I swear JT is the reincarnation of Senator McCarthy.

@ general531

You're taking my statement too seriously. They didn't 'cut him off,' they just got the idea that he's a nut (finally) and stopped the conversation.

@Terrible Tom:

If he does, here's hoping bookstores will clear out all those unsold copies of 'Out of Harm's Way' (to the recycle bin) to make room for it. ;)

OMG! I want to ask him so many questions! I skimmed some of his papers, but this is incredible! Good thing I live in Montreal.

Actually if you look at the anecdotal information from the past ... children were much more violent in previous generations. Stuff that'd make your hair curl man. Scary stuff used to be routine when it came to bullying, fighting and especially animal cruelty.

It's a better world, no matter how some people would prefer to think of it. The good old days weren't always good and tomorrow ain't as bad as it seems.

OMG, it's an industry apologist!


/sarcasm.

I know firsthand about having difficulty in expressing oneself. Growing up while I had vocabulary, I could not easily express what I was feeling at the time. This lead to many emotional incidents, miscommunications and other sources of grief for me. For the most part, almost none of the incidents were violent.

I've been lucky that I was able to get specialized help in this area (and others of concern). I got into video games before I got therapy and I have to say that I understand about the frustration. I got help before it could have gotten really bad for me (diagnosed with ADHD/Depression). My parents had to lobby very hard for me to get into the special ed programs and it is still just as hard today to get your children into them. I think it was especially hard for me because I didn't act out extremely and I tested as quite smart. ;)

If you ever ask a special ed teacher about how bad their budget is, well: They. Won't. Shut. Up. All us kids knew that the budget for our program was bad.

Tangent aside, what the pols should be working on is increasing funding for programs for troubled/disabled youths instead of pissing it away on grossly unconstitutional "feel good" bills. The bastards should pay out of pocket the legal fees for such bad laws.

Oh, and dugg.

I, myself, have argued that stimuli (playing video games, being at and watching a sporting event, watching an injustice on the news, watching a movie, participating in a debate, and billions of others) evokes many emotional responses (positive and negative) and those, in concert with life experiences, personality types, and even GENETIC factors, determine an aggressive (positive or negative) or even non-aggressive response.

The research certainly shows a genetic factor in determining the potential for responding more or less aggressively to the complex concert of factors that occur when someone is exposed to any stimuli.

While I still remain wary of studies in general, the long study period with a large study group is pretty interesting.

It is a good study on one of the many causes, genetic, of how much aggression or lack thereof that an individual may display.

Nightwng2000
NW2K Software

"Tremblay has tracked 35,000 Canadian children for more than 20 years."

Long term, observational studies. Not some quack brain scan handed to you 5 minutes before going on live tv :) Or brain scans that show that children's brains work differently (who would have guessed), but do not show that this is detrimental. Actual, meaningful study, as opposed to emotion and opinion driven statements.

This seems like a study that any and all anti-video game legislation proponents should read and consider before they put forward another unconstitutional and unenforcable waste of taxpayers money. Although, to the politicians and agenda driven people, they could not care less about anything that would undermine their position.

*ahem* Paging Captain Obvious, paging Captain Obvious, please pick up the white courtesy phone, please pick up the white courtesy phone.

@ Hackangel

Prof. Tremblay is based at Universite de Montreal.
http://www.psy.umontreal.ca/employes/TREMBLAYRichardE.html

Wow, this guy has done his homework :) .

@ GamerDad

Glad to see you up and about. Keep up the good work.

I love this study. Long term, lots of subjects and no agenda. The best kinds.

Expect JT to come in and claim this guy to be an industry shill.

@Gamerdad:

"The good old days weren’t always good and tomorrow ain’t as bad as it seems."

Did you learn stickball as a formal education? =)

@Gamedad

"The good old days weren't always good and tomorrow ain't as bad as it seems."

Yeah, as an sponge for history, I've seen this trend in the past before. People are convinced that it's the end of days because of some event or another and usually give up their liberties to see the problem fixed, whether it's to a king or a politician. Of course, we later came to regret those decisions (re: The French Revolution),but it's still sad. And now we are seeing it on two fronts: "Moral reform"groups trying to take freedom of speech, and leaders using the fear of terrorism to do away with the rest.

At least we can rest knowing that there are wise people to protest these short-sighted actions, however few they may be. ;)

The science suggests we are correct, and that games do not have a significant effect on the aggression of children. It is not completely conclusive, but it is stronger than the cooked-up arguments attacking games. As I respect our military, let me just say:

WAAAAGGHH!!!

"It’s a natural behavior and it’s surprising that the idea that children and adolescents learn aggression from the media is still relevant… Clearly youth were violent before television appeared."

Oh, the sweet sound of common sense. There's been so little of it recently. We gamers have been saying much the same thing for how many years now?

Que JT's Brain Dead Bullshit in 3....2....

@finaleve

I agree. At the end of lion king you see the shadow of Scar being eaten alive by 3 hyena's. That and Disney's orphan fetish. Either the parents are dead, one is dead, or one/both will die soon.

It's so good to see a study shown on an unbiased point of view, AND from where I come from.

Of course, youth violence were more serious 20 years ago. It has always existed.

The fact that it is a long term study, on a great number of persons reinforce it's credibility.

One final though: I do hope that JT won't comment to fuel another of Pandraslik's anti-christian rant, and I dislike them more than everything JT will ever say.

*grin* This is cool!

oh. and great headline GP.

Somebody should itroduce this guy to tanya Byron

Not mention Novels, paintings and alcohol before that.

"Kids Were Agressive Before There Ever Was Modern Media"

Never..? I swear, we've been saying that for so long and finally someone else realises it..

Wouldn't Jack be conscripted into the Union Army in the 1860's?

@GamerDad

Seeing pointless violence makes your hair curl? That explains a few things..

Oh pah-lease, everyone knows there was world peace before video games were invented and Pong is what caused the vietnam war. (this is sarcasm)

I made a chronalogical error about when Huckleberry Finn and Tom Sawyer was published.Tom Sawyer was published in 1876.Huckleberry Finn was published in 1884.The book was banned in a Connecticut libary in 1884.There is still a lot of controversy surrounding Huckleberry Finn today.
The books take place before the US civil war.And the civil war ended in 1865.That would have placed Jack in the year of 1884 if he would have traveled time.

Heh, if Jack is so obsessed with this matter, why doesn't he do his research?
Guess this guy solved it XD

This is undoubtedly the single dumbest story ever to appear at this site, and that is really saying something. Of course kids have been aggressive. Games make them more so. If you all had watched Fox News this morning at 11:30 am you would have known that.

GP: Jack, any truth to the rumor that you've submitted racy pix of Headmaster Dumbledore to the federal court record?

Hey, what do ya know. Pandralisk actually made a comment that was relevant to the article.


Anyways, it's good to finally see some real research going on instead of papers being shuffled around Fox saying that thinking is a bad thing.

Wow. That is an incredible piece of research. I mean, 35 000 children over 20 years? The genetic idea caught my interest (hoping it won't be twisted by others), and the communication and pregnancy stuff really seems quite reasonable. I'd love to have heard his presentation.

No, because you heard it on TV, it must be true.

Need I point to my favorite example Jack? Gen. Westmorland said that the War in Vietnam was as good as won. Three or so weeks later, the NVA and Vietcong launched the Tet Offensive.

*you're

Sorry.

@Jack, if that were the case, you would expect overall agression to have risen with the introduction of video games. Any evidence of this (as opposed to lab settings)? If there was a net drop because they replaced something else that made kids violent to a greater degree, I'd say video games still come out ahead.

OOoooh! I missed it! =(

Guess I'll have to wait for it to be YouTube'D.

@JT:

"This is undoubtedly the single dumbest story ever to appear at this site, and that is really saying something."

Yeah, this site has had some pretty dumb stories. Remember that one about the crazy lawyer who trawled the internet for pictures of men having sex and then sent them to a judge?

"Of course kids have been aggressive. Games make them more so."

This study shows that kids have been aggressive over 20 years. That means before Grand Theft Auto. Before Manhunt. Before Halo. The games you blame were not around then, so how do you reconcile that fact with your silly theories?
Are you really saying that kids were never violent before the advent of video games?

"If you all had watched Fox News this morning at 11:30 am you would have known that."

To watch what? Watch you trot out the same old studies that have been shown as flawed and inconclusive? That can at best show a weak corellation, and not the causation you incorrectly reference? Being wrong on television is the same as being wrong on the net, in your lawsuits and public appearances. The forum involved does not make your incorrect statements any more true or accurate.

Finally someone who doesn't make blind and stupid conclusions

Isn't JT the one who said you can't argue with science?

Seems he means "You can't argue with science that supports MY arguments - but if it supports yours - well thats the "dumbest thing ever."

@jack thompson, attorney(not for much longer)

Oh just shut up. It contradicting you does not make it any less right. Hell, by your logic you should have logged hundreds of hours on GTA San Andreas, because you're the most aggressive person I know of.

