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

How do you feel about Amazon buying Twitch?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
AvalongodAgain I think we're conflating the issue of whether Sarkeesian's claims are beyond critique (no they're not) and whether its ever appropriate to use sexist language, let alone physical threats on a woman to intimidate her (no it isn't)08/29/2014 - 5:04pm
prh99Trolling her or trying to assail her integrity just draws more attention (Streisand effect?). Which is really not what the trolls want, so the only way to win (if there is a win to be had) is not to play/troll.08/29/2014 - 5:02pm
prh99Who cares, just don't watch the damn videos if you don't like her. Personally, I don't care as far as she is concerned as long there are interesting games to be played.08/29/2014 - 4:34pm
Andrew EisenZip - And yet, you can't cite a single, solitary example. (And no one said you hated anyone. Along those lines, no one claimed Sarkeesian was perfect either.)08/29/2014 - 3:51pm
Andrew EisenSaint's Row: Gat Out of Hell was just announced for PC, PS3, PS4, Xbox 360 and Xbox One making it the 150th game For Everything But Wii U! Congratulations Deep Silver!08/29/2014 - 3:49pm
ZippyDSMleeI do not hate them jsut think its mostly hyperlobe.08/29/2014 - 3:40pm
Andrew EisenSleaker - I'd say that's likely. From my experience, most who have a problem with Sarkeesian's videos either want to hate them in the first place (for whatever reason) or honestly misunderstand what they're about and what they're saying.08/29/2014 - 3:16pm
james_fudgeWe appreciate your support :)08/29/2014 - 2:55pm
TechnogeekIt gives me hope that maybe, just maybe, the gaming community is not statistically indistinguishable from consisting entirely of people that your average Xbox Live caricature would look at and go "maybe you should tone it down a little bit".08/29/2014 - 2:49pm
TechnogeekI just want to say that while I've disagreed with the staff of this site on several occasions, it's still good to see that they're not automatically dismissing Anita's videos as a "misandrist scam" or whatever the preferred dismissive term is these days.08/29/2014 - 2:49pm
E. Zachary KnightZippy, So you can't find even one?08/29/2014 - 1:04pm
ZippyDSMleeAndrew Eisen:Right because shes prefect and never exaggerates... *rolls eyes*08/29/2014 - 12:53pm
SleakerAnd honestly, nearly all of the games she references, or images she depicts I've always cringed at and wondered why they were included in games to begin with, from pinups through explicit sexual depictions or direct abuse. I think it's cheap storytelling.08/29/2014 - 12:35pm
Sleaker@AE - aren't most people fundamentally misunderstanding her at this point? haha.. On a related note I think a lot of the backlash is coming from males that think she is telling them their 'Generic Male Fantasy' is bad and wrong.08/29/2014 - 12:33pm
Andrew EisenAnd no, I don't think the female community would be upset over the performance of a case study in and of itself. Possibly the mostivations behind such a study, the methodology or conclusions but not the mere idea of a case study.08/29/2014 - 12:29pm
Andrew EisenAmusingly, these videos aren't saying you can't/shouldn't use tropes or that sexual representations are inherently problematic so those are very silly things to have a problem with and indicate a fundamental misunderstanding of the series.08/29/2014 - 12:29pm
SleakerDo you think the female community would get extremely angry over a male doing a case study on the negative impact of sex-novels and their unrealistic depiction of males and how widespread they are in american culture?08/29/2014 - 12:25pm
SleakerThe other thing that people might find problematic is that they see no problem with sexual representations of females (or males) in games. And realistically, why is there anything wrong with sexual representations in fiction?08/29/2014 - 12:24pm
SleakerTo even discuss or bring up these issues at a cultural level to begin with. Going straight for games to many probably feels like a huge overstepping given that it's interactive story in many cases, and when you're telling a story why can't you use tropes.08/29/2014 - 12:21pm
SleakerI think a large part of the controversy stems from the idea that games aren't culture setters, but culture reactors, and simply depict what is already in culture. So people don't care that games use tropes or are blind to them because we've failed ...08/29/2014 - 12:20pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician