August 14, 2007 -
Will Dr. Phil be nasty or nice to video games?GamePolitics has learned that the popular TV shrink is taping an episode about game violence on Thursday.
Readers may recall that just one day after the Virginia Tech massacre, Dr. Phil made comments on the Larry King show which seemed to indicate a belief that violent games played a role in the killings:
LARRY KING: Why, though - OK, you want to kill someone, you’re crazed, you’re a little nuts, girlfriend drops you, why do you kill innocent people?…
DR. PHIL: ...the problem is we are programming these people as a society. You cannot tell me - common sense tells you that if these kids are playing video games, where they’re on a mass killing spree in a video game, it’s glamorized on the big screen, it’s become part of the fiber of our society. You take that and mix it with a psychopath, a sociopath or someone suffering from mental illness and add in a dose of rage, the suggestibility is too high.
And we’re going to have to start dealing with that. We’re going to have to start addressing those issues and recognizing that the mass murders of tomorrow are the children of today that are being programmed with this massive violence overdose.
As of this point, we don't know when the video game themed episode will air or who Dr. Phil's guests will be. There was some talk with the show's producer that ECA president Hal Halpin would appear. However, we've heard that Dr. Phil has instead lined up a "game violence specialist."
Uh-oh...
Comments
Re: Dr. Phil Taping Video Game Violence Episode
Here's a video I found very interesting, it really opened my eyes to some of these video game violence issues.
Video Game Violence: A Modern Epidemic?: http://youtube.com/watch?v=X5ozuPflaZw
Ohhhhh, so the disappearing comments were your doing. And here I thought I did something that pissed you off and caused you to ban me. Glad to see I haven't joined that boat yet.
Also, I think the Dr. Phil is a quack and doesn't deserve to be a psychologist or whatever he is, nor should he have a tv show.
But then again, if this "Game violence specialist" is who we think it might be, and they invite on Hal Halpin as well...... It will be a TIVO moment for sure.
Anyone who's actually PLAYED a video game knows that points are no longer the bragging tools they once were.
Lost all of the comments here while doing a quick edit..
:-(
If Jacky shows his ugly face on the program: You gotta chug 6 beers.
Just shows his boundless ignorance.
Seems appropriate since Dr. Phil is as qualified a shrink as JT is as qualified a lawyer.
so true, I suggested it before that a statistician compare findings to try and prove out cause but comaring:
Gamer population/shootings that have some tenusous link to games (gamerviolence occuance)
AGAINST
normal violence occurance
(total population/all shootings)
Then youd have some statistical backing for whether games increase or decrease the chances of such horrible events.
Suppose that there is a correlation between consumption of media violence and propensity for real-world violence. (That's media violence, not just game violence, and I don't claim that there is any such correlation - I think the jury's still out on that one.)
Anyhow, presume that the correlation exists. Without knowing anything else, causality can work in one of four ways:
1) Consuming media violence causes one to be violent. (A causes B.)
2) Being violent causes one to prefer violent media. (B causes A.)
3) Some external influence causes one to have a preference for both media violence and real world violence. (C causes both A and B.)
4) There is no causal link - just a random coincidence.
Without a more thorough study it's impossible to tell which is the case. Rigorous scientists are very clear on this point - correlation does not imply causation. Unfortunately, not everyone is clear on this point and unscrupulous scientists can drum up support by showing off a correlation as cause.
"Father Time; Doesn’t common sense tell us that correlation DOES equal causation?"
No; no it really doesn't, science is in fact quite adamant on that point. Did you know there is a distinct correlation between ice-cream sales and murder rates; they both peak and ebb at the same time of year, on the same days. This is because of the heat; not because ice-cream makes people murderers. Seriously look it up.
I just keep out of it. I'm almost certain that it's impossible to convince someone, who believes this, of anything else. Seriously, has anyone ever convinced someone non-scientific who was FIRMLY of the belief that violence is caused by video games otherwise?
Trying to evade the spam filter...
I think most people, even here, agree that media has affects on people. The issue is one of degree. The surgeon general put media violence somewhere around eleventh on his list of issues that cause youth violence. The ones before it should be addressed well before.
Fuckin' massacre chaser.
