Here is a fantastic video by Total Biscuit making a lot of note-worthy points based on the recent school shooting in the US, focusing specifically on the media's unethical portrayance of past shootings and also with video games.

As usual, Total Biscuit makes some very compelling points.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=5uwAo8lcAC4

That was an excellent piece; it highlights *exactly* why i don't watch televised coverage anymore.  I turned on network news for the first time in years the day one of these shootings happened, and i couldn't decide if journalism had taken a dive in the last decade, or if it had always been this way and my distance from it was highlighting how poor the coverage was.  TB is one of the more rational and thoughtful voices in this industry, I'm glad he decided to speak about this.

It wasn't until today that I saw my first piece in the media about video games being blamed for the incident. Upon seeing the headline, I thought "Huh. Usually I see that link being made much earlier when these things happen." So now here I am, using Google News to see how far back the stories go, and the only ones I see made on the day of the killings are either from Jack Thompson (and not getting much traction), or someone else posting about how "in the next few days the links will inevitably be made in the mainstream media". Then most other sources are from today or yesterday.

Am I just seeing the news differently these days, or is the link to video games finally starting to take a bit of a back seat now to real issues?

In Reply To #3

I saw a general remark "he played violent video games" by a reporter (quoting some article from another outlet) come by on my Twitter feed on the day of the shooting. It was brought more as a general statement like "he enjoyed hamburgers" than something placing blame, but the simple fact that it was somehow worth mentioning that the guy played violent video games means we're not yet free from the stigma.

But yes, it seems to be taken less and less seriously. I'm guessing mainly because we've probably reached a point where most reporters either have perfectly healthy kids who play these games or they play them themselves. You don't blame something you're involved with yourself.

[EDIT]

On a slightly different note, I have noticed a trend where media like to describe certain crimes as the "Facebook murder" or "Twitter rape" or "Google+ Securities Fraud" (alright, I made that last one up).

Not that the social network in question actually had anything to do with the crime, it's just the way people communicate these days, but for some reason they still think it's worth mentioning.

There was a "he played Call of Duty" story in the Sun a couple of days after the shooting)



Which is a bit like saying "he had a penis".

(it's not a real newspaper anyway, but it was still irritating. Although the worst thing I've seen is a few papers running photos purporting to be 'the exact moment this parent discovered his daughter had been shot', which is just utterly vile)

A new guy at work this morning, just before coming off a night shift asked if I play COD, following up with "I was told I should ask you". ULTRA (ir?)-relevant.

<--- Not a RL killer!

Also, since violence has rapidly decreased since the time of DOOM's release, I hereby nominate John Carmack for the Nobel Peace Prize. Double thumbs up you legend you.

Well, we all knew this was bound to happen at the NRA's head office.

http://au.pc.gamespy.com/articles/122/1227006p1.html

Yes Cyris, this is from Gamespy.

Well, I think I have officially changed my mind.

In Reply To #8

I really think it would be so much harder for US politicians to spew this sort of bullshit if the US simply certified games properly.

If they're only (legally) being sold to adults - or being purchased by parents for their children (which means the parents KNOW what their kids are playing, and therefore supervising it (at least partially)) - then it's pretty damn hard to say that violent games are being peddled to children.

(naturally I mean 'certification'; restrict some things to certain age groups, and not 'censorship'. Adults should not have their game content policed...)

In Reply To #9

Most retailers are voluntarily doing so, refusing to sell Mature rated games to children. Unfortunately most parents still just buy their excessively annoying, over sugar'ed demon spawn the games anyways to baby sit them while the parents go out drinking in the hopes of finding other idiots like them to produce more said spawn.

In Reply To #10

Over in the UK (and most of the EU) the certification is legally mandated; so it's against the law to sell 18-rated (or 'mature content') games to under 18s.

That's not to say that parents don't still buy them for their mewling kids - they do, all the time. But that's fine - parents are allowed to do that; the law is "you can't sell these games to children", not "parents aren't allowed to let their children play them"

But from a political perspective, it's a win for the gaming community - mature content games are for adults, they're only intended for adults, and if children are playing them they're doing so under adult supervision (at least in theory - or at least with parental permission).

So politicians who try to paint games as "murder simulators aimed at our children" (as they do now and again) immediately get shot down, as it is pointed out "it's a criminal offence to sell these games to children".

If kids are getting their hands on them and being somehow 'corrupted' - it's not the industry's fault. It's the fault of irresponsible parents.

And it's a pretty hard to sell for politicians to try to restrict things - especially entertainment - for adults (even more so in the US).

Hahahahaha...now there's a petition to deport Pierce Morgan because he spoke up about gun control. Fucking goofs.

It'll be interesting to see how this plays out. I suppose its not all that surprising, but this topic has received quite a bit of discussion here in Australia, mostly at work. I know the NRA holds a lot of political swing over there, but I wonder just how much power it truly has when a chunk of the world is against it. I imagine not a lot though.

In Reply To #12

Please don't deport Piers.

You let him into your country, now you have to keep him. Those are the rules.

Not my country. I'm just a spectator too. I don't think any writer could come up with shit this retarded.