Violence
On 17th September, Australia Classification Board announced that they will be banning Left 4 Dead 2, which is set to be released worldwide on 17 November, due to high impact violence.
According to the following link ( http://www.kotaku.com.au/2009/09/heres-why-left-4-dead-2-was-banned-in-australia/), the Board finds that the “interactive nature of the game increases the overall impact of the frequent and intense depictions of violence. This coupled with the graphic depictions of blood and gore combine to create a playing impact which is high.” Despite the high hostility towards the “terribly archaic classification system” as claimed by many of the Australian gamers, I do agree with the Board’s reasoning for the banning of such violent games.
Mean World Syndrome is a phenomenon where the violence-related content of mass media convinces viewers that the world is more dangerous than it actually is, and prompts a desire for more protection than is warranted by any actual threat. This means that they tend to overestimate the amount violence that actually occurs in their communities and in the rest of the world. People who are exposed to less media violence, are hence perceived to have a more realistic sense of the amount of violence in the real world.
Though many gamers might beg to differ and criticize such theory for being non-sensical and overly critical, the cultivation theory, coined by George Gerbner, proves otherwise.
In the cultivation theory, Gerbner argues that mass media is highly responsible for shaping and “cultivating” viewers’ conception of social reality
Attached below, is a short clip that explain the relationship between the cultivation theory and gaming violence
In short, the clip suggest that
1. Mass media imposes long term effects which can be small, gradual or indirect, but are cumulative and significant
2. “Murder Simulator unethically train children with the use of weapons, and also harden the emotionally to the act of murder.
3. Most believe that the video games are more threatening to violent tv shows, due to the fact that the gamers personally uses the controller to make an on screen character act out the violent behaviours.
Cultivation theory presents television as ‘not a window on or reflection of the world, but a world in itself’
I believe that the media heavily influences our perception of violence today. Heavy viewers and avid gamers are more susceptible to such “numbness” of violent behaviors and acts due to their constant exposure to them. As it may tend to induce a general mindset about violence in the world, quite apart form any effects it might have in inducing violent behaviours. This is further proven by the clip above. In addition, in a survey of about 450 New Jersey schoolchildren, 73 percent of heavy viewers compared to 62 percent of light viewers gave the TV answer to a question asking them to estimate the number of people involved in violence in a typical week. The same survey showed that children who were heavy viewers were more fearful about walking alone in a city at night. They also overestimated the number of people who commit serious crimes. ( http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Documents/short/cultiv.html). In short, many of these heavy viewers are completely disillusional and are unable to make out the difference between what is real and what is not.
Hence, I find the Australian Classification Board’s decision to ban the video games, due to high impact violence, a justifiable one.
I support the Australian Classification Board’s decision to ban the highly-violent game.
With regards to the issue on violent games, I feel that it is only fitting to have authorities take firm stands on the matter, so as to make the public think twice about the seriousness of the issue. We live in an age where technology is prevalent; the use of the internet is widespread. Children are increasingly being exposed to more matured content prematurely, and this is a cause for concern because at young ages, their perceptions, values, and beliefs are easily influenced. This is definitely something not to be taken lightly since their values and beliefs are the things that are going to influence their attitudes and behaviours in later life.
Hence, can you imagine if no restrictions were put on such violent games? If no authorities stepped up to portray the seriousness of the issue? What will we be exposing to the children then? Adults are able to discern right and wrong easily, but children are not as able to do that. By allowing such highly-violent games entry into the consumer market, children will inevitably be exposed to violence involuntarily (as via advertisements and the like), and as in the video, they will become ‘unethically’ trained to use weapons, and they’re emotional response to gore and violence becomes more detached. Is this seriously what we want for children? Should we be tainting their innocence? Would it be fair to them?
Teresa Chua
October 26, 2009 at 11:18 am
Balance is the key
I don’t think it’s possible to censor violence completely. Let’s face it, since the dawn of time, humans have been dealing with violence all their lives. In fact I think ancient civilisations were more violent than we are.
Innate instincts aside, humans are probably the only race capable of killing their own kind.
Personally I myself play such games, but I still squirm at the sight of pieces of flesh flinging around the screen. In fact, seeing more of such violent images only makes me more sensitive to them. I can’t stand gore ( I have never watched a single SAW movie ) even though I enjoy games like Left 4 Dead.
We think that more violence is bad for us ( and our children ) because we assume that they’ll be affected negatively by it. Now I’m not saying we should embrace violence and gore, but I believe that we need to expose the next generation to certain levels of violence. They are going to live in this world, and if we cannot censor violence completely from them, we’ll need to educate as they get exposed to it along the way. Don’t forget the lure of the forbidden fruit.
Now, violent entertainment is not the only thing that’ll affect us. Think about our civilian army in singapore. Half our soldiers play such games, the other half love the sight of gore ( the men under me love the sight of blood ). But I’m not sure how many of them are capable of killing or even harming another living human. But the kids in south africa are more capable of pulling the trigger than any of us. They probably never seen a gameboy before…
Culture is another key aspect of our lives. Our environment forms the basis of our conscience. If we’ve always lived in a society where violent is despised ( not in games; I’m referring to real violence in the streets ) we’ll naturally be inclined against violence.
Think about it =)
Samuel Lee
October 26, 2009 at 12:58 pm
Hey cmon la ppl…chill lah…ban this ban that, no life meh~. Essentially, these games just game, they are meant to be enjoyed! No matter, you can never ban ALL the gory games in the world because just like gum, it will still find its place here in Singapore if people are truly interested in it.
So my own opinion is still to educate the people about it. Being the 21st century world, teens these days think, act, and do things differently from last time. Visuals and activities that is inappropriate in the past are now seemingly common in our society today. Thus, we cannot follow the old ways of just banning the thing as we see deem fit as due to the media and the internet, things that are happening at the other end of the globe can be seen and heard from this tiny little island. So my point is that, there is no end to the things you can ban. To cut to the chase, what we really need to do is to inculcate the correct values and perception thinking to the younger generations. As the saying goes: ” You can go ahead and leash the dog, but ask yourself truly, is the dog leashed to u, or are you leashed to the dog?
Tan 'Cense Les Krape" Di Han
October 26, 2009 at 2:11 pm
why does everyone take the media so seriously?! im not surprised you’ve chosen this topic to blog about because it is indeed quite a highly discussed topic within the media students. when i was in uni i took up a subject that analyzed media effects and they wouldnt stop talking about the violence due to “overly-violent” shows and games. i disagree with their ban because i think that such a ban assumes that we human beings do not think for ourselves. we get completely and literally “brain washed” by these games/shows. that is so not true. the incidents of some crazy kid stealing his dad’s gun, randomly walks into a shopping centre and guns down everyone in sight is still a minority, it’s rare. i do not think that the government has any right to tell us citizens what games are good and bad for us. it is so totally overrated because to me, games are purely for entertainment purposes. its for me to destress after work/school and just simply have fun. besides, even if such seemingly violent games are to be banned, shouldnt it be the parents responsibilty? i think parents should be the one instilling the right values into their child, instead of depriving the child of entertainment.
yunshan
October 28, 2009 at 1:03 am
I dont agree with the Australian Classification Board’s decision to ban the game due to its violent contents.
I feel that instead of banning the game entirely, they should just set an age limit to the game. Maybe say people who are 18 and above can play it or something?
I think that the young shouldnt be exposed to the violence but young adults should be able to differentiate between virtual and reality. Moreover, I feel that we are able to tell what’s right and what’s wrong and will not become completely “numb” of aggressive behaviours.
Hence, I dont think they should deprived the older age groups of their entertainment. After all, it’s just a game.
xinyi
October 30, 2009 at 2:46 pm
Should we ban violent video games? I’ll like to take on both sides of this argument in order to prove my point is that the banning or censorship of media of a highly sexually and violent is the wrong approach as it fails to address the root of the problem in the mass media. That is that today’s society (especially the younger ones) lack the necessary skills to decide for themselves if fiction does indeed reflects what happens in reality.
Yes, we should ban media of a highly violent nature. You can argue that we know what’s real or not real, but when you’re bombarded with images that personify violence as “cool” on a daily basis, it is inevitable that we will adopt them as our personal view. What’s the latest movie or show that depicts non-violence as the best solution to conflict? Even I can’t name any. We live in a world that we are highly depend on the mass media to show and teach us our worldly views whether we admit or not, and when that world is one of violence, it’ll always be in the back of our heads as a belief that is just dying to be proven correct. No pun intended.
However, this view assumes that we are able to logically reason with ourselves that the typical Hollywood action movie or Electronic Arts video game is just a huge exaggeration and dramatization or reality.
No, we shouldn’t ban media of a highly violent nature. Violent video games are just a form of entertainment and if we start banning them, where will it end? That’s quite true. We as intelligent human beings too indeed have the power to separate reality from fiction. And with a overwhelming proportion of the media today showing violence ranging from some comedic karate moves to human flesh eating zombies, where will it end? Does every movie have to like another “Finding Nemo”, just that it’s taking place in the African plains with lions and elephants? That’s a world of boredom.
On second thoughts, doesn’t the opposition assume the same thing as the proposition? That we attended the same boring instilling of values every good parent should have done?
Thus, both sides of the argument have the same weakness. That today’s family and education system has proved us with sufficient ability to separate “Crime Scene Investigation” with an average cop’s life. That violence of that nature and scale is highly unlikely. My personal belief is that the answer is no. Parents have the temptation to leave the instilling of good moral and ethnics to the school and mass media. This is easy to understand as today’s job market encourages family to adopt a “dual income” system. And with such incredible pressure and stress on them already, it’s much easier to let the school and mass media have the job of teaching their children the necessary values every well rounded member of the human race should have. Take for example, sex education. Forty years ago in the developed world, it would be have been insane to ask anyone outside of the family to teach children anything about sex. But in just one generation, families are pushing this long held family responsibility to other social institutions, especially the education system. I fear the same thing is happening with the violence…
But it does not stop there. How many schools are actually more concerned with whether their students are holistic people or if their test scores are above the national average? The obvious answer is the later. Schools today are still judged by their administrators in the ministries by their test score performance, not by the character of their students. Sure, lip service is given to those worried by this, but not much is done. Besides how many of us actually go through any form of liberal education? This is more than apparent in the Singaporean education system. Emphasis is given on a technical or business education, because as we all know, that’s where the demand of jobs are. It doesn’t matter if you are a well-rounded person, as long as you have a job, you’re doing society “good” already.
I fear that if this trend continues on, we’re really going to end like senseless gun-totting Terminator robots. It’s quite amazing that we can just dismiss games like “Left 4 Die” as just entertainment, not a parade of mindless zombie killing. It’s not guns that kill, but the man pulling the trigger. And when he’s not given the proper education, he might as well part of the rifle as an automated trigger pulling device. Fire at will! Or rather at anything that moves.
jun☆hao
October 30, 2009 at 6:57 pm
i do understand where the Australian Classification Board is coming from as they make the decision to ban the game due to its violent contents. however i feel that it may turn out to be pointless eventually. the world is so exposed to technology now that kids can start gaming from as young as three years old. gaming aside, children today get in touch with the internet from a very young age as well. therefore i feel that even if they can ban violent games, people are still prone to violence via other forms of media. if the kid is destined to turn violent, the desire can be spawned from something as simple as a plastic toy gun.
eileen
November 1, 2009 at 11:10 am
Charles Sykes writes about the victimisation philosophy, where, in a summary (mine, by the way), people blame everything around them but themselves (did i hear someone say Alex Ferguson?)
take any movie from today, and show it in one of the drive-thru theatres from 30-40 years back. You’d find yourself courting trouble in court (pardon the pun).
while the australian authorities seem to be rather paternalistic when it comes to this (i HEARD that they have a pornography channel on their TV, although it is probably not readily accessible), i wonder why, among other methods, they seem to think this is effective. I’m assuming they have a problem with violence and crime, because i have chanced upon quite a few articles about racism in australia.
i’d think that clamping down on crime and beefing up their policing authorities and policies would be, by far, a lot more effective. If they don’t agree, they might want to look north (no, not indonesia) to, ahem, SINGAPORE, and realise that no one here has killed somebody because of l4d. or l4d 2. or WoW. that one would be a case of people killing THEMSELVES over it, not OTHERS. fortunately, they were forced to use a window and the results of the first pair’s attempt were a very very substantial deterrent.
By restricting the amount of Leeway, and following Lee’s way, Australia can have their cake and eat it: the australians get to play the hot hot hot upcoming most anticipated sequel, or maybe second most, because people may argue for starcraft 2, and the australian authorities get to kick back while their police force goes out in force.
personally, when all my exams are over, I am going to try out the chainsaw and frying pans on those poor ex-men.
on a side note, i’d imagine the australian kids would probably try to download l4d 2. or, if they really are against piracy, they could try buying it off e-bay.
Chao
November 1, 2009 at 11:28 am
indeed, the effects of the mass media are far-reaching and detrimental. i personally feel that the decision to ban the game is a justifiable one too. afterall, there is no age limit for the game and even kids can play them. and kids learn the fastest. this will only expose them to more violence than there already is in the world.
minzhi
November 1, 2009 at 5:13 pm
indeed, the influence of the mass media is far-reaching and detrimental. i totally agree with the banning of such a gory game. afterall, there is no age limit for the games, meaning even kids can get them. and kids learn the fastest at their age. this only means that they will be exposed to only more violence than there already is today.
minzhi
November 1, 2009 at 5:23 pm
Hi Adrian,
L4D is fun!! haha.. ok well i guess that the banning of the game might not be that effective. The level of technology around us allows kids to get their hand on the game through many means such as downloading.
Futhermore, the playing of such RPG games actually can also cultivates the leadership skills and the teamwork awareness of a person through the use of group communication that is needed in the game.
How a player wants to view the game based on the blood and gore or the tactical and teamwork aspect voiced down to the values and influences the player get from his surroundings especially the parents. Parents are there to instill the correct beliefs and attitude in the child.
Therefore, instead of banning of the game, the Australian government should have a workshop for parents to teach them the values they are suppose to know to their kids if they are to get their hands on the games for their kids.
thelifeofachamp
November 1, 2009 at 5:45 pm
I think that although violence is something which everyone claims to be bad and unsupportive of anything violent, people still prefer say for example, violent and gory movies or games to romance movie or puzzle games. I guess it’s simply because its something which sort of “provokes” our very prehistoric basic instincts for survival.. You see the bad guys who are out to get you, you kill them so that you’ll live. Pretty much a simple concept. Secondly, I would think that it is also probably because society doesn’t encourage it, therefore one gets the excitement or “high” from breaking the rules and doing something that is viewed as “not good”. Its really like how if you try to stop someone from doing something, the more they want to do it kind of theory.
yu han
November 1, 2009 at 6:27 pm
i dont really agree that banning bvideo games will curb violent tendencies. it might help abit, but ultimately it is not the video games that makes a kid violent. many other factors play a part too, such as upbringing, environment, friends. i doubt a child growing up in a pleasant environment will start becoming violent and scary after playing one or two video games. and if the child has a healthy social life and healthy relationships with peers and family, they would be able to differentiate right from wrong.
by restricting the playing of such games, youngsters might get bored or become even more curious due to the banning, they might want to play it more, or even search for games with higher violence content.
and actually i really kinda agree with thelifeofachamp, playing such RPG games will strengthen coordination skills, cultivates teamwork.
setting an age limit or encouraging parental guidance will be more viable rather than banning it totally. and besides, such games are an entertainment as well.
carina
November 2, 2009 at 4:17 pm
First, I do agree that the mass media can cultivate and influence viewers. However, for violence, I believe it still boils down to how that individual is like as a person. His/Her character and interests. And also, which century are we living in now? Technology is so advanced nowadays and even with banning the game, i am sure if the gamers want to play L4D2, they are surely still able to have their own ways to get it.
“Many of these heavy viewers are completely disillusional and are unable to make out the difference between what is real and what is not.” I believe that by banning the games, it will still not bring a stop to the issue of gaming violence. So why not just take a another step by educating them so they will be able to make out what is real or not.
EDWINA
November 6, 2009 at 12:39 pm
I agree that exposure to too much violence and gore may actually legitimize the usage of violence, and make it seem commonplace. With the increase in gory and violent shows such as Saw, and video games such as Left For Dead, children are being exposed to violence and gore at an increasingly young age. This may shape their perceptions of violence, and may actually influence them to think that using violence to get their way is perfectly all right. However, we need to take into account human agency as well. We are not simply robots who internalize everything the media feeds to use without thinking. I suppose the best way to get about this issue is to educate people.
HuiLin
November 8, 2009 at 8:54 am
I agree that the ban of such violent games is necessary as most have discussed that the mass media indeed has a powerful impact in shaping young minds. This action being taken exhibits that there is a growing concern of whether such materials are suitable for young teenagers. Knowing that the game allows the players to exercise decisions in a virtual dimension, if no proper guidance are provided, teenagers may be misled into thinking that their actions of violence is justifiable.
Therefore, i feel there is a need for authorities to step in and take preventive measures.
Joel
November 8, 2009 at 9:08 am
A ban may be necessary however, this will not be an effective solution. Reason being, kids these days are techno-savvy, if they cant purchase the game, they can easily rip it off from websites. As long as they are determined they can resort to other means and ways possible and they will still get their hands on such violent games. Curiosity is an innate nature of mankind. Unless we can exterminate curiosity of the teens totally(which i believe is not possible)these teens will not give up the thought.
What is more important is to teach them about the consequences that follow their actions. By implementing a ban is akin to applying lotion to an infected wound, it’s superficial and it has no healing effect.
What will be more effective is to get to the crux of the matter which will have to start from education, it may take long for results to be manifested but its effect can be lasting.
happycookies
November 9, 2009 at 4:20 am
Actually, i really don’t have an issue with media violence, except where it affects young children. I suppose there are many relevant things that the theories you’ve shared have pointed out, but I think there’s a certain sense that as long as one is educated, it can be trusted that a young adult etc would be discerning enough to tell the difference between virtual reality and reality.
In fact, i’m for the argument that consumption of violent films/texts/movies/games can provide good catharsis – one that may allow one to live through any kind of violent fantasy vicariously. however, the problem really happens only when young children cannot tell the difference and cannot understand the deeper ideological messages that are embedded within violent films like rocky and fight club (rocky: about not giving up and fight club about the way consumerism is emasculating and never satisfying). they emulate the violence just for the sake of it, and that’s where the problem arises because they would think that violence is okay.
in that sense, i think the best form of censorship still comes in the parental form. every other sort of banning would either attribute the media form (in this case, L4D2) too much credit for being violence-inducing or desensithizing, or make people only more interested in the thing that is precisely banned. (forbidden fruit = sweeter?)
btw, you may want to check this out, a very good book written on violence and the media, and the way children/young teenagers are affected:
Mayhem by Bok, Sissela.
Ritchell
November 8, 2009 at 4:35 pm
Aww. Mass media is it? Then I suppose if i were to reverse the “Violence” concept into “Peace”, wouldn’t that give me a reason to put religions under fire for their prophecies, teachings, indoctrinations etc etc. The list can go on forever like the way anyone blames the glorification of violence & gore in media =) I can equally blame anyone in this aspect for trying to spread the idea of religion to me like it is supposed to be absolutely healthy for me.
Darryl
November 8, 2009 at 4:37 pm
I feel that such a ban is justified as it has indeed been proven that media does affect the cultivating of mindsets, especially those of the young adolescents, who may not be able to discern right from wrong at their age.
Albert Bandura’s Bobo Doll Experiment in 1961 proved that aggression is a result of the observation and imitation of others. By exposing people to such addictive games of gore and blood like left4dead, violence would definitely be on the rise.
Some may say that a complete ban on the game is too harsh and a “blunt-weapon” approach, and they suggest a minimum age needed when playing the game.
However, who’s to say that they are mature enough to not be influenced by what they see on the computer screens? Who’s to say that they are able to differentiate themselves from the character they portray themselves to be online, with the character they are in real life situations? All of us, young or old, are fallible to the effects of the media.
Amanda
November 8, 2009 at 4:40 pm