Video Game Editorial vs. Editorial

November 15, 2010 -

In a response to a recent Tampa Tribune Editorial Board editorial backing California's efforts to ban the sale of violent video games to minors (called "Videos kids shouldn't play"), psychologist (and associate professor in the Department of Behavioral Sciences at Texas A&M International University) Christopher Ferguson pens a strong series of counter-points.

Among the litany of valid points made by Ferguson, is the emphasis on the fact that science just does not support what the state of California is trying to prove; a conclusive correlation between playing violent video games and violent behavior.

Instead of running down all of Ferguson's points, here are a few samples from the article:

As video games have soared in popularity, youth violence has plummeted to 40-year lows. Of course, video games are probably not the cause of this decline, but we now know video games have not sparked a youth violence crisis. The best studies that are coming out – those that carefully consider youth violence or youth mental health, find little to no evidence of harmful effects.

It's probably time to discard this hypothesis.

Another strong point is about Postal. Here's what Ferguson thinks about it:

The state of California (and the Tribune) makes references to a single game, Postal. Indeed, this is a vicious game morally unsuitable for minors. However, I've reviewed research databases of my own and colleague Cheryl Olson and the Pew Research Foundation in which children report on games they play. Of approximately 2,500 children, not one reported playing Postal or its sequel. So California is paying millions of dollars (which could have gone to children in need and families at risk or used to not lay off thousands of teachers) to prevent children from playing a game they already don't play.

Read the whole thing here.


Comments

Re: Video Game Editorial vs. Editorial

From the article:

"A law that distracts us from real causes of youth violence and diverts precious money from education and mental health into a law that will help no one is what is truly harmful."

Thank you. God, thank you.

Everyone, please circulate this article to as many of your friends as you can. Not only is it a breath of reason and sanity in a drowning sea of ignorance over the California law, but is, in its own way, a commentary on public understanding of scientific findings and fear-mongering news reporting in general.

Re: Video Game Editorial vs. Editorial

 The fact youth violence decreased so much should be the end of the entire debate.  Obviously, the anti-games people don't care about the facts, but the industry has been very lax in promoting this critical piece of information.

Re: Video Game Editorial vs. Editorial

The problem is that those are just the reported youth crime statistics.  People like Jacko have claimed that the youth violence problem is so big that most of it goes unreported. There's no real way to prove him wrong about that (even though he almost certainly is).

 

 

http://www.popularculturegaming.com

Re: Video Game Editorial vs. Editorial

Well I could buy that lots of violent crimes go unreported.  But even if that's true, the youth violence statistics are still valid in tracking trends over time.  Unless you had some rationale for why crime would be reported less often than 20 years ago (given massive efforts to destigmatize victimization, if anything, the opposite should be more likely). 

Re: Video Game Editorial vs. Editorial

Yes, there is.

"Who are you?"

"jack Thompson"

"then you are wrong sir"

 

Problem solved

Re: Video Game Editorial vs. Editorial

LOL, good ol´ Jack Thompson mockering. His ideas still make us laugh.

------------------------------------------------------------ My DeviantArt Page (aka DeviantCensorship): http://www.darkknightstrikes.deviantart.com

Re: Video Game Editorial vs. Editorial

"The fact youth violence decreased so much should be the end of the entire debate."

Not necessarily.  Who's to say that without violent video games, youth violence would not have decreased even more?

 

Andrew Eisen

Re: Video Game Editorial vs. Editorial

Who's to say that without macaroni and cheese we wouldn't have achieved world peace in the seventies? I declare that sports drinks are why we haven't sent a man to Mars yet. Prove me wrong. 

Re: Video Game Editorial vs. Editorial

Uh, we didn't achieve world peace in the 70s.

Anyway, here's a fact: as violent games have become more numerous and detailed in their depictions of violence, youth crime has gone down.

However, that's simply a correlation.  It's an interesting fact to point out but it's not a debate-ender.

 

Andrew Eisen

Re: Video Game Editorial vs. Editorial

I think its intended more a counter to claims that video games have a massive impact on youth violence (10-30% according to Strasburger, 2007). 

 

So it's meant to "kill" the absurd arguments, not necessarily "reasonable" arguments.  However it's the absurd arguments that too often are being made by scholars and filtering down to the general public. 

Re: Video Game Editorial vs. Editorial

Sure, but again, it's not a debate-ender.  Unless the debate is "youth crime has been on the rise since violent games were introduced."

 

Andrew Eisen

Re: Video Game Editorial vs. Editorial

No I'm not saying it's a debate-ender.  Neither is it an unimportant piece of evidence (although in fairness I don't think that was your point...not trying to straw man you).  I do think the violent crime data gets shoved into a black/white mentality.  Either it ends the debate or its unimportant (again I'm not saying that's what you said, but certainly the Anderson/Gentile crowd try to make that argument...and in a way that's hypocritical).  When folks make claims that 10-30% of crime can be attributed to media violence (as folks like Huesmann, Strasburger and others have done), they "open the door" for consideration of youth violence (and general violence) statistics.  Similarly many media violence scholars (Anderson, Bushman, Centerwall) happily pointed to violent crime rates while they were rising, only to hypocritically arguing they're unimportant once they are on the decline.

We're probably arguing over details despite being 80% in agreement, but...debate ender...no.  Worthwhile and important piece of that debate...absolutely yes.

