“There exists in this country, sadly, a callous, corrupt and
corrupting shadow industry that sells and stows violence against its own people…”
One could be forgiven for assuming at a glance that the
statement above is condemning a hard-drug black market, or perhaps the domestic
sale of assault rifles of the likes used in recent and reoccurring American mass-murders.
In fact the statement is a condemning of the (American) videogame industry for
its continued and seemingly intensifying depictions of violence, mouthed by Wayne
LaPierre, Executive Vice President of the National Rifle Association of
America.
The quote is from an article that attempts to draw out some
irony in the NRA’s creation of an iTunes app-store game based around the firing
of various weapons at a virtual shooting range, a game that appeared for retrieval
online shortly following this statement being made at an NRA press-conference.
The article can be found here:
However this post is less concerned with the perceived irony
and has more to do with the harm to truth that can occur when social science is
used in the service of deception; here LaPierre suggests that while ‘guns don’t
kill people’, videogames and the industry that fuel their consumption are
somehow responsible for instances of mass-murder and general gun related
violence in the USA.
It is a hefty claim, and one that has not yet been
convincingly proven according to Jeffery Goldstein, author of “Violent Video
Games” from our course reader. Goldstein remarks that while a number of studies
from around the world conclude in videogames having an effect in bringing about
aggressive behaviour in players, many others have found no such link. Too much
variation and inconsistency exists in the breadth of research for assertions to
be made on the danger of videogames in this respect. Yet figures like LaPierre
insist on placing heavy blame on this medium, evident in the article linked
above.
The issue here is not simply of fallacies and the misuse of
the academic world for the purposes of frontmen such as LaPierre. The
incredibly damaging act is this focus of attention on particular and potential causes rather than addressing problems
from a variety of angles. I’m left wondering why finger-pointers have
historically homed-in on specific forms of media as causes of violent behaviour,
such as Television, Film and now Videogames. Surely a rise in the popularity of
significantly violent videogames over the last 20-30 years would be met with an
equivalent rise in aggressive behaviour. The opposite is true at least
regarding youth violence, as was pointed out in Tuesdays lecture,
Asserting the validity of videogame play causing violence
and aggression is in my view a scapegoat diverting attention from vast
deficiencies in American mental-health support, GUN CONTROL and perhaps even in
the general state of modern societies where the only way marginalised
individuals perceive that they can leave a mark on the world is by committing atrocious,
highly publicised acts of violence.
I think there’s also value in considering the social context
of gaming; it can be isolating,
immersive to an anti-social extent as well as a powerful form of escapism for
the more tormented of souls. Do videogames produce violent behaviour? Or are
unstable, isolated individuals with psychopathic tendencies just more likely to
engulf themselves in graphic fighting games and first-person-shooters?
Either way it seems forms of media will continually be
attacked when spokespeople, Politicians and leaders need to appear as if they’re
solving problems.
Reference:
Goldstein, J. (2005). "Violent Video Games", Handbook of Computer Game Studies. available at theunshaven.rooms.cwal.net.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.