Some Questions Around Media Concerns

The conversation around the Chatroulette web site (discussed in an early post and comments) and the Daily show’s satirical look at the media’s exaggeration of the web site as a “craze” tied into questions I have had relating to how discussions of fear around media are framed.

I have a particular interest in the debate about violence that surrounds video games. I’m not so much concerned here with the legitimacy of claims about the negative effects of video game violence, but more so interested in how much that debate has framed discussion around video games, to the exclusion of many other discussions.

I don’t dispute the fact that violence is a serious issue. I personally dislike watching violent movies (can’t handle Tarantino) and would definitely prefer not to have youth I work with be violent. However, I’m not quite sure what the long-running debate around video games and violence is supposed to accomplish. If it is conclusively proven that video games cause violence, is the aim to then restrict people from playing these games? To ban the industry from creating violent games? To restrict just young people? Or something else?

Whether or not we researchers, educators, parents come to the conclusion that video game violence is detrimental, video games are already deeply imbedded in our culture – and the video game industry is larger and more pervasive than perhaps even the movie industry in the United States. And it is the most violent video games that are also the top sellers, not necessarily just because they are violent but because they are often the most complex, largest in scope, open-ended and interactive, and generally the best-funded games. So what do we do? What discussions should we be having? And why is the violence debate so often the only discussion the mainstream media seems to be having?

Chat Roulette...the new conversation??

I have a creepy feeling about Chatroulette.com. Of course, it takes me awhile to warm up to any new technology so I am going to try to be objective about this new phenomenon. I get a kick out of being a voyeur as much as the next guy but Chatroulette is too “in your face” for me. For background, watch http://vimeo.com/9669721 informal, funny research on this new use of the web cam.

My gut reaction is that there is something weird about wanting to chat with a stranger who probably has no expertise in anything I’m interested in and whom I will never talk to again and will never meet. I like to meet people that share one of my interests or with whom I can have a relationship. And, of course, there is the pervert factor. Every article I’ve read and news report I’ve seen warns of the sexual implications of this form of entertainment. On Chatroulette one can see masturbation, private body parts, psychos with nooses around their necks, men in bras…need I go on?

Is the right to patronize this site in the same league as the right to read books on sensitive subjects? My opinion is no, it is not. While I am all for freedom of the press and freedom to express your opinions and to talk about the taboo, I think there are some things that do not need to be witnessed. I might join in a conversation about sexual perversion, what is perverse, what the attraction is and why some people like it and others don’t. But it is a whole new ballgame to witness sexually explicit acts. For example, to change the context, it is one thing to read about a grisly murder but it is quite another to witness one.

This is definitely a concern when thought of in the same context as youth. Teens would be the most likely age group to be attracted to this technology. First, some of them have more leisure time than adults and more of their time, leisure or not, is tied to the computer. Secondly, even if a teen is leery of whom they will run into, persuasion of peers will be a big factor. And, most importantly, trying new technology is as familiar as breathing to teens and that, combined with natural curiosity and a sense of daring, might be a dangerous combination.

It’s not that I don’t trust the kids (God, how many times have you heard THAT one!) Seriously though, my concerns are with whom they will start chatting in Chatroulette and what that person will do on camera or ask the kids to do. Older teens have probably seen much more sexually than adults want to recognize but the younger teens and tweens that might get on Chatroulette.com could see things that they are just not ready for. Another concern for me is that the more we see and accept sexual behavior, as well as other outer-limit behavior, the more mainstream it may become, although I think we may have crossed that threshold already.

I would like to say that perhaps there is some educational value in meeting new people from different areas of the world but from what I have read and seen, that is not even possible. Participants move from one to the next partner so quickly, this process is called nexting, that if you are not a beautiful, young girl or naked, you will be nexted faster than you can say hello. This new use of internet technology is purely for entertainment. The point is simply to sit there and see what completely strange thing can be seen. The point is not to chat so much as to be shocked.

To quote Cliff Kuang at Fastcompany.com, “Self-published entertainment has officially moved into territory I can barely comprehend. Parents: One more reason to lock up your daughters.”