SO whichis this guy? Industry shill? Apologist? Oh, wait, no, he's a whore for taking money from them.

You should just, stop talking. You're liek the Dalai Lama of f***ing retards.

media and middle class life has gone a long way to pacify the populace if you will they no longer feel the need to fight or worse, these emotion can be played out on the screen or from the radio, society is like a old dog it cant learn new tricks so it blames fleas for not having the will to scratch itself!

@Jack Thompson

"This is undoubtedly the single dumbest story ever to appear at this site, and that is really saying something."

There have been some dumb stories on this website.Most of them probably involved you in some way.

He's right. You're not. Deal with it.

"Of course kids have been aggressive. Games make them more so."


So do little league sports.

@Luke:

Yeah, now you're getting it! And most people have to pay for their subscription to 'The Logic Weekly Newsletter with Jack Thompson' My favortite column is 'Why you're right (and they're not)'

@kurisu7885:

touche. :P

@Erik

I thought that only affected the parents?

It's Jack Thompson's greatest fear that people actually exhibit independant thought.

This is undoubtedly the single dumbest story ever to appear at this site, and that is really saying something.

Of course you think that. It does not allow any room for you to misrepresent it and use it for your pointless agenda.

Of course kids have been aggressive. Games make them more so. If you all had watched Fox News this morning at 11:30 am you would have known that.

The point of the study was to determine if kids were at the same level of aggression or more or less than they are now after modern media came about.

Just because a study doesn't enforce your preconceived notions does not make it stupid. What makes a study stupid is using a number of subject that can be counted on no more than two hands and studying them for half an hour. That sounds a lot like the studies you hold strong to.

This study took several tens of thousands of individuals and studied them for twenty years before they made any conclusions. That is how studies are supposed to be done.

As for your 11:30 thing. I didn't watch it as I don't have cable. But I can picture you saying exactly the same things you always say.

Hey Jack, I played a video game last night. You failed to stop me. WHERE WERE YOU, JACK?

Yeah, notice how when religion is not woven into a topic, I tend not to bring it up? Incredible, isn't it?

Anyhow, a person like JT should spend his time fighting the variables I listed. What do you expect is going to happen when there are more guns than people in certain states, tons of parents suck, and schools lack power to discipline children?

Not that I watched it, but I think they "cut him off" due to his habit of not listening, interrupting, being rude, and being an obsessive control freak who wants to force the "interview" his way (i.e. like in just about all other "interviews" he has had).

Like that one MSNBC(I think, was some business news channel) he would not let the other people get their own words in. And lets not forget that one radio interview where he got fed up at not being able to control it & avoid answering their questions, he got to be the shows first interviewee to hang up on the interviewers.

While I think it didn't go that great or show us in a good light, that is the reason I supported G4's Adam Sessler's attempt to keep the conversation flowing. Otherwise it would have just been the same old debate with a broken, repeating record("studies have shown, studies have shown, studies have shown..." etc)...

"jack thompson, the gay pictures attorney Says:

October 20th, 2007 at 1:29 pm
This is undoubtedly the single dumbest story ever to appear at this site, and that is really saying something. Of course kids have been aggressive. Games make them more so. If you all had watched Fox News this morning at 11:30 am you would have known that."

Ok Jack so were they more or less violent before video games?

Considering that going around and beating up gays and black people and rapind women was considered 'boys being boys' in many states(mainly because it happened so often that jailing millions of boys would have been the alternative...) before video games how can you possibly claim that games make them more violent?

Oh yes that's right because you said so... and on FOX no less... which is so 'fair and balanced' that looking at a study for 5 minutes makes you an expert...

nope jack the dumbest story ever heard was you passing the damn bar as overlawyered put it "if jack can pass the bar anyone can"

@Erik

I second that.

@JT
Yeah, you know, I don't feel any more violent than I usually would. In fact I feel kind of mellow. I'm taking it you haven't seen the youth violence figures that sharply decrease after GTA3. And even if I had access to fox news, I still wouldn't watch you. Because I have better things to do at 11:30 at night... you know, sleep.

"I’m convinced that he paid his psychologist to pass that mental examination."

That's what I was thinking. He either wrote it himself or bribed for a good result, and Jack isn't that good a writer.

When is JT's disbarment?

What makes me laugh is that when we point out a report that helps support our point of view we are 'dumb' and yet when Jack points one out, he's 'protecting the children', he's so transparent.

I don't see how anybody with even moderate intelligence (ok, that rules out JT and a significant percentage of politicians, I know) could presume this study could somehow become a tool for eugenics or racism or other problems with pointing out genetic causation of such things as aggression and violence.

