Tanya Byron: "Difficult" Meeting with Game Critic Keith Vaz

[...] wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptMCV UK details Tanya Byron’s comments regarding a “difficult” meeting with Labour MP - and frequent game violence critic - Keith Vaz: The private meeting, which took place as Dr. Byron gathered evidence for her Review, was also attended by Giselle Pakeerah – the mother of murdered Leicester schoolboy Stefan and a constituent of Mr. Vaz. [...]

There is an indisputable link between violent people and violent games. Violent people like violent games (presuming they like games at all). That's a link.

Of course, I assume violent people also enjoy a lung full of oxygen and a good meal after work. I assume violent people enjoy sex and professional sports. Violent people LOVE defense attorneys.

I think we should control all of those too.

Right on! ^_^

"But my biggest fear is that it will be used for currency – whether that’s political or currency within the industry. I don’t want that to happen…"

It is happening! She needs to get the word out there about this and make sure that this doesn't happen. Of all people who are able to point out this abuse of a report, surely the person who wrote it is in the best position to do that!

"… it’s not as simple as violent games making people violent. I’ve never said that, and would be sure to disagree with anyone who inferred that from the Review."

The problem is with people who already believe that, whether it be due to hype, tabloid stories, their own holier-than-thou moral stance or plain utter luddite ignorance. Of course these people are going to cherry pick any little parts of information that appear to bolster their own position while ignoring or decrying information that proves them wrong. Ms. Byron really needs to lay out the facts in an even more concise format. Her statement above about how it's not as simple as violent games make people violent is a start, but she needs to make it clearer and louder so that there's no possibility of her fear coming to pass.

I feel sorry for Dr. Byron. She wanted to conduct an independent review on video games and help clarify the debate. But a lot of people are using her report for their own interests. They don't want to hear what she has to say : they just want a scientific approval of THEIR beliefs. And as they didn't get it from the Byron report, they are going to falsify it.

@ Ebonheart

/sigh You and your Bawls..

@Rhade
Vaz's argument has no proven scientific basis therefore in order to make it work he has to attempt to grasp at social interest stories. Even though links may be disproven there will always be at least one person blatently ignoring the facts. Vaz is unfortunately nothing more than a tragedy chasing goon.

"Mr. Vaz, perhaps you've missed the memo. The death of Mrs. Pakeerah's son, while undeniably a tragic occurance, has been proven unrelated to the game Manhunt. You can see this easily verifiable fact for yourself by consulting any report of the investigation, in which it was discovered that the VICTIM OWNED THE GODDAMN GAME, NOT THE KILLER. YOU STUPID TWAT."

I think her rebuttal should have gone a little something like that. Maybe just a little less sugar-coating.

BearDogg-X: I wasn't aware that Keith Vaz had an element other than being out of his element.

Vaz = knob

So the vicims mother knows so much about Manhunt, why hasn't anyone gone "WHy do you know so much about this game?" Ahh thats right intelligent and insightful. I'm honestly starting to think we should hand out common sense tests (not intelligence) and you need to pass to be allowed to breed.

@ JustChris

I'm more afraid of the giant "non-threating" bear than I am of a copy of Manhunt or FEAR, or The Orange box. No wait the Orange box scares me, just all those loading screens that took forever *weeps*

@Andy_UK: Byron's task was to gather information from all possible angles on the video games industry here in the UK. Vaz is the single most outspoken Politician on the subject. I'd be concerned if Byron _hadn't_ met with him.

@Ebonhart: Ms. Pakeerah certainly knew nothing about the content of the game, otherwise I imagine she wouldn't have purchased it for her son (I'm assuming that you all know that the victim owned the game, not his murderer as Vaz frequently alludes but never quite commits to - he's not so stupid as to all out lie, just twist).

@Zerodash: Despite your protests, that's totally crass ;-)

@ G

Hmm, from some of the articles I've read she knew a good amount graficlly about the game, more than one would gain by watching a 30 second clip on youtube or reading a Wiki article on it.

I can understand Mrs Byron's consern for some politicians to use the Byron Report against the Industry where she is trying to protect it and get the real truth put.

Sadly, I feel that with the insane Keith Vaz who has already made up his biased mind on this issue long ago, you can never talk any sence in him.

The real person to talk to is PM Brown, because he is the Prime Minister of the UK and people are more likely to listen to him, but the real danger is that Prime Minister Gorden Brown has also himself being brainwashed by Keith Vaz and it is only time when the PM (who originally told Mrs Byron to write the review) is so convinced by some of his ministers that there IS a link to Videogames and Violence,

People for a long time still think that Violent Videogames brainwash kids into becomming violent.

By looking how PM Brown linked Knife attacks to Videogames is a worrying sign that the only people who are being brainwashed here are the parents who are only listening to the media and the Politicians.

Even Byron said in her report that there is so much charged emotion out there that has distorted the facts and sensationalised them.

I feel sorry for Mrs Byron because she worked so hard to do this review for us but even her work is being used against the industry instead of helping it.

