The above was the topic on a radio show in New Zealand recently hosted by Michael Laws of Radio Live FM. Of course the reason for this topic would be Modern Warfare 2 (spoiler warning if you have not played it) and it's "terrorist mission" where innocent people are gunned down. The host of the show was very against this and felt that the censorship system had let us down by allowing a game with this content into the country.
I should point out this particular radio host happens to be the mayor of a town called Wanganui and appears to be a complete bigot – at least when it comes to gamers.
Some of his opinions about gamers are that "Gamers are a very unusual group of people. If mass murder was ever to be committed in this country, it would be committed by a gamer." He also refers to gamers as “sick and disturbed people”.
He later on says “I am not against gaming, don’t get me wrong. But unfortunately every gamer I have met is usually 30kg over weight, smelly and wears black Mega Death T-shirts.
To say that I was insulted and shocked by some of these comments would be one hell of an understatement.
As for his description of the game, he begins by saying that you become a terrorist and kill innocent people in an airport. Oh and that you later must go back to wounded civilians who are crawling away in pain and execute them. He mentions that the game is rated R18 and then follows my asking “Is this really what we want for our children? A glorification of the killing of innocent people by terrorists?"
The actual context of the level is not explained until over 30 minutes into the show and a caller and not the host first mentions the fact that you can skip the level if you want.
Now, by the time I heard this topic was being discussed I had already missed the first hour of the show (I listened to it later from their website – I will post a link and some of the times to go to and hear some truly saddening things at the end of this article). However, what I heard since I started listening was enough for me to call in and come to gaming’s defense.
The argument I raised was how is it any different to something you would see in an episode of 24 or read in a Tom Clancy novel? All of these are forms of entertainment media and this particular level was designed to shock the player and give a sense of hatred for the stories villain. Also you may chose to skip the level if you want, so I honestly could not understand how the censorships system failed to do it’s job. The game was rated R18, which meant it was up to adults to decide whether or not it was entertainment they wanted to consume.
Another large part of his argument was that games are meant to be entertainment and he cannot understand how killing innocent people is entertainment. To an extent I can understand his point, but I believe the problem stems from what his definition is of the word “entertainment”.
Perhaps this is the problem for a lot of the mainstream media and audience that does not understand violence in video games. They see games as something to have fun with and while most of the time they are, this is also a maturing medium. The Airport level in Modern Warfare 2 is not meant to be fun and “entertaining” in the traditional sense; but rather in the same way a movie like Schindler’s List is “entertainment”. I do not know about you but I was not having fun while watching that movie, but I still think it was a brilliant film and is considered a form of entertainment. So like that movie, games too, can have levels or scenes that are for dramatic purposes and not, specifically, fun. Modern Warfare 2’s airport level is a recent example of this.
I attempted (poorly I will admit) to raise a similar argument with the host of the show. His response was asking me whether or not I knew that Schindler’s List was based on real events. I will admit I was so shocked by this ignorant and insulting comment that my argument fell apart and before I could ask him how that was, in any way, relevant (Is he saying that if Modern Warfare 2 was based on real life events then he would not mind it so much?) I was told that I was being ridiculous and hung up on.
While it is common practice for radio hosts to cutoff callers who disagree with them - makes for better radio I guess - it was sad that there seemed to be a double standard for censorship when it came to video games. Obviously this is nothing new as video games are often blamed for many of societies problems - even though those same problems existed for centuries before video games did.
But let us think of the children right? How does Modern Warfare 2's terrorist mission affect the children? Well, firstly, the host never actually tells us. He keeps saying there is a correlation between violent video games and real life violent crimes amoung children; however, offers no evidence to back that up. He also believes that if you took away American’s easy access to arms and violent video games then the Columbine shootings would not have occurred. Correct me if I am wrong, but didn’t everyone agree that whole thing was Marilyn Manson’s Fault? I kid, I kid.
But in all seriousness, technically Modern Warfare 2 should not affect our children at all because they should never play it – unless the host was referring to the inner child in all of us? If that is the case then that child may be a very traumatized little puppy, but not a killer. Real children, however, should never see this level. If they do, then it is usually the fault of the parents for allowing their children to have the game (this is assuming retailers would not sell it to children without the parent present).
In the end, while it is a shame mainstream media does not get with the times and try to understand gaming; an even greater shame is that the gaming industry has no voice in the mainstream. Sure we have podcasts, gaming sites and a few other odd things but these are hardly mainstream. Sadly, outside of Jimmy Fallon on The Tonight Show - which is not even aired in New Zealand - there seem to be no positive forums for gaming discussions in mainstream media. Instead everyone else gets to hear the often ignorant opinions of networks like FOX News or people like this gaming bigot; Michael Laws. Someone should explain to Mr Laws that just like guns, video games do not kill people… people kill people.
Please discuss below what you think about his comments on violent games, his opinion of gamers as people and the fact that he has his own radio show to spread these opinion.
Here is a link to the audio of the show. While there are plenty of discussions had during this show it actually jumps around a few different topics. So I thought I would point out some of the more interesting or shocking things he says in order to save you some time.
Part 1:
10:30 – Gaming intro
29:00 – Insults gamers
43:00 – Stereotypes gamers and says there is correlation between violent games and violent crimes in youth, while offering not evidence other than saying it factored into the Columbine shooting.
Part 2:
40:20 – another insulting stereotype of gamers
Part 3:
6:55 – my argument with Michael. As I said, I fell apart in the end a bit but was cut off before I could raise further points. I hope my fellow gamers felt I did an ok job in their defense.
