Media Bias in Michael Brown Shooting Coverage Inspires Video Game

Kill Screen has a fascinating interview with indie developer Nicky Case, who is working on a video game about media bias. His inspiration? The network coverage of the Michael Brown shooting in Ferguson, Missouri.

On August 9, African American teen Michael Brown was shot multiple times by Ferguson, Missouri police officer Darren Wilson. The death of the teen, who was unarmed at the time he was shot at least five times, sparked riots and protests in Ferguson, and tons of national attention from media outlets.

But according to what Case tells Kill Screen, he felt that some networks covered the shooting and the subsequent protests through a lens of their own bias, prejudices, and political leanings. It inspired him to develop a video game about media bias.

"Take cop-friendly photos, and the cops could be more friendly towards you, and let you have access to areas you wouldn't have otherwise," said Case. "Or take extremist photos, and you will personally turn a peaceful protest into an all-out violent conflict."

Case said his game is influenced by Lucas Pope's game Papers, Please, which unabashedly puts players into a horrible position of authority with interesting elements to engage and enlighten the player about the realities of living under a totalitarian society.

Case's game isn't specifically about Ferguson because, he admits, he is not skilled enough to do justice to what happened in Ferguson in a video game.

"It's a very tragic and sensitive topic I don't think I'm skilled enough to handle respectfully," he tells Kill Screen.

His video game is also inspired by a cartoon about how the media often tells a different story than what is really happening in front of them through framing it in a way that fits into whatever narrative they are trying to tell.

You can read the rest of Case's interview with Kill Screen here.

Source: Polygon

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on RedditEmail this to someone


  1. 0
    GrimCW says:

    the base premise is there are at least two sides to every story.

    I'm not talking simply political debate, but any report in general. Yes there may be more than two at times, but the baseline is always going to be at the minimum 2.

  2. 0
    Infophile says:

    Or the flipside to the issue: That there at least two sides worth listening to on any issue.

    "Is the earth round? Today we have science educator Bill Nye here to debate Daniel Shenton*, the president of the Flat Earth Society…"

    The trick here is figuring out which sides are worth listening to, which isn't always easy.

    *Actual president of the actual Flat Earth Society.

  3. 0
    MechaTama31 says:

    "Both" sides…  I see you've already absorbed their most important propaganda: that there are only the Democrat and Republican sides to a given issue.

  4. 0
    GrimCW says:

    TBH I don't care for most news outlets for that reason. A lot of it just doesn't cover both sides, and they lack citation to anything they do post/write about. Meanwhile they'll inject a TON of opinion (and often times literally stating "in this writers opinion" then go into more a rant than an article) when the news should be the news, not one side or the others political leanings.

    I won't say GP is exempt, but at least its open for reasonable discussion in the comments, writers are active here, and you cite most information.


Leave a Reply