Internet Hub Offers Both Sides of Game Violence Debate

February 8, 2010 -

ProCon.org, a California-based nonprofit charity that specializes in promoting "critical thinking" by presenting both sides of compelling issues has launched a new site dedicated to the topic of video games and violence.

The hub offers an introduction to the topic, noting that “The effect of violent video games on children and teens has been debated by researchers and the media since the release of the video game Death Race in 1976.”

It then lists a variety of research and opinions on the subject, from both sides of the fence, and offeres gathered images and videos on the subject. Visitors to the site can take a survey on the subject and add their own voice to the debate. A separate debate section highlights pros and cons offered by politicians, scholars or public figures.

A 1999 quote from Bill Clinton is used on the pro (or, yes, violent games contribute to youth violence) side:

… video games like ‘Mortal Kombat,’ ‘Killer Instinct,’ and ‘Doom,’ the very game played obsessively by the two young men who ended so many lives in Littleton, make our children more active participants in simulated violence.

A Henry Jenkins quote is utilized to illustrate the con side of the argument:

According to a 2001 U.S. Surgeon General's report , the strongest risk factors for school shootings centered on mental stability and the quality of home life, not media exposure. The moral panic over violent video games is doubly harmful.


Comments

Re: Internet Hub Offers Both Sides of Game Violence Debate

If the children are left in front of a computer game for many hours they may develop a greater insensibility toward the violence they face in the real world and therefore act in consequence. But video games are bad only if they are overplayed. On the other side, PC games actually develop strategic thinking and many of them contain references to mythology (see Age of Mythology or Caesar). Ella Rochelle - Arizona Web Designer

Re: Internet Hub Offers Both Sides of Game Violence Debate

I do believe this video sums a lot of my opinion on the subject:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGArqoF0TpQ

It is a video by the saturday morning breakfast comic team exposing "both side" debates as something a bit more than that. Please watch until the end, the author's explanation and opinion is in the third, I think, "debate".

Re: Internet Hub Offers Both Sides of Game Violence Debate

Violent games haven't made me violent & will probably never will. Only my family esp. my mom makes me irritated & go nuts.

 

 

"It's better to be hated for who you are, then be loved for who you are not." - Montgomery Gentry

"It's better to be hated for who you are, then be loved for who you are not." - Montgomery Gentry

Re: Internet Hub Offers Both Sides of Game Violence Debate

FBI crime graph is good enough to bring for evidence, as well as the long line of Scare Tactics and Moral Panics that happened with books, radio, comics, TV, movies, cartoons, videogames, dolls, computers and so many other things.

Plus look at wars that are happening in other countries and ask if those countries had videogames?

 

TBoneTony

Re: Internet Hub Offers Both Sides of Game Violence Debate


I just went over there to take a survey.  If anybody reading this article, go to that site and do the survey.  If you join the debate bring every evidence to show them that video game does not cause violence.  Use the FBI Statistic on crimes to prove your point.  Also, to discredit the haters, show what happen to Jack Thompson, Rob Blagoevich, and the like of those politicians.

 

Re: Internet Hub Offers Both Sides of Game Violence Debate

we kinda don't need to drag those names out. Those people are done and over with. We should just present our case and hope for the best.

Re: Internet Hub Offers Both Sides of Game Violence Debate

No.

--------------------------------------------------

I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

-------------------------------------------------- I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

Re: Internet Hub Offers Both Sides of Game Violence Debate

I've posted my views on the site. I think other people here really should take a few minutes to do the same, and do so politely. The survey is VERY short. It asks if you are pro or con and about the importence of the issue, and has a space to write your views in more detail.

Re: Internet Hub Offers Both Sides of Game Violence Debate

This is actually a good idea, assuming enough of both sides join in on the debate. The gamers will for sure. The problems are two things: 1. Those against violent videogames not showing up. 2. Rude gamers making the decent ones look bad.

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." -Albert Einstein

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Andrew EisenNow, having said that, what sites are you reading that are claiming that if "you self-identify as a Gamer, you're immediately the problem" or that gamers are "obligated to stop harassment"? Or was that hyperbole too?09/21/2014 - 1:03am
Andrew EisenFirst of all, ONE person in the Shout box suggested an obligation to call harassers out on their harassing but only after YOU brought it up. Plus, Techno said "when you see it happening." If you don't see it, you're not under any obligation.09/21/2014 - 1:02am
Sleaker@Craig R. - at this point I don't even know what the hashtags are suppsed to be in support of. what does GamerGate actually signify.09/21/2014 - 12:21am
Sleaker@AE - Hyperbole for the first 2, but it seems like some of the comments in the shout are attempting to place blame on fellow gamers because they aren't actively telling people to stop harassing even though they don't necessarily know anyone that has.09/21/2014 - 12:16am
Andrew EisenSleaker - Who the heck are you reading that is claiming "all gamers are bad," we "need to pass laws or judgement on all gamers," that if "you self-identify as a Gamer, you're immediately the problem," or that gamers are "obligated to stop harassment"?09/20/2014 - 9:44pm
erthwjimhe swatted more than just krebs, I think he swatted 30 people http://krebsonsecurity.com/2014/05/teen-arrested-for-30-swattings-bomb-threats/09/20/2014 - 9:31pm
Craig R.Btw, the guy who swatted security expert Brian Krebs? He got picked up recently. It can be done.09/20/2014 - 8:55pm
Craig R.Such things are not done in a vacuum... hence why the 4chan and other logs show what fools you've all been, tricked into doing the trolls' work09/20/2014 - 8:49pm
Sleaker@Technogeek - How do you call someone out that anonymously calls in a SWAT team, or sends threats to people?09/20/2014 - 7:04pm
Technogeek"It also doesn't mean you're obligated to stop harassment from all gamers that are doing so." I'd say you're certainly obligated to call them out when you see it happening.09/20/2014 - 5:17pm
SleakerNow if you disagree with anything in my last 2 posts then we obviously have a difference in world view, and wont come to any sort of agreement. I'm fine with that, maybe some people aren't?09/20/2014 - 5:09pm
SleakerIt also doesn't mean that just because a news outlet says that Gamers are the problem and you self-identify as a Gamer, you're immediately the problem. It also doesn't mean you're obligated to stop harassment from all gamers that are doing so.09/20/2014 - 4:59pm
SleakerJust to re-iterate: People getting harassed is wrong. Just because someone is harassed by so called 'gamers' doesn't mean that all gamers are bad. nor does it mean that you need to pass laws or judgement on all gamers.09/20/2014 - 4:56pm
SleakerAnd furthermore just because someone doesn't 'crusade against the evil' that doesn't make them the problem. You can have discussion with those around you. There's a thing called sphere of influence.09/20/2014 - 4:54pm
Sleaker@Conster - one person getting harassed is a 'problem' only so far as the harassee's are doing it. Just because a select few people choose to act like this doesn't make it widespread. Nor does it immediately make everyone responsible to put an end to it.09/20/2014 - 4:54pm
james_fudgeno worries09/20/2014 - 4:15pm
TechnogeekI misread james' comment as "we can't have a debate without threatening" there at first. Actually wound up posting a shout about death threats and "kill yourself" not technically being the same thing before I realized.09/20/2014 - 3:59pm
james_fudgeDon't hit me *cowers behind Andrew*09/20/2014 - 3:20pm
ConsterYou take that back right now, james, or else. *shakes fist menacingly*09/20/2014 - 3:00pm
james_fudgeOur community is awesome. We can have a debate without threatening to kill each other.09/20/2014 - 2:50pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician