I just finished reading a very interesting blog entry on one person’s perspective regarding violence in video games. I thought it was well-written. In summary, it was this person’s opinion that violent people aren’t the result of violent video games, but rather a result of bad parenting. I’m sure many people have heard this before and chalked it up as another “excuse”. This is where the author’s credibility takes hold. He went to Columbine High School and was freinds with both the killers and the victims. He makes a point about 11-yr olds playing Grand Theft Auto. I concede that playing GTA could possibly have an effect on an 11-yr old. But… GTA isn’t intended for 11-yr olds. It has a “Mature” rating. How could an 11-yrold be playing GTA? Bad parenting. I think GTA is intended for an audience that is mature enough not to get reality and “the game world” confused.
On a totally unrelated note… the recent ruling that journalists have to reveal their sources if ordered to do so by a court. I’m not sure where to stand on this. I wholeheartedly agree with the journalist’s side that it’s very difficult, if not impossible, to do their jobs if they can’t provide protection to their sources. However, there is a problem with their desire to have the same right to patient confidentiality as counselors, doctors, etc. To the best of my knowledge, you don’t need a license to practice journalism. I think this ruling is going to have a detrimental effect until something can be done to ensure some protections. I heard on public radio the other day that a major newspaper (I can’t remember where) had announced that it was stopping investigation into two major news stories because they feared for their sources. I think this ruling works in favor of a government that has something to hide from the people it serves.
On a final note, I find it amusing that some people think “freedom of speech” gives them the freedom to say whatever they wish without any repurcussions.
