Video game critics commonly hold that violent video games, including Doom, contributed to the 1999 Columbine massacre. But an Oregon psychiatrist theorizes that not being able to play Doom may have been a far more significant factor in the murderous rampage carried out by Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold.
Psychiatrist - and GamePolitics reader - Jerald Block MD (left) discusses his theory in a lengthy interview with Destructoid. Block's recent research paper, Lessons From Columbine: Virtual and Real Rage was recently published in the American Journal of Forensic Psychiatry.
Dr. Block - a gamer himself - has a professional fascination with the effects of technology on individuals. He told Destructoid:
I knew that Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold played many computer games. I had even played some of the same games. So I was curious and began reading the data… It was consuming, compelling, and disturbing reading.
Of the criticism often leveled at games, Block doesn't see it as unfair:
Game developers know when they are pushing the envelope... I'd argue that several successful companies, like Take 2, have used such marketing strategies. And they expect the criticism, maybe even like it for the free PR, though sometimes they get burned... The problem is that the entire gaming industry then gets predictably (i.e. not unfairly) attacked.
Regarding the Columbine killers, Block speculates that being deprived of their PC's - and thus, their games - by way of parental punishment left a void in their lives which they filled up in part with the plot to attack their high school:
When Klebold and Harris are kicked off their computers, few, if any, would recognize just how important their virtual lives were to them. Most people wouldn't even know they were in trouble. That would make the punishment much more severe...
For heavy computer users, cutting them off can free up 30 or more hours a week. That is a lot of time to fill, especially for an enraged teen with limited social skills. Unwise. The second issue is to recognize that computer users have a relationship with their computers... As silly as it may sound, being cut off from the system might feel something like being cut off from your best friend...
Harris had just been banned from the computer and the game. In its absence, he was keeping the game alive, refusing to give up his virtual life and the degree of power he felt there. By merging it with the real, he did not need to give it up.
I believe the primary issue is not the violent content. The problem is how seductively immersive technology can be. It becomes our best friend, our container for aggression, and the place we spend time. For many of those immersed, they go into crisis when they lose access to it. Clearly, we need more research exploring and confirming my analysis. In the interim, I'd suggest moderation, both in computer use and when putting limits on gaming.
If Block's theory has merit, how about this nightmare scenario:
One minute you might be enormously powerful online. The next minute, the plug is pulled and your entire virtual existence is deleted away. We should expect such events to make people question what they have been doing with their lives for the past year(s). Imagine the day when that happens to WoW. It might seem unlikely but… suppose Blizzard gets sued and needs to shut its servers down… will we have 9 million infuriated people across the globe?
Block also offers an interesting critique of the work of video game critics Craig Anderson of Iowa State University and Brad Bushman of Michigan State.
Comments
Turn the other cheek works in some instances, but the problem is in this instance, if we do, well, he's liable yo blindside someone.
You fail at reading comprehension Jack.
"I believe the primary issue is not the violent content." Hence this does NOT support your frivolous lawsuits. The point, which I don't really agree with, is that they didn't know how to face the real world when their games are taken away. The games could have been Barbie's Horse adventure for the purpose of this study.
Therefore this isn't a violence issue Jack but rather an addiction issue. Please try to read more than the parts which satisfy your personal vendetta. This goes for the bible as well.
Plus, its like the comic relief here.
there wasn't that much for him to do but say "see, he agrees". He didn't have any chance to really misspell words due to the short statement, and he said something stupid without reading anything past the title. Yeah, its him.
Good post man, sums it up nicely. I do feel as though the search for the trigger mechanism in these cases is such a blatent dead end in the search for solutions, that it just detracts and distracts from what could be genuinely helpful, and just helps to paint over the wider issues involved.
You seem to miss the point here, but thats ok. I wouldn't want you to be out of character.
Everyone has their outlet...their way of relieving stress and getting through times that may be harder to deal with. Saying that these things make them more angry and violent is like saying "people that hunt deer will some day start hunting people". However, while I disagree that deprivation of the game was what caused these two to do such a heinous crime, take into consideration many things that you seem to keep "ignoring" in your cases against the video game industry.
Both kids were said to have been raised in broken homes, and have been abused. They were given games as a shut-up toy so their parents wouldn't have to deal with them. They were continually harrassed at school on a daily basis. Lack of supportive figures in their life caused them to look for other routes to outlet their stress. A student claimed they had heard the two talking about how they "were sick of all the bullshit" and "weren't going to take it anymore".
