Journalists sure like using passive language these days. Or as I like to think of it... 'Covering my ass language'.

When am I going to see journalists using active language and saying something like they mean it? What's with the prevailing use of 'likely', 'may', 'could', etc. Stick with the 'definitely', 'will' and 'would'.

Honestly if they are not confident enough to write something with conviction, they shouldn't bother writing anything.

More lazy journalists practicing more lazy journalism. Even more depressing, though, is that they probably only put this much effort into a lot of their articles.

I love this "speak", suggest what you want, knowing that your readers are open to your sugeestion and when someone points out the flaws you can always claim that you whwre just talking about a possibility:

"If, by chance you would go and walk outside today you could be on the wrong street and it would be entirely possible that you clould be in just the right place to be possibly hit in the head by a meteorite. So it could be safer if you stay inside today."

Simply read the article and it's clear Glaister has absolutley no clue what he's talking about, though he claims too. Not even more than a few short paragraghs in, he claims GTA is about a hero who rides on a motorcycle with a prostitue and looks for his cocain...which is probably the most misguided and quite funny assumption about GTA's plot I have ever heard.

He also seems to really hate WoW, like it innapropriatly touched him or something. According to him, all guilds are filled with people who treat their members like crap and have high expectations of everyone or they get dropped. Funny, I'm on the second biggest guild on my server and I'm also the lowest level in the guild, almost 30 levels below the other members, yet my guild mates, people who I've never even met in real life (yes, he makes the real life vs internet assumptions in the article, but I'm not even going into that) give me silver/gold when I need it, enchants when I get a new weapon, and certain items when I need them for my professions. Of course there are a few guilds like he claims out there, but just because a small precentage of them are like that dosen't mean they all are.

Then he goes and claims the WoW episode of South Park was an accurate depiction of WoW player's and gamers. Yeah because you know, we stay up for over 48 hours playing the same game, pissing in bottles, and demanding other people in the house to get us food *End Sarcasm*. Again, just because a very small precentage of people have done it, dosen't mean we all have.

But all in all, he seems to hate us like we did something to him, playing on the typical "you have no life" saying (and yes Mr. Glaister, I do have a life, because right now, I'm writing this which means I'm alive, and being alive in defention means life, so that statement can't really hold up) and claiming at the end of his misinformed article we are all, or someday will be 40 year old virgins in our parent's basement playing in the fields of Karazhan, which he mentions quite a few times because an interviewed player mentioned it, and I guess he needed something to make him look intelligent when it comes to video games. Which even if someone is or ends up that way, why is it any of your damn buisness in the first place? But hey, that's just my ranting 2 cents on the matter.

P.S. Glaister, I don't have a basement.

Yeah, "Are Video Games Dangerous" would work as the speculative "if" rather than setting a falsified conclusion and seeking extent in the title.

Nightwng2000
NW2K Software

I stopped reading the first one when he started naming South Park as a good example of the dangers of WoW.

The second one was more balanced, as Schaffer articulates the positive things games can accomplish at the end. Still, that doesn't excuse her evasive "maybe" language and use of inconclusive research.

"The study downplayed any negative impacts but did find evidence the games were habit-forming because they filled basic psychological needs. Of course, the same could be said for heroin."

Wtf.

First off, yeah that graphic could be a little more insulting to gamers, if say one of the controller grips were covered in blood. Second, why are these people making articles like this, trying to prove a direct link when there is BARELY a correlation to ALL killings and video games?

i think it's the times.. currently the people in charge are unfamilar with video games. In 10 years all of this will go away.

These quotes from the Consumer Affairs article kind of jumped out at me.

Initially, gamers had to contend with the geeky image that came with training up onscreen warriors to hunt down orcs in the forest. Did they have no real life to attend to? But then came the filming of Lord of the Rings and suddenly the secret lives of orcs, elves, dwarves and hobbits entered mainstream culture and RPG’s (Role Playing Games) seemed a fairly innocuous hobby.

Seems to me like gaming has been an acceptable hobby for a lot longer than that.

With 8 million users paying $20 or so a month for their fix

rather tedious industry – such as repeating a single action like leather working or fishing a few hundred times until your character progresses.

Flying dragons across the Lands of Karazhan

If you're going to comment on WoW, try to do enough research to at least be able to pretend to know what you're talking about. How the heck did this guy get the monthly fee wrong?

Blizzard isn't evil and World of Warcraft is a great game. In moderation. But moderation is a rare quality in human nature and it’s an anathema to the business world who want consumers to buy more, more, more.

I guess you could say that. Then again, if I play 5 hours a day or 3 hours a week, Blizzard is still getting the same $15 per month from me (and I'm eating up less of their bandwidth if I only pay 3 hours a week), so maybe not...

Beyond that, I think Shadow-Breaker summed the article up quite nicely.

If you comment, be civil. I couldnt find any specific contact info for the author himself.

I swear hating on WoW seems to be in style with some of the press recently. I guess for some of them facts will never be in style, then again vague opinions and wildly inaccurate assumptions will never go out of style.

I remember reading that article when it came out, he made me yawn... About those studies he mentioned, it's that new book by Anderson and Buckley. If you visit Craig Anderson's website and watch his "Plenary Address at the National Summit on Video Games, Youth, & Public Policy". He admits that the studies needs more work and new ones to be made.

"Kind of like a dinosaur in a tar pit with its whole body below the surface, and just the long neck sticking up but slowly, slowly sinking down in to the muck… "

You have such violent thoughts! You must be a video gamer.

Slate has annoying, misleading headlines like that all the time. It's all for the sake of catching the attention of the reader and actually getting you to click the link and read the story. I completely agree - the content of the article really didn't support its headline. I'm glad a breakdown of the article appeared here.

I would like to do an entire newspaper column on a subject I know nothing about. Don't worry, I'll rely on heresay and flawed studies, so it will still have some "journalistic integrity". Can you help me out Slate?

I found it interesting that both articles use most of the same studies to support their stories.

While that graphic would most likely cause controversy, it would look great on a t-shirt or message board avatar, IMO.

"A study last year found that adolescents who play violent video games may exhibit lingering effects on brain function, including increased activity in the region of the brain that governs emotional arousal and decreased activity in the brain's executive function, which is associated with control, focus and concentration."

1. Aren't video games supposed to be de-sensitizing us, not increasing are emotional arousal?

2. Decreases "control, focus and concentration"?! How can we have "single-minded intensity" with decreased focus?!!!

What, did this guy use JT has his research assistant?

This graphic is not particularly offensive to me. It is clearly a murdered xbox controller. It is a clever metaphor for what the writers attempted to do. hey... wait a minute. Oh that's what they're saying. Never mind that offends the hell out of me.

About the graphic : in fact, it refers to last ConsumerAffair's 2-minutes report on "dangers of video games". Watch it on YouTube : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yiu3dEF6dQc

http://www.slate-quartzite.com/ natural slate tiles
http://www.fireplace-carving.com/ marble fireplace and stone sculpture
http://www.chinamarble.com/ China marble granite
http://www.granite-monument.com/ granite monument