Re: Video Game Editorial vs. Editorial

Agreed.  Not unimportant, not un-notable, not uninteresting, just not a debate-ender.

 

Andrew Eisen

Re: Video Game Editorial vs. Editorial

Probably because they know they've done nothing wrong and feel no need to prove it.

Re: Video Game Editorial vs. Editorial

I think the California Lawyer actually said that Madworld would "probably" be covered.  So the law is even more useless because with the exception of Postal 2, they couldn't reliably name another game that would trigger the law, and even the games that would "probably" be covered, no kids played them anyway.

 

-------

Morality has always been in decline. As you get older, you notice it. When you were younger, you enjoyed it.

------- Morality has always been in decline. As you get older, you notice it. When you were younger, you enjoyed it.

Re: Video Game Editorial vs. Editorial

Considering that Postal 2 was supposedly satire, that would mean that not even that would be covered by the California law due to it having merit. This thing really is useless.

Re: Video Game Editorial vs. Editorial

To be fair, CA did namedrop Madworld too but looking at that game's sales numbers, I don't think any kids played that one either.

 

Andrew Eisen

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Did Microsoft pay too much ($2.5 billion) for Minecraft developer Mojang?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
KronoThe underlying suggestion most of the articles had that gamers supporting the issue were just the young men stereotype pissed off a lot of people, and sparked the #NotYourShield tag09/18/2014 - 9:41am
Krono@andrew Just two? The whole reason #GamerGate gained real traction was that 9 op-eds including arguments to that effect dropped in 24 hours: http://markdownshare.com/view/a524affd-e679-40be-8aa1-72058065dc2a09/18/2014 - 9:38am
MaskedPixelantehttp://www.gog.com/forum/general/double_fine_abandoned_spacebase_df9_development ITT: People who don't know what Early Access is.09/18/2014 - 9:32am
ZippyDSMleeFF2/4 remake now on steam.09/18/2014 - 9:13am
james_fudgeThis what they really think of us: http://www.donotlink.com/framed?54192709/18/2014 - 9:10am
ConsterAh yes, nothing quite says "I take offense to being associated with an awful few" like siding with said awful few.09/18/2014 - 9:07am
Michael ChandraSo be smart, and if you want to be part of the good guys, separate yourself from the bad guys. Don't attack those upset you won't.09/18/2014 - 6:30am
Michael ChandraMeanwhile, Gamergate is tainted and wise people already use a different tag to defend decent arguments. Keeping it up is like going #KKK while arguing about PoC.09/18/2014 - 6:30am
Michael ChandraSo while claiming to be unfairly attacked for the actions of a selected few, you unfairly attack an entire crowd for the actions of a selected few? #notagamer #butahater09/18/2014 - 6:30am
james_fudgeQuiknkold: Let me ask you- how many of those 'gamers are dead' articles did you see here? Because apparently i'm part of some vast conspiracy.09/18/2014 - 5:18am
NeenekoAh, that old straw man. That is one of the ironies about the discussion, the whole point is showing how good people can still have problems with sexism and not realize it.09/17/2014 - 9:11pm
Andrew EisenYes, there have been a handful of op-eds suggesting that the term “gamer” has become tainted (two that I know of) but that’s the opinion of only a few. I've seen an equal number from those who disagree.09/17/2014 - 8:55pm
Andrew EisenExcept, you haven't provided a single example of a site that’s actually calling gamers a "collective of Sexist White Bigoted Basement Dwelling Manchildren."09/17/2014 - 8:55pm
TechnogeekIf you want to make the stereotype of gamers less painful, try calling people out when they do bad shit rather than handwave it away as "not all gamers". Even if it is a few bad apples, that'll still more than enough to spoil the barrel.09/17/2014 - 8:53pm
quiknkoldI'm not going to Sell Gamergate anymore. It can sell itself. But I will sell the integrity of the Gamer. That we are still good people, who create and donate to charitys, Who engage with those around us and just want to have a good time.09/17/2014 - 7:35pm
quiknkoldpeople should not be harrassed and punished for the actions of a few. I've always welcomed and accepted everybody who wanted to join in. Who wanted to make them, or play them. I love good strong female protagonists, and want more.09/17/2014 - 7:35pm
quiknkoldOne of the tennants of Gamergate is to stand up against Harrassment. That Gamers arent like those assholes. We can argue for days if the Sexism or Antifeminism or corruption is there or not, But the one thing I believe in and wear on my sleave is that09/17/2014 - 7:35pm
quiknkoldBut there were these websites, attacking me and people like me, for the actions of a few. and then others joined in on Twitter and other places. there was a hashtag that said "explain in 4 words a gamer" and it made me sick.09/17/2014 - 7:35pm
quiknkoldManchildren who are awful people and that the Identity of the Gamer should die. This hurt me personally. I've always identified as a Gamer. Even in my childhood years, I was a Gamer. All my friends are Gamers. Its one of the core parts of my identity.09/17/2014 - 7:34pm
quiknkoldUltimately, With the whole Gamergate thing, I jumped on it due to the harassment. A small number of assholes harrass Anita and Zoe, and then all the publications lumped together Gamers as this collective of Sexist White Bigoted Basement Dwelling09/17/2014 - 7:34pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician