February 7, 2008
The Tennessee State Senate will consider a measure which seeks a legislative study into the "adverse societal impact" of violent electronic media.Such a study would likely encompass video games as well as television, movies and the Internet. In fact, games and TV are specifically mentioned in the resolution, SJR 613. The legislation was proposed by Sen. Roy Herron (left), a Democrat.
While calling for a study, the language of Sen. Herron's resolution seems to suggest that, at least in his mind, the matter has already been decided:
WHEREAS, decades of social science research reveal the strong influence of televised violence on the aggressive behavior of children and youth; and...
WHEREAS, there appears to be evidence that exposure to violent media increases feelings of hostility, thoughts about aggression, and suspicions about the motives of others, and...
WHEREAS, television and media violence negatively affect the maturation of our children, the social development of our young adults, and the equilibrium of our citizens who are mentally impaired, and this important issue should be carefully studied by this Body...
It is also noteworthy that Sen. Herron's proposal appears to have both its outcome and subsequent course of action pre-determined:
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that as part of its study, the committee should identify ways and means to impress upon the entertainment industry that the depiction of the consequences of violent behavior in the electronic media should be associated with negative social consequences.
SJR 613 has been referred to committee. If approved, its called-for "study" is due by February 1, 2009.
Comments
It is further resolved that Roy Herron is a jackass.
Anyway, regarding the "research" topic, has anyone here actually read about what sort of things that go into the lab experiments in which they determine if video games are linked to violent behavior? The research is pretty flimsy, from what I've read in the past the research consists of taking a subject, having them sit down and play like fifteen minutes of a violent game, and then questioning them afterwards to see if they exhibit any potentially violent thoughts. The problem is that the scientists who have set up these experiments have failed to create a situation in which real aggression/violence can be produced in their lab settings. In which the direct result is a half-assed conclusion on whether or not violent video games are linked to violent behavior.
this whole thing stinks of padding political career and not doing something for the populace....
Unfortunately, from that point onwards, saying 'We want research that gives [i]this[/i] result' is somewhat abusing the scientific faculty in order to forward a political agenda.
How many does that make, btw?
Or I would spend the money on stuff that really matters (education, health care) as opposed to researching topics that people with common sense already know.
Especially when a just-posted article here debunks anything that this fool can come up with.
In Tennessee they are trying to rob the lotto scholorships meant for college kids to pay for failing, sometimes physically falling apart public schools because "there's just not enough money" to give the schools any type of budget. However we've got the money to study violence in TV and Games?
WHAT THE HELL?
"The Tennessee State Senate will consider a measure which seeks a legislative study into the ”adverse societal impact” of violent electronic media."
Surely they mean the "adverse societal impact THAT IS CLAIMED BY SOME BUT NOT SUPPORTED BY ANY CONCRETE EVIDENCE"?
"WHEREAS, decades of social science research reveal the strong influence of televised violence on the aggressive behavior of children and youth; and…"
Wrong. Some correlational studies have claimed this, butat the same time, maybe they just proved that people with violent tendencies like violent games.
"WHEREAS, there appears to be evidence that exposure to violent media increases feelings of hostility, thoughts about aggression, and suspicions about the motives of others, and…"
I suppose it is right of him to qualify this statement with "There APPEARS to be". It shows that there is no concrete evidence that he has to mention.
"WHEREAS, television and media violence negatively affect the maturation of our children, the social development of our young adults, and the equilibrium of our citizens who are mentally impaired, and this important issue should be carefully studied by this Body…"
Lumping citizens who are mentally impaired in with regular normal people is one reason why the anti game nuts get the whole thing wrong and seek to demonise our hobby. Out of the millions upon millions of people who play video games, the only ones who have committed violence have been mentally impaired or unstable. Also, similar (and worse) violence has been perpetrated in the past by people who don't play games. You cannot make laws restricting the rights of people just because of the actions of people who are mentally unstable and impaired. Do guns get banned because the Columbine and Vtech killers used them? Did the Beatle's music get banned because of Charles Manson? Did Catcher in the Rye get banned because of the actions of John Hinckley Jr and Mark Chapman?
"BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that as part of its study, the committee should identify ways and means to impress upon the entertainment industry that the depiction of the consequences of violent behavior in the electronic media should be associated with negative social consequences."
Doesn't GTA already do this? If you act in a criminal manner in the game, the police come and arrest/kill you. The worse you act, the more extreme their efforts to stop you. If you are killed/arrested, you lose money and equipment. There's negative consequences of violent behaviour. For goodness sake, there are cities in WoW where if you start fighting you are kicked out or attacked by guards. There are probably innumerable video games where violent behaviour has a negative consequence for the player.
The frightening thing is, that if this study even comes up with a correlational finding (which is very easy to do) they will go ahead with it as it is too good of a "We care about the childrens" opportunity to pass up.
And what do you know it's a Democrat (or should i say Censorcrat) to. God i hate both U.S. political parties.
At the time there were no such laws that I knew of in tennessee, now it looks like there will be.
"study into the ”adverse societal impact” of violent electronic media."
