Crecente Debunks Thompson, World Sighs
April 17, 2007 9:27 PM | Simon Carless
This is already rolling up the Digg charts as I speak, but a hat tip to Brian Crecente's dissection of Jack Thompson's Fox News report over at Kotaku - a sensible and necessary look at some commentary that's beyond the pale.
I'm not really sure what to say about the original news report, other than it'd be nice if tragic events were not spontaneously linked to games at every turn:
"Just hours after the shooting on the Virginia Tech campus, Jack Thompson worked his way onto national television to attempt to tie the tragedy to video games - hours before authorities had released any information about the suspect or his motive."
Crecente's conclusion to the whole sorry affair: "What do we learn from this assessment of Thompson's babble on national television? That you can say anything on TV and not have it fact-checked as long as you say it quickly, when TV needs someone to fill time and it's a good sound bite." I'm officially depressed, which is why this whole entry is just a little bit, you know...
[UPDATE: David Thomas (I presume) at the IGJA has added some commentary: "It’s shameful, and perhaps indicative of the lack of professionalism at all levels of the journalism world, that Fox returns over and over again to Thompson as an expert. While experts may have controversial claims, and may reach debatable conclusions, we certainly need to exclude anyone as an expert source who simply, and consistently, get their facts wrong."]
Categories:
2 Comments
While Fox News certianly should be called out, MSNBC also had Thompson on where he said the exact same thing and Larry King had Dr. Phil on his show, who also went into a whole rhetoric about violent videogames. It's absolutely ridiculous.
Eric Chrisman | April 18, 2007 12:12 AM
I earned my college degree in science, and at the time I noticed an amazing disconnect between what was being said and what the public perceived. 12 years ago we were talking in a class about how global warming was the first issue ever that 100% of the National Academy of Scientists agreed upon. However, the news of the day presented the issue as though there were different sides. How? By making people of low-reputation spokespeople who presented a certain point of view.
It obviously has taken years to overcome those misconceptions about science (and they go-on unfortunately). My guess is that games, as an industry, is only beginning to understand what stands before them. Perhaps a lesson can be learned from science and a better approach could be taken? I fear that most of the approaches taken by the gaming industry (and especially the fans who attack with more vigor than wisdom) have exacerbated the issue instead of getting ahead of it.
Russell Carroll | April 19, 2007 1:17 PM