TBoneTony

ps. even with my essay I did last year, I would never want any politician to have access at it considering how many can twist the information to their political gains.

So how many times does Vag have to keep spouting the Manhunt BS before Rockstar/T2 can file a slander/libel suit against him? What's the UK's laws governing it?

Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards

http://www.parliament.uk/about_commons/pcfs.cfm#Contact

The Code of Conduct

V. Rules of Conduct

15. Members shall at all times conduct themselves in a manner which will tend to maintain and strengthen the public’s trust and confidence in the integrity of Parliament and never undertake any action which would bring the House of Commons, or its Members generally, into disrepute.

I'm just wondering if parading around a bereaved mother to hammer home a non existent point about a crime that has nothing to do with the issue at hand and misrepresenting that ‘rape’ is possible in computer games qualifies under this section?

I don’t know about you but ignoring facts about a case to push my own agenda neither maintains, strengthens or improves my confidence in parliament.

@nightwing2000

So every religion plus atheism. Gotcha.

@ JC

The difficulty is political. She can't just slap Vaz upside the head with the truth. He'd just turn around and say she was biased and want another study.

Honestly I commend Tanya Byron for doing such an excellent job dealing with this toolshed of a politician.

I wonder if Vaz is one of the "others" JT referred to in his note to Dennis in the earlier article "JT + FBI = LOL"?

I think I love you, Ms. Byron.

That chipmunk really knows how to disrespect the dead. The dead victim is probably upset over this stupid crap when he knows otherwise. That's to assume someone believes in the afterlife. I originally thought that she would be no good but I was wrong and we need to support her, to fend off these nut cases like vaz the spaz.

As much as it frustrates me that there are people this stupid out there, it is quite a comfort that it isn't me or 99% of the people on this site that are this stupid.
And we're the ones playing with toys that make us murder and rape people!

p4rma, Vaz isn't indian.

It's nice to see that the Byron report's author is determined to make sure all sides understand what they actually studied and determined, and what they did and didn't recommend. She's a good ally to have, even though she doesn't share most of our vehemence and bias toward videogames, but that's actually why she's good for our side.

We're not trying to force anyone into any beliefs or actions, just convince the morons over-legislating to at least use reality instead of unattributed hearsay, and science instead of "common sense" and assumption. So neutral parties agreeing with us sort of lends credence to our claims, or at least more widespread acknowledgment of the baselessness of the other presumptions and false studies and repeated soundbytes.

Hopefully, Vaz gets put in his place more publicly, and more completely, in the near future. Using somebody's grief, stoking it again and again just to further his cause, would be reprehensible enough on his part. But I can't believe he's using that bereft mother's pain like this just for his own crusade rather than for a useful purpose. I feel bad for the mother, but it's hard not to think that she's exactly the reason messages like Vaz's find an audience.

I would guess--but at least I don't think my guesses qualify as proof like some seem to--that she didn't know as much about her son as she thought she should, bor wasn't as involved as she now wishes she had been, but it boggles the mind how she somehow assumes that the game her son played deserves blame even though that had nothing to do with his death and all evidence proves the killer didn't have the game. I mean, while I can see how she might want to blame the games, I would have thought that either getting at the true cause of her son's death or punishing the inflictor would be more important than crusading against her son's passtimes, but maybe, to her, the games took him awy from her before his life was ever lost.

I presume that she's displacing her guilt (misassumed, for any parent faces times when they miss warning signs, or racks their brains for nonexistent ones, and feel a gulf between themselves and their child, especially in the teen years, that can make them feel like it was some failing on their part that kept them from being close when it was just natural growth or phases or both). Blaming videogames might salvage her own sanity or ability to cope with her loss.

She probably associated her son playing such games with him not listening to her--because, let's face it, most parents aren't as fun as videogames and some parents (whether they deserve the blow-offs they get from their teens or are innocent victims of angst), will blame this ignoring of them on whatever is handy rather than admit that their child is growing up and growing away from them in many ways they can't comprehend or control.

And if she is doing that, I guess it makes sense that she might feel she needs to crusade against games as a recompense for her own (nonexistent or else perhaps over-stressed in her own mind as she must ask herself all sorts of questions now) failures as a parent. I hope she pauses to think soon, moving away from Vaz's poisonous mutterings (like Wormtongue to Saruman), because she could do actual good if she put her grief and passion toward identifying and/or treating mental disorders or simply educating parents to warning signs in strangers and friends of their teens.

It's frustrating to see her being used, but on the one hand, it's also her own fault--for not looking into things, for accepting the convenient scapegoat, for more things ike that--and I hope she at least does little harm, if she can't accept the truth and do good. Maybe the Byron Report will help her to come to her own convictions rather than continuing to drink Vaz's Kool-Aid, but even if it doesn't sway those emoitionally invested in the videogame attacks, it is a good first step in defusing the arguments supposedly based in studies and evidence but revealed ever more clearly as generational propoganda.