The study isn't saying that "some people pass on better genes", it's saying that "certain environmental conditions, particular before birth, inhibit the expression of genes necessary for both learning and using appropriate social and emotional actions and responses." So the study is basically saying that it's important to provide your children with a healthy, stimulating, and calm environment even in the womb, avoiding extensive stress, poor nutrition, drug use, and other factors that interfere with an unborn child's development.

Which should be as much common sense as the "children have always been aggressive, drawn to violence and what they aren't allowed to do" argument, but it's amazing what some parents believe because it's easy or ignore until told they NEED to consider it. I can only hope that this provides the final nail in the coffin of asinine policy, unconstitutional law, and the public's acceptance of whatever sensationalism is thrown at them without stopping to actually look into things. Of course, I know that won't happen, but at least give me the hope of a small-scale victory for reason, science, and true commonsense.

@Cyberskull (and all the people adjuring politicians to spend the money where it will actually help children)

I suspect politicians KNOW that they are undermining efforts to teach both special-needs and gifted children (let alone both) in an environment that is best for them, and considering the research I've done into education and diparities in it, that is something unlikely to change. They don't want to bring up those issues because that draws attention away from them and the wonderful things they've done, and also serves as pretty much a bottomless sink for money.

There are so many different teaching and social needs even of children considered "normal" that the average politician a) isn't actually bright enough to comprehend, b) won't take the time learning about but instead just hears catchy phrases regarding, and c) doesn't care about in the least because it's too expensive and too much work to implement changes that are actually beneficial to children, thus they stick with the easy soundbytes that make them look good to everybody else.

Tangentially, does anybody know what legal and realistic potential lies in effectively suing one's political leaders to pay, out of pocket, for the tas money they've wasted trying to pass laws, such as the anti-vidogame efforts, entirely based on heresay with no research done into actual legitimacy, usefulness, or legality?

Dumbledore pictures? You suave dog you, Jacky! Not that anything in that post much to do with this topic. Seriously. This is a good study.

Terrible Tom
*pounce*
glad to see you back ^^

I swear to god. my body automatically facepalmed after reading JT's comment.

Well, jeez. I didn't need an entire scientific study to tell you that...

@ Fasoo

I think my hand automatically facepalms before I can even start reading it, usually in an attempt to stop me from hurting my brain.

This deserves a big DUH. Cain and Abel?

Maybe is more "respected" people talk like this the stupid blamegame will be gone

Way back when people got stabbed, ripped, eaten and decapitated in colloseums.
And i'm pretty sure video games wern't around then.

@DarkTetsuya:

I hear that when they recycle all of the copies (there are no 'used' copies out there) of Out of Harm's Way, they recycle them into instruction manuals and DVD sleeves for games.

i know this is coming so i have to do

heres jacky boys next argument "blame canada!"

@Kajex:

"Chances are, he probably set up a google alert on his own name and is getting sick and tired of getting articles on the photographer, school principal, the “Throwin’ Somoan”, the air-traffic controller and Australian actor who came out in Star Wars Episode 2 as Cliegg Lars."

I thought he was just tired of "us" making him look bad. (When all we're doing is showing that he is bad, he's the one making himself look bad.)

@Weighted Companion Cube:

I hope no one thought I was saying there were used copies of that book. Also wouldn't you rather they recycle it into toilet paper? A much better use of that fiction, imo.

@Greenfenril_CTU:

save your (virtual) breath. He can't spell (aside from his own name, anyway)

"@erik

psst cain would have been playing the violent game he was the killer

(just so you know)

no trying to be rude "


Yeah. I had not enough coffee in me when I wrote that post.

When the youth in some country decide to overthrow the government and then guillotine everyone who supported it, you can start to argue that the evil mass media is making kids more violent. Unless people are claiming that the French Revolution was caused by a time traveler with Manhunt 2?

2008 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION WEEKLY POLL
http://www.votenic.com
Results Posted Tuesday Evening.

For all of those who are celebrating. I wont celebrating just yet. Most likely the study will be challenged . After all it does proof some very powerful people wrong.

@Jack
FOX news? Come on. I find the "fun facts" under a Snapple lid to be more reliable than that outfit. Sensationalism and fear-mongering at its best. That's why you like them though, isnt it?

[...] GamePolitics brought our attention to this gem. Canadian researcher Richard Tremblay has invested some time in studying a fairly large group of children to identify the roots of physical aggression. How much time you ask? 20 years. How many participants in the study? 35,000. [...]

Does anyone have a link to the whole article? I'd like to use this in my research paper. Thanks in advance.