Parental Guidance

Well Howdy Y'all! This is a college paper I wrote. The argument is my choice, obviously, and it might be a little biased. But I doubt I am wrong in any sense of the word.  And here is my edition of Parental Guidance.   All forms of entertainment, at one point or another, are questioned in some shape or form. Books were once banned profusely for what they held and movies were held in distaste on how they displayed certain acts. It is only natural that the newest form of entertainment, video games, would be questioned as well. These questions include whether or not video games desensitize children, if they influence kids to acts of violence, or even if video games could be considered an art. With such questions raised, it is easy to understand the worry behind the video game industry and their effects on children. Video games are not harmful to children, nor are they harmful to adults. The lack on knowledge about video games, thanks to the media and various others, contribute to the opposite belief.            In the state of Illinois, there was a court case between multiple software and retail associations and the state of Illinois in the year 2001. The software and retail associations sued several state and local officials seeking to enjoin the enforcement of Illinois’s Violent Video Games Law and Sexually Explicit Video Games Law (Kennely 1). This law would of restricted the sale of violent video games to minors. The standard as of today is only set by that of the company selling products, not that of the federal or state government. In this case, the state proceeded to gather various tests on video games and their users which investigated whether or not video games caused aggressive behavior in children. Through the various tests, no conclusive evidence was found to cause aggressive results. [The research by Dr. Anderson] included no data whatsoever that was critical of research finding a causal link between violent video game play and aggression (Kennely 16). Said research states “Short-term exposure increases the likelihood of physically and verbally aggressive behavior.”(Anderson 1). The flaw in Dr. Andersons research laid in the procedures he followed, such as the failure to test for lasting aggression of any form (Kennely 15). This court case has been held up by multiple different accounts to defend video games, such as MIT Professor Henry Jenkins who states, “…no research has found that video games are a primary factor or that violent video game play could turn an otherwise normal person into a killer.” (Jenkins 2). Professor Jenkins also explains many other common misconceptions about video games, taking time to discuss the desensitizing of American youth, or there lack of, antisocial behavior developed by children, and how girls often do not play video games. It is very easy to see that this professor has no difficult time explaining common misconceptions that wary parents have received from the media.                   It is not uncommon to hear things on the news such as Jack Thompson’s statement on the Virginia Tech shooting which says, “These are real lives. These are real people that are in the ground now because of [Counter Strike]. I have no doubt about it.” (Bendetti 1). When completely unfounded ideas are said on television such as this, especially at times of sorrow or when said by a “Professional”, it is understandable as to where the ideas of video game violence come from. Bill France explains many of his worries that video games produce, one of which being, “ These Video games are not spectator activities…. They use simulation techniques that are used to teach people to fly a plane, drive a car or fight wars.” (France 1). While this is obviously an overstatement, being that very, very few games actually have the controls of an actual plane, the stick shift of a car, or the tutorial on how to reload a real gun, these words are still written down for other worried adults to find. Statements such as this one, and various others created by Jack Thompson have given many parents motivation to fight against this evil enemy.            It is the duty of a parent to protect their children, to seek only the best for them, to not only shield them, but to teach them. Video games are too strong of a force in every day lives to just force a child to ignore them. Children will eventually befriend another child, and this child will most likely have some sort of electronic entertainment in their household. We can not hide something as prominent as the twenty billion dollars industry that are video games. What we can do is introduce this harmless item to our child and attempt to understand it with them. It is so very easy to ignore, or completely disregard, research and articles defending videogames. It is also very easy to become a well informed parent who will look into what our children might one day be interested in. By doing so we not only know what to expect from video games, but are able to still make knowledgeable choices on what our children look at and play. While there are no negative effects from video games, there are still ideas and different types of statements expressed by video games. These statements, which the Indianapolis Federal Court agreed to their existence, are frequently listed by a system of rating not unlike that of movie ratings (Jenkins 6). These movie ratings are made for parents, giving parents the opportunity to understand more of what their child is looking into rather than being completely oblivious.            There does lie the argument of whether or not video games actually hold any merit in the form of education. Other than the obvious games created as teaching tools, it is easy to throw aside video games as a legitimate source of education or development. Other than the recently discovered effect of improving ones eyesight via video games, and perhaps fixing amblyopic (commonly known as lazy eye), there is no real evidence of any educational or developmental effect from video games (Motluk 1). This does not take away the argument for it though. See as how the title of Art is debatable, this can only mean that video games being an art is also debatable. If this is true though, video games being an art, it is to be accepted that video games are an educational source. If we rely solely on the story being told, it should be easy to decide that video games can be considered an art form, as Aaron Smuts explains, “Current video games have highly integrated narratives that are often far more complex than the most sophisticated noir plots.” (Smuts 1). If this medium of art is being outdone by a video game, it is only safe to assume the video game has entered the realm of art, therefore entering into the realm of education.            We have encouraged our kids for generations to get involved with reading, visual art, music and sports. We consider all of these things educational to a degree. If we are able to understand the educational qualities of all these different mediums, we can begin to see their translation over to video games. Reading is involved in almost all video games, some games involving book size and longer text. Many games are worked on for years at a time to produce visually appealing graphics and colors. Music is done by orchestras and by men in computer labs in the creation of video games, and some games even involve music creation or playing in themselves. And while the physical action of sports may not take place in a video game, the idea of it does, this undoubtedly plays some part in how a child views sports. With all these different types of artistic and accepted ideas, how could we deny the educational existence in video games? Since we can not, since we can only acknowledge it and accept it, we must also accept that the education presented in video games produces a harmless atmosphere for children to play in.            It is simple to control our children, more simple to let them run a muck. As parents it is our duty to assume control over what our children are exposed to. It is also our duty to understand what we do with our control and how informed our usage is. We can not rely on the media to tell us what is not safe, and we can not rely on a college student to tell us what is. What we must rely on is our own ability to think for ourselves and truly understand what we are against. If we understand that, it is safe to assume we can come to understand that video games are in nature not harmful. And as this non harmful form of media is considered a form of art, it is safe to assume that the ideas some of the video games posses might not be suitable for children. This is where the real decision lies, but this is for the parent to decide.  Video games, in the end, are bought by the parents. Parents are the only ones who know what is right for their child. For them to blame their own failure on video games is nothing but a cop out. A parent must accept their responsibility. Video games are not the problem, the problem is loss of contact between the child and the parent. When the parent is a part of the child’s life, then video games could never be harmful, for the ideas that the parent understands the child is ready for will be allowed to be played, while the others will not. A parent must choose. Not a child.   -Travis