government or these developers aren't to blame, but part of defending what we enjoy is facing the facts and standing up for ourselves, part of which is taking responsibility.  Again I digress.

edjos
edjos

interesting post.

thereal-15-cent
thereal-15-cent

It's a waste of time and money.  I guarantee you one thing;the connection to violence and bad parenting is much stronger than the connection to violence and video games. Heck, the connection of a bad economy and violence is stronger than that. Speaking of the economy, when are the politicians going to stop messing around and fix it?

Conversation powered by Livefyre