Millions of people under the age of 18 play video games on a daily basis. Most, however, have a support structure in place, and have parents that actually get involved with their lives. When I go to my parents house for a weekend, my father and I will still play a game or two of Counter-Strike or Command and Conquer. While growing up, I wasn't allowed to play anything violent, sexual in nature, or anything along those lines until I was old enough to realize the difference between fantasy and reality. I still, to this day, play video games, and have never once committed anything violent towards others as a "reinactment" of video games.
So kids get ahold of M rated games. While doing research for a book I'm writing ("Blame the Game", and guess what, Jackie...you got your very own chapter!) I contacted 42 random video game retailers across the country and asked if they would sell a game to my little brother, who was coming to pick up a game for me that was M rated. When stating he was only 17, they said they couldn't because he was underage. At the age of 17. So, if kids age 12 are getting these violent games, who do you think is buying them? Thats right, people over 18. Any guess at who that may be? Parents and grandparents? So the problem isn't the video game industry, because quite frankly, they state right on the cover of the box "This game is intended for mature audiences only". Mature because they need to be able to seperate fantasy from reality. Who are the people that are responsible for helping to show that seperation to those at a younger age? Thats right. Parents.
Jack, when you get disbarred, it will be the perfect end to your chapter in this book. I look forward to it, especially because I can just see you trying to sue me for defamation. Too bad you won't be a lawyer anymore to try to falsely send a cease and decist.
Blessed be. I agree with you on the whole turn the other cheek thing. The problem of dwelling on what someone else is doing rather than what you yourself are contributing to the problem/solution is like a cancer. I was typing the post above while you posted about triggers. I have seen quite a few authorities on mental health look upon the issue as such, although the special in question was the most recent example I could recall.
Let us look at plot for a moment, since content is usually driving this snug bug. The radically insane plots of fiction are FAR outweighed by the reality of horrors committed since recorded history in societies far and wide. More horribly violent action is condoned by governments and rebel groups globally rendering people dead, buried, and forgotten than will EVER hit a TV screen from movies, television, and video games. If you look at the history of the world you will notice that every crime imaginable cycles in waves of hell-on-Earth, and we as people continue it. We allow hate and bigotry to dictate our lives. Money rules our motives nearly every hour we breathe versus a desire to better ourselves and the lives of our common (wo)man. We allow governments that cheat us out of life and liberty to run rampant. All the while children pick up this message that when it comes down to it, we don't give a damn about being decent human beings toward one another.
Take video games away. Take movies away. Take television away. Take technology into a back alley to get a quick slug to the noggin and strangle the desire to forward the boundaries of science. While you are at it, burn all the books, scrolls, tablets, and other recording devices that keep our histories of the world's past (both vaguely true and fabricated) and the legions of fiction writings so we eventually lose all touch of who we are and where we have been. Let us all return to the stone age.
Drastic perhaps, but where would we be without the media forms helping to push technology along. Media forms giving us mere rehashes of ancient and modern history bring consumers what they of their own volition will never strive for. If anything we should be using this content (good and bad) as a history lesson, drawing the parallels and engaging our brains to avoid past horrors and mistakes of judgment in the future. There are going to be people playing the Beowulf game who have NEVER heard of book, let alone read it. Turning the products of our media forms into learning aids would be the perfect opportunity to enhance the seriously lacking educational landscape in this country were it not for fear mongers and those attempting to capitalize (in wealth, power, notoriety) on national traumas such as Columbine, VT, and every day family tragedies that could have been prevented. Think about it. The content is already there, saturating households and communities. Should not something good be done with media other than it being blamed for bad parenting, and horrible personal judgment/control over mental conditions?
As for the story, I think the author has some fair points (although I believe he overstates his case somewhat). Remove the main social outlet for those with limited social skills, and trouble can ensue. It seems quite obvious however, that for an outcome quite as horrific as this one, it can only have been the kind of trigger that would have created this effect in someone as severely disturbed as Harris as Klebold. If it were otherwise, surely we'd be seeing comparable cases occuring on a nearly daily basis across the world.
Perhaps a more productive direction for study might be to look into why certain sections of American youth feel quite so alienated from their societies and peers, rather than the blame falling once again at the feet of an entertainment industry that is enjoyed by tens of millions of people around the world.
Of course this can be applied to any kind of obsession. Teenage girls who lose phone privileges, customizable card gamers who get grounded on the eve of the big tournament, grown men when they can't watch the Superbowl. And even lawyers who lose access to the spotlight they think they deserve...
All resort to the only thing they know how to respond with... temper tantrums...
I don't think that you understand the nature of addiction. Not all people who are addicted to something lash out violently when they are deprived of their habit. Additionally, not all addictions are a chemical addiction. People can be addicted to a whole lot of things even if it is not called an addiction.
Let's take an extreme example, porn. People can be addicted to porn. It has a very strong psychological tie to some people. Not everyone who views porn is addicted, but many people are. Those who are find it very hard to break away and it can destroy their lives. It changes your perceptions of intimacy and women (or men for that matter). Not everyone who views porn will become a pedophile or the next Ted Bundy, but it can really destroy your self esteem and respect for others.
Video games can have similar effects. It is just that these effects have not been documented as well as porn or drugs. It is too early in the study to write off the addictive nature of video games. To dismiss it is to write your self off as ignorant of the nature of the human conscienceness.
I agree that it is better to monitor and control the childs tv, movie and video game consumption early on. Children need to be active in educational and esteem building activities from an early age. Passive entertainment such as tv and movies are alright for a quick escape from reality and video games help in that respect as well. But when your kid is spending 20+ hours a week playing games and watching tv, don't you think that they could be doing something better with their time?
I for one, think that if your kid has a hobby that they love, they should be encouraged to delve deeper into the hobby. If you kid loves to play games, maybe they should be encouraged by the parent to learn how to make games. If they like certain shows and movies, they should be encouraged to learn about the subject matter in more depth, or to learn to write their own.
It is not what they consume when it comes to media, it is what they do with the things they learn that really matter.
So it in the end still comes back to the parent for not encouraging a more constructive habit for the Columbine kids.
He is not saying games are addicting. He is saying, some people are so used to them that they become a normal part of life.
Some people manage to deal with losing a limb, some people don't. While not an equal comparison, I think that is the point he is making.
a) an attorney has the free time to spend on a gaming website when he's in the middle of multiple lawsuits,
b) he's actually interacting with a website that is directly mentioned in one of his lawsuits (a HUGE no-no, as anybody with any legal knowledge would point out),
and c) that someone who's gone through years of education to get a law degree would such a low reading comprehension that he couldn't even get the basic point of a fairly simplistic article.
While I have a low opinion of the real Jack Thompson, I can only hope to God that this post isn't really him.... because my already low opinion of him would have dropped significantly as a result.
Either way, way to go, Jack! Continue being a "thorn" in the video game industry/gamer's lives by relentlessly showing your ignorance of basic law and the subject matter that you're complaining about, giving free press to controversial games, and by making your debate opponents automatically more respectable just by standing next to you.
A question though, does that mean you're ready to say video games are addicting?
Those without agendas to push, who view the Columbine Massacre as tragedy rather than career progression, see two disturbed boys who needed help.
Follow the money. When something like Columbine happens, who gets paid? The game companies? Nope, tragedies like Columbine hurt their bottom line. Massacre chasers? Yep. It's a lowlife feeding frenzy.
Well, just about anything and everything can become addicting, and as such to different people it can go to different degrees.
For instance, I can put down my Xbox controller for over a week and be fine, whereas someone else may not be able to do that as well as others.
I( hope that makes sense.
Video games are not addicting, yet they are something that certain people can become addicted to. Same with alcohol. Same with gambling. Same with sex. Same with any number of other activities. The majority of people are able to partake in these activities in a healthy manner, but some form habits which get worse and result in full blown addiction.
In the Columbine case, I'm not even sure it was addiction, more chronic delusion (see all of the God references) that led them to do this. Dooms at most gave them a vocabulary to pin on the people they didn't like. It did not train them, motivate them, and ultimately did not cause them to kill.
@Jack Thomson, Attorney
"This guy’s theories support our lawsuits stemming from game-related deaths. "
No, you have it wrong. His theories claim that playing Doom and other games actually had a cathartic effect on the killers. Just like you can take your anger out on a punching bag, or release frustration by sticking your face in a pillow and having a good shout, this was how these two vented their frustration at a world which appeared to them to full of bullies an persecution.
I'm not saying that video games was the cure here and had they been left playing it would never have happened. However, when they were cut off from their only release, it made all of their frustration build up rapidly. If they had been able to keep releasing their anger, perhaps it would have escalated more slowly and their mental instability would have been noticed before it got to the stage where they decided to kill.