He doesn't want to study the effect, he wants the study to find the adverse effects. If, on the off chance that the researchers have any moral fiber at all, the study finds there to be no adverse effects, the researchers will all be scrapped and the study will be re-ran.
Is there any way for us to send him our feelings on this subject? Does his office have an e-mail address to which me can mail WELL THOUGHT OUT, POLITE, and SOCIALLY RESPONSIBLE coorespondence?
Scary, yes. http://www.royherron.com/childrenandyouth.htm
I couldn't find a way to contact him directly, but I guess we can email his administrative or legislative assistants (on his web site) about the foolhardiness of such an empty study.
and if video games cause social degration, agressive thoughts, ect. why aren't we all asocial hermits that hide out in our basements with AK-47'S?
Politicans who waste money kill people.
*sigh*
Politics as usual.
I'm not a big fan of Halo, but the violence there is always in context. In war people do things that we find reprehencible in normal life, but they are dealing with extrodinary circumstances. That is the game they are trying to make sure they keep out of kids hands. But Pokemon they have no problem. A game where the idea of 10 year olds breeding and enslaving monsters to force them to brutally fight for their own entertainment and monetary gain is fine.
If you don't play video games then you need to get yourself educated. Go out to the store and look at the game box's to see what type of rating system is in place. See how well that rating system is enforced. Play a video game and see if in your opinion it makes you more violent.
If our politicians aren't at least doing what I mentioned above then they honestly have little to no right to say anything about video games, let alone fund research to see if they cause violence.
I'm honestly tired of politicians who are too old to understand, and too lazy to get themselves educated on the subject. They really shouldn't be making poor decisions, wasting tax payer money, and creating laws about something they know so little about.
If you can't adapt to new things then it's time you step down and let someone who can take over.
@chuma: Tennessee has never, in it's entire history, been hit by a hurricane. Our wind disaster are tornadoes. But your point stands.
@insanejedi: You are a complete idiot. Getting this nation's economy back on track is something that can be only accomplish at a national level, not at a state level.
Being from TN, I am obligated to say something. With that in mind, I'll write him on the weekend(along with some other people). My advice to anyone else intending to write him is to remember that politicians tend to ignore angry emails and letters, so be courteous, calm, and to remind him of the other state's failures(with the cost of each failure bolded or underlined). Also it would be proper to remind him, of ethical issues such as going setting up this study as if he knows the outcome already
Really? Why would be only something that can be only accomplished at a national level? It’s that kind of thinking that gets nothing done. Just because you aren’t the president of the United States doesn’t mean you can’t do anything about the economy. That money could have been used for social programs in the state to help the nation get its economy back on track. Yeah it’s a pretty minor difference made in the current situation of the country, but haven’t you ever heard the saying “every little bit counts?”
Why don’t you go out and also say that only big companies like EA, Activision, and the ESRB are the only people that can tackle these people trying to demonize video games because it’s too big for you to do something about it if you’re going to say that. ECA anyone? Just because Hillary Clinton is running for president and she’s the front runner doesn’t mean it’s too big for you to do anything about it. Same goes with recession, just because its nation wide doesn’t mean you can do something about it locally, especially if you're a senetor for god's sakes.
Funny. That's exactly how this resolution makes me feel. Clearly, it should be banned.
Um, no. Just no. Strike one.
"WHEREAS, there appears to be evidence that exposure to violent media increases feelings of hostility, thoughts about aggression, and suspicions about the motives of others, and…"
Strike two.
"WHEREAS, television and media violence negatively affect the maturation of our children, the social development of our young adults, and the equilibrium of our citizens who are mentally impaired, and this important issue should be carefully studied by this Body…"
Oh no you di-in't. Strike frikkin three, douchebag. Right, sure, video games cause mental retardation now. Yeah. In a science-fiction universe, maybe, but last i checked, this isn't, this isn't '1984,' or 'Matrix,' or 'Brave New World,' or whatever. Insert your favorite 'Eternally peaceful future from having no emotions/etc' media here.
People are BORN with mental disabilities. They're not MADE. As someone who has a learning disorder myself (which has been evident, according to my parents and early teachers, to have been somewhat apparent several years before i even laid a hand on an NES controller), this just plain pisses me off.
"BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that as part of its study, the committee should identify ways and means to impress upon the entertainment industry that the depiction of the consequences of violent behavior in the electronic media should be associated with negative social consequences."
Right. Call us when those consequences have actually HAPPENED. THEN we'll talk.
I sorta realised that i was chucking in learning/developmental disorders and other mental impairments into the same group, and those ARE pretty different when you think about it. I apologise.
I think that sums it up right there.
Looking at that paragraph, I wonder if he means 'negative social consequences' in-game, the meaning is far from clear to be honest. If that's the case, it's going to be interesting to see WW2 games or Total War implement this idea...
And the consequences are usually someone trying to kill you back, I'd say that's a pretty negative social consequence right there.
That really is an incredibly vague sentence, I keep reading it through but it still doesn't seem to have any definite meaning.
...this politician thing sounds like a great gig. Lie a lot, smile, shake hands with people, get perks from lobbyists, vote yourself a pay raise every year, and spend tax money on iPods and fishtanks using your food budget. Brilliant!