President Obama Asks for Research Into Game Violence

[RhombusHatesYou]

if anyone has accused the CDC of biased research, I don't know of it

Do you mean 'anyone' as in other scientists/science organisations or as in 'everyone, including batshit conspiracy theorists'?

The CDC has been accused of conducting government coverups by the tinfoil beanie brigade too many times to bother counting.

 

[flarty]

Not being funny, but maybe it is actually something to do with the availability of guns http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_school_shootings_in_the_United_States

 

[bravetoaster]

"We don't benefit from ignorance. We don't benefit from not knowing the science on this epidemic of violence."

Legitimate question: What epidemic of violence?
I thought youth violence is some of the lowest it's been in the last seventy years.

Going by these stats, you appear to be correct--violent crime would appear to be decreasing. That being said, going by the FBI numbers, there are still over 1.2 million violent crimes committed per year (as of 2011, at least) and homicide is still the leading cause of death for black males age 15-34 and second-leading cause of death for all males age 15-24 (albeit in 2008--the most recent data they have available), I'd still argue it's an issue (and worth figuring out if/how we can reduce the number of people being hurt or killed).

...strangely(?), wikipedia seems to offer a very different picture, although I honestly cannot find where they're getting their numbers from, exactly (as I failed to locate any stats dating back to 1960 on the Bureau of Justice Statistics site.

Even if violent video games increase non-trivial violent tendencies in children, Mature games are already being policed. ... The point is that parents obviously don't care, so why should the government?

If parents don't care, that's their own (and their kid's) issue. If video games do/can have negative effects on children, is it not in all of our best interest to know it, though? If we don't do the research, we can't know, one way or the other.

 

[EGtodd09]

Assault rifles ban should be completely unquestioned, assault rifles were designed as an ultimate all purpose killing machine and citizens (or police really) shouldn't have access to them. The video game violence research will definitely be unbiased because they don't have an agenda, they don't want either outcome (proving or disproving a link) they only want look into it. Don't know about those universal background checks though...

 

[JaredXE]

It's not games, it's boys. It's masculine culture in America. Not a single one of these shootings were perpetrated by a girl, but no one ever remarks that it is ONLY males that are committing all this violence. Instead media comments on kids killing kids. No, it's BOYS killing kids. What is it about our idea of masculinity and how "Real Men" are to be that causes this?

 

[Shoggoth2588]

Hey I could be wrong here but uhm...haven't there been numerous studies about video games and violence before hand? Haven't there been relatively long studies too about prolonged exposure as well?

You know what? I'm kinda glad this is happening, because we all know that games do not cause violence, and this can be an official report to tell the ignorant why they are wrong.

I feel the same way. I can't quote or point out any studies but I know there have been some. Maybe something this mainstream will finally shut the more stubborn people up (although we know THAT won't happen).

 

[Callate]

I think I shall partially withhold judgement until I see where the funding for these studies go. And withhold the rest of my judgement until I see the results. We all know that some of the so-called researchers who ply similar studies use questionable methodology, even if they don't straight-out gear their studies towards achieving particular conclusions. I hope that whatever the result of this initiative, we can do better than that.

I hope. But I'm not confident.

 

[Ticonderoga117]

Why are we even researching this? I've been playing violent video games and watching violent movies since I was 5. 17 years later after being exposed to the same, I haven't committed one violent crime. Period. I am also not desensitized to violence, or at least dead people. One time my summer job involved going to the Medical Examiner's and they had a dead guy out for an autopsy. I felt sick and I most defiantly did not want to be anywhere near that.

Now, to expand from the personal story. How many people buy violent video games? A lot. How many tragic shootings are there? Not nearly as many.

Again, there are much bigger worries than restricting what people can buy to use and defend themselves with and researching a non-issue.

 

[ScruffyMcBalls]

I've got no issue with this. Not like we have anything to hide, video games have no unique impact on violent development. I do however hope that age certificates now somehow become a staple of law and not a simple guideline like they are now, as a result of this. Then the whole "violent video games are bad" argument would become mute, since the children who shouldn't be playing them in the first place, won't be playing them.

TL;DR
I'm glad Obama is covering his bases and I'm confident nothing negative will come of this.

 

[Falsename]

Good. Do your studies!
One of two things will happen.

1) They'll discover that video games aren't a major cause of violence in young minds and it's not worth going any further with.

2) Video games will be seen as a means of insighting violence in young adults (and anyone else) so ratings for video games will become stricter. As in some games with be rated R18, which I agree with. That Call of Duty game where you gun down civilians.... Rate it R18. The only reason they didn't was because the younger generation was the target audience.

I have faith in Obama. He's may not be the president of MY country but he is the president of perhaps the most influential country when it comes to the media.

I think we're becoming too desensitised. If a game has the stomping on zombie heads R18! If you gun down innocent civilians R18. If you kill aliens with guns that make the noise 'pew pew pew' give it a less harsh rating, because we all know Halo isn't responsible for any of this. No one practised a massacre by killing people on Halo!



I have faith that this examination into Violence in video games with only be positive. Maybe it should be looked into. Maybe it's just a fluff to passify all those that claim it is video games to blame for all our troubles.