Although, seeing as they were plotting a year before the murders makes me think that nothing short of catching them with the guns on the way to their school would have prevented it. (making sure that they couldn't get their hands on guns in the first place might have helped but that's another discussion altogether :P )
"You give a kid an appetite for this stuff, and of course they are likely to act it out "
Again, untrue. People who ALREADY have an appetite for this stuff are drawn to it. I enjoy horror and crime fiction. I didn't read those books and then gain the appetite for them, I sought them out because I was interested in them. I enjoy most kinds of games except for sports titles, they hold no interest for me. If you make me play sports video games I will not be "given" an appetite for them, the appetite does not exist in the first place. People who are prone to violence will more than likely enjoy violent literature, violent movies, games, tv shows, etc. Violent media will not make people prone to violence.
"virtual reality in real reality."
Real reality is just called reality. I understand that reality is something you have a problem with, but at least try and get the terminology correct.
Once again, Jack proves he failed reading comphrension as a child.
The point was that the two lost the outlet they knew of for their anger and frustration.
Meaning it doesn't support the bullshit lawsuits you've filed for years only to support your ego.
"Shut the F*** up, you're out of your element"- Walter, "The Big Lebowski"
This guy contacted me for no reason at all. I laughed at him then, and I laugh at his inability to provide a decent point even now. ^_^
DON'T! DATE! ROBOTS!"
About the critique on the works of prf. Anderson and Bushman and their response, I have no clue, even I'm a psych undergrad. Why can't a third party have a say in it? A stats psych prof? or even a statistician?
Elaborating what I said. Yeah, suddenly cutting off anything like that can cause severe reactions.
For example, say someone had become dependent on, sleeping pills. Cutting it off suddenly can cause a nasty reaction, the better idea would be to gradually work to where you don't need it.
Again, these "theories" only make it more apprent that the Columbine killers were clearly disturbed people, and not representative of the vast majority of gamers.
And again you miss it entirely. The point was that the two lost the outlet they knew of for their anger and frustration.
Factoring in all that and bullying ,they likely didn't take part in anything else as they were made to feel so inferior that they felt they 'd be no good at it.
-P
That's the whole point, Dennis. Good grief.
When you have only one outlet, you embrace that outlet. I took the gaming way too far. I feed off that violence now, otherwise I cant calm down. Videogames are dangerous only for angry people like me with violent potentials. I'm the exception. I can hold back my anger. It's hard but I can hold it back. I don't need a shrink, I need a new outlet.
I've got a story for you folks. One that goes hand in hand with Block's theory that sudden deprivation from a violent game can make you snap. Here me out people, here me out. Sudden cold turkey from any addiction will always have the addicted person suffer nasty widthdrawal, really bad withdrawal. Unfortunately I am one of these people. I have flipped several times because my parents would completlely cut me off from my consoles/PC.
They didnt even attempt to regulate, they would simply cut me off. After each time my addiction grew two-fold, they were making it worse. I have flipped several times because my parents would completlely cut me off from my consoles/PC.
Theres a few parts to my issue. My family is one problem. Family history and blood is full of rage. We are an angry bunch, my family is. Short fuses that burn out quick. We can be extremely patient or extremely volatile in certain situations. We've got good self-control, otherwise heh, we'd literally kill each other. Its hard to live with irritable, short-tempered people, family-wise. My father is the irritable passive-aggressive type whos high-maintenance. It doesnt matter to me, he's happy I work, so I can safely ignore him. Mother is a strong woman, much more resilient than me. Takes a LOT for her to flip. We three learned in life calm avoidance of PO'ed people works. Finding a quiet place for a few minutes of serenity saved the whole day from anger. But I also learned gaming was an outlet, lots of it. There wasn't abuse, just lots of anger.
Another start for my addiction was the constant bullying and ostracizing I had to deal with as a child. This made me completely apathetic to peers and their lifespans. I to this day, wish death and misery to my peers. They have been a thorn in my side whenever I was outside of my house. They took advantage of the fact that I was easily enraged, making my life total shit. Since I am 21, I mention peers as people from their teens to late twenties. Thankfully I ended up in a much better high school just 3 months after starting my sophomore year. I finally flipped out (non-addiction related) because of one jerkoff who started to bully me that year. I was thrown out but so was he, but not before he recieved a lovely glass jaw.