One more thing
we can dismiss their arguments because it's the same old song and dance they've pulled throughout history. First it was rock and roll causing juvenille violence, next it was comic books, then it was dungeons and dragons and now it is video games.
I don't believe anyone here has ever said media has no effect on people. Its always been people asking for the same rules that apply to movies/books to be applied to other media like video games.
Not to mention that being desensitized to violence really doesn't say much. What exactly are you implying when you say that? That being desensitized to violence makes you more likely to do violence or less or neither? As for correlative evidence being more aggressive does not make you more violent. You confuse the two. Most studies I've read have noted a increase in aggression not violence two entirely different things.
I'm going to dismiss your argument based on the fact you cited nothing and are just spouting your opinions. So, yes we've dismissed their arguments because they are flawed and contain either no factual information or they twist what the studies say to fit their agenda.
O, and when you watch Dr. phil make sure he cites his information and his expert is an actual expert. Not a media dubbed expert. Common sense isn't always as common as people would like to believe.
How do you keep getting published in what feels like a Chinese Newspaper. Seriously, this entire website is giving me the FYAD response.
I just keep out of it. I'm almost certain that it's impossible to convince someone, who believes this, of anything else. Seriously, has anyone ever convinced someone non-scientific who was FIRMLY of the belief that violence is caused by video games otherwise?
A few of my 'more tasteless' comments in regards to the spam filter didn't get posted. /cry
Um, on the subject at hand... I dunno, he's not really a doctor? So what does he know? And why does the great unwashed listen to him?
One point that got erased here was that gamerdad said he got a call from "Dr." Phil's producers but they quickly balked when they found out he would not take an anti-game stance.
Funny, I didn't know Phil was on FOX... :P
Whoa, whoa, whoa, there sparky. No.
Violent media, or imagery, can desensitize people to more violent media or imagery. There have been no cross correlations between violent media and real life violence.
A person can watch 300 over and over and over, which can make them desensitized to say, watching Saving Private Ryan (and give them a warped sense of history), but then still get light-headed at the sight of real blood (say, a nosebleed).
Our brains distinguish between fantasy and reality from a young age (at least with the slightest bit of influence of a parental figure[s]). People who can't are the vast minority.
"One thing that I think we need to do is stop saying that media has no effect on people. We all know that’s a load of horse hockey."
Oh really all of us and a some professionals say otherwise
"Violent media CAN desensitize people to violence."
Assuming that you don't realize that the violence is fictional then sure it can. Also being in the military desensitizes peopole to violence, there's no question about that, but do we see a lot of veterans going on killing sprees?
"We also know that there is correlative evidence to violent behaviour and the consumption of violent media."
Common sense 101 tells us that that correlation does not equal causation so that correlative evidence is essentially horse spit.
There is no civil discourse, cause dr Dave has a black sharpie in one hand and his dick in the other and he's saying "Look'it me! I'm putting an end to civil discourse. Flag Flag Flag." The last thing we need is a filter with massive delusions of grandeur.
One thing that I think we need to do is stop saying that media has no effect on people. We all know that's a load of horse hockey. Violent media CAN desensitize people to violence. We also know that there is correlative evidence to violent behaviour and the consumption of violent media. Once those points are acknowledged and aggreed upon real, common sense solutions can be worked out.
Dismissing any argument other than our own out of hand does nothing but hinder civil discourse.
I want to TiVo this when I get the chance. Something I would like to point out in the discussion is that the number of people who grew up playing violent videogames is huge. I mean REALLY huge. I don't think I would be selling it short to guess in the tens of millions (again, just a guess).
Out of all of those people, how many have gone on a murderous rampage?
What would you make that percentage out to be? %0.0001 or something?
I think that the best defense of the whole "violent videogames" debate WOULDN'T be a psychiatrist, it would be a statistician. The numbers disprove what the rating mongers are trying to prove.
In fact, youth violence is on the decline. Why? Because videogames teach a number of things that previous generation couldn't learn in the same way:
1. Teamwork
2. Problem Solving
3. Consequences
4. Persistance
5. Patience
6. How to constructively channel your emotions
Earlier generation COULD learn these, but not as easily as a lot of games can hammer it into you.