And would harsher rating on video games really be a bad thing? I know that when I finally have kids (some fifteen years from now ..... that makes me 20!) I don't want my children playing a game where they stick their thumb into a victim's bullet hole (Far Cry 3) or watch a man's eye be pulled out with a corkscrew (Call of Duty) or place glass in a man's mouth and punch him (Call of Duty Again).


((On a side note: Obama's doing something about guns.... Good! Suck it RTA you ignorant f***))

 

[Doclector]

Well shit. How long do you reckon we have?

In all honesty though, with something like the CDC, it has a fifty fifty chance of being either an honest, complete, unbiased study, or a load of graphs that basically say "Videogames cause violence because fuck you, we needed a scapegoat and seeming as nobody gives a shit, you'll do".

I don't need to say which one of those would be the right thing to do, but we all know how many bullshit studies there's been before carried out in such a way as to actively suggest a link no matter the actual meaning of the results.

 

[gyroscopeboy]

I think this is great, and gamers should be embracing it to see once and for all if the effects of violent video games is there or not. People can spout "hurr durr, i play violent video games all the time and IM not violent" well great, but thats not empirical evidence.

And as talked about in this Cracked article by Robert Brockway [http://www.cracked.com/blog/the-truth-about-guns-video-games/] (I know its Cracked, but its a great piece of witing), the political response is pretty standard compared to other attacks on media.


So lets just see how this plays out.

 

[Colt47]

The research is actually to our benefit unless the research firm's statistical analysis is biased towards violent outcomes. However, a bias in that regard should be fairly easy to spot if someone looks at the process by which the firm arrived at the conclusion along with the data. The unfortunate thing is that this wont stop people from pointing fingers at video games. -_-;

Assault rifles ban should be completely unquestioned, assault rifles were designed as an ultimate all purpose killing machine and citizens (or police really) shouldn't have access to them. The video game violence research will definitely be unbiased because they don't have an agenda, they don't want either outcome (proving or disproving a link) they only want look into it. Don't know about those universal background checks though...

I'm still rolling around laughing whenever someone says assault weapons ban. Can we just call it what it is? Firearm Attachments ban maybe?

 

[marurder]

I really hope publishers take notice of this. I am all for shooting games and simple minded fun. But some games take marketing in the wrong direction (we have seen the shock ads before). Focusing on the gore, the 'fun' in murdering a person etc etc. If we want games to be taken seriously, we (publishers, marketers and gamers) have to present it as serious. And not take it to extremes. A study would be welcome [assuming] it would reflect the truths of the industry.

 

[Baresark]

I think this is awesome. More studies on this subject are welcome and necessary. Now, I also think the amount of money thrown at this entire project is laughable. The studies should also fall under the ability for third parties to corroborate the findings and check the work done. Not for nothing, while the CDC does fine work, they are are still paid by a government who's members have a vested interest in finding a strong connection to video games and violence (tax revenue).

Good on him though. It's rare, but he does occasionally do something I agree with. He is about on par with the laughably infamous George W Bush by my count, though he is ultimately far more likable than that jackass ever was.

 

[WarCorrespondent]

You know what? I'm OK with this. This is what science is about. We don't really know how things work. So we test. And then we test again later to see if it's changed. And later again. And of a 23 step plan, only one of them involves video games, this sounds like a plan that was made with all the factors in mind (or at least as many as they could get).

The thing that really gets me is when politicians and moral entrepreneurs cling to the violent video game argument like a damned magic bullet. And I don't think this is the case. Research away guys, I'm confident you won't find anything that links video games with real violence.

 

[Jamous]

Really isn't that big a deal; the biggest deal I can think of is that they either come out with RIDICULOUSLY unbiased results, or that it could be inconclusive and be seen as a 'waste' of public spending.

 

[Jumplion]

I am honestly surprised how little knee-jerking there is in this thread. Usually when a news story like this pops up, people immediately jump out and start screaming "Waste of money!" and "So pointless!" and all sorts of things that just devalue the topic that we should be discussing. Good job guys, you're actually trying to see both sides of the argument here.

Frankly, so long as these studies will be done with as little bias as possible, and with more stringent methedoligies, I will be very interested in what they will find. There is no solid evidence one way or the other as to how video games, or any violent media for that matter, affect people, whether positively or negatively. Like it or not, video games and media in general have an affect on our populace, and while they will never be causatory, they may certainly have some some of correlatory effect on people.

 

[MrHide-Patten]

I recently felt as though the Aussie Government had a few screws loose when they legalized religious based hate speech (or right to be dicks to 'sinners', i.e. everybody), but it's reassuring to know that when the biggest dogs do the most stupidest things to get the nanny goats off their asses.

How many times have they done this "research" to only end up with pointless information that sets them straight back at square one? If you want to resolve gun violence, do something about the guns.
I'm not usually one for conspiracy theories, but if the games industry was lining their pockets instead of the NRA we might see this sort of crap unfold differently.

 

[grigjd3]

Can anyone say "appeasing the asswipes"?