Its actually a great thing to get thrown out of one school, because if I didnt end up in the second high school, I don't know where I would've ended up. Thankfully, from sophomore to senior I was in a better high school, surrounded by GOOD peers, not idiots.
As a kid mostly my grades flopped from the marathon gaming. The punishments were usually just taking the Sega Genesis or Playstation away, but indefinitely. It made me a nervous kid, I couldn't figure out why I felt so crappy. Then I realized I was hooked. So I busted my ass for grades to get my consoles back, just to get some endorphins flowing. Ironic, no?
In 2000, my addiction got to a newer level: PC gaming. Compaq Presario 5461, it did its job for Doom and Half-Life (I loathe Counter-Strike). From that day I've been a heavy PC gamer, never looking back on console gaming ever.
When I was in the second high school I had lots of trouble digesting the math they taught. The teachers couldn't speak english that well and chronically vague. They were brilliant, evidently they were, but couldn't explain the chalk writings on the board. I was very stubborn to avoid after-school lessons, for some reason I had immense shame. I had to hide progress reports and lie through my teeth about my grades. Math was down the drain for me, I just couldnt comprehend it. All the while gaming like a hermit.
Now heres when the shit hits the fan. The computer had a failed hard drive and it took 5 weeks for Staples to fix it. I was dying without the pc, I was salivating for the pc. I couldnt think straight, was always thinking of gaming and browsing the web. The day I got it back, my mother found out about me hiding progress reports. Before I could even turn on the machine, it was all taken away from me indefinitely.
I f***ing lost it, I snapped like a mother F. I smashed all the furniture in my room and cursed up a storm. I paced back and forth through the hallway on the top floor of the house for 5 hours. I locked the door to my room and refused to speak to anyone. I simply cut myself off from my parents. I was completely silent for a week.
My parents were doing what responsible parents were doing. One problem: they thought cold turkey on me would've worked. They didn't realize how hooked and STILL hooked I am. They were too busy with my fathers machine shop to give a shit about me. No matter, I've had to embrace the addiction in order to be sane.
My job doesnt help either since I'm tech support in a medical clinic. I'm a anti-social and I struggle to socialize with people. I try hard and today, I am a lot more social than a year ago. But god help an asshole doctor today, I will choke his ass if he gives me shit for HIS computational incompetence. The job has further incresed my addiction. Manager is compete asshole. I plan to leave in several months if I am further pushed by these inconsiderate pricks. If I have to send my idiot manager into a coma, so let it be done.
With this aside... What am I today? I'm a violence junkie. A heavy metal fanatic. I feeeeed off the violence and gore. I am into the blood, guts, the macbre. If it doesnt have any violence, I'm not interested.
Metal? Love heavy instruments, riff, solos, a mix of growl and high-pitch vocals. Cannot get enough of it, pumps me up yet cools me down.
I love FPS only for the perspective. I just love the first-peron view, its immersive to me. Not because of the realism of violence mind you, I prefer FPS as its the best view of a game. Therefore I love Thief AND Doom. If i have a choice to sneak or demolish, I like the sneak part more. I have a thing for AI so I like to observe AI while I sneak around. (Sight, hearing, pathfiding in stealth situations). So dont think I'm some potential murderer. I would've been dead by now.
I bought some BB guns recently to start a new hobby and some outdoor plinking (and to kill some piegeons, joke). My VSR-10 (Tokyo Marui bolt-action rifle) messed up. I tried to occupy myself for up to 5 days on something other than video games. I was cooking by the 3rd day, not because of my addiction. It's because I'm easily frustrated and enraged. The job that time and the rifle broken started me up.
You might think "life story" but I'm trying to be serious. I do have a handful of friends. I IM people and use voice chat a lot. I go out once in a while. I stare at womens asses and boobs. I am still a horny bastard. I do not look like a nerd, I look like a PO'ed asshole. I am not emo I am metalhead. Right now? I think I'm doing pretty fucking good for someone with a violent temper so easily fueled. I just wanted to rant here because of the hypothesis from Jerald Block. Dont cut the addicted people off, try to reduce the addiction bit by bit. Instead of 16 hrs a day, I forced myself to do 3-8. A lot better from my perspective.
Yeah, then he actually would have been "trained" (something you can't do on video games despite what massacre chasers believe) and would have been an even better shot.
Probably the only true lines within that statement... Everything else is fair game.