Hehe fair go

You are correct in that. It is a deeply disgusting platform for Carol; however, every time there's a shooting or such, video games can be blamed all they want, but I haven't seen that ever make it not the shooter's fault.

As to the numbers, this is the best overview I've found so far:
http://www.ncdsv.org/images/RapeandOtherSexualViolenceinUSAreDeclining.pdf

"According to the Justice Department’s latest annual National Crime Victimization Survey. It estimates that rapes and attempted rapes in the United States fell more than 80 percent from 1973 through 2004. That
amounts to a drop from 2.5 per thousand per year to 0.4 per thousand.
The study began tallying fondling, molestation and other forms of sexual assault only in 1993.
The rate at which they’re reported is down about two-thirds since then, from 1.6 per 1,000 to 0.5."

"A second national survey, the FBI’s Uniform Crime Report, which is based on arrests reported
by 17,000 police agencies nationwide, found a 13 percent decline in forcible rape, attempted
forcible rape, assault with intent to commit rape and statutory rape since 1991"


These are both national reports that anyone who tried actually taking legal action against video games on Carol's platform- that they have increased the incidence of rape- would have a tough time rebutting.




Yes. There is a very thin contextual distinction between the "jokes" here and macho bull****ting about sexual assaults. If I weren't a lifelong gamer, and didn't know- at least to some extent- this community for most of a decade, eg if I read a FOX news article and people had responded like some of the guys here in the comments section, it would entirely have proved her point to me regardless of if it was meant as satire.


Also, here is the official response to FOX and the Amazon trolling, which illustrates my thought experiment above:
http://www.drcarole.com/news.htm

"The reviews, laced with explicative, derogatory language and put-downs unrelated to the book itself, seem to illustrate that video games do make people more aggressive, indeed."

Though FOX of course did slant and paraphrase as should be expected. There is more detail in the news post, but this is the salient quote:

"Nevertheless, Dr. Lieberman stands by her views against media violence. In her correspondence with Fox News Reporter, John Brandon, she wrote: "Video games have increasingly, and more brazenly, connected sex and violence in images, actions and words. This has the psychological impact of doubling the excitement, stimulation and incitement to copycat acts. The increase in rapes can be attributed, in large part, to the playing out of such scenes in video games." "


It is worth noting that she is speaking specifically to videogames which connect sexual and violent images; it's the same argument that's been made for R/X-rated movies, rap music, and pornography in general. But at the same time we cannot paint the entire gaming community with one wide, innocently outraged brush. There is no causal evidence [at least at this time], however it is undeniable that some gamers are also or will become rapists.

This thread seems pretty bad. I skimmed through most of the stupidity. Sorry if I missed an actual link to the Fox News story but here it is. Seems like a fair article. Much fairer, in fact, than the dumb game site article in the OP. It also seems to me that several people here should support the notion that games and other media plays a significant role in influencing behavior. After all, didn't some members suggest that cross hairs on a map caused a shooting in Arizona?

it's fox news so i must defend it even though it's obviously stupid

How? Did you time travel?

Edit: You're right, this thread is full of stupid. Let's look at the article using our think-brains.

The exact quote from the author is: "The increase in rapes can be attributed in large part to the playing out of [sexual] scenes in video games."

This claim implies there exists a positive correlation between video game consumption rates and sexual offense rates. Assume for contradiction this positive correlation exists.

All research into the rates of sexual crimes indicates that the per-capita rate is decreasing (see an earlier post in this stupid thread.) [Remark: the last time I looked into this issue, the same could be said of all violent crimes.] Therefore, by assumption, the per-capita video game consumption rate must also be decreasing.

But the continued revenue growth of the games industry indicates that the per-capita consumption rate of video games is increasing.

Therefore, there does not exist a positive correlation between video game consumption rates and sexual offense rates.

Therefore, by contraposition, "the increase" in rapes cannot be attributed to the playing out of [sexual] scenes in video games.

Q.E.D.

Lieberman apparently gave Kotaku an interview. She didn't do much to help her case.



She's certainly correct that rape statistics have serious accuracy problems, mostly due to underreporting and the fact that the UCR keeps a tally of only "forcible" rapes. But what does that leave her with? An argument from ignorance, in which we have to accept her premise that rapes are increasing because the evidence to the contrary is unreliable? Come on. Rape has always been underreported, and probably even more so in the past than today.

I don't see any reason to reach the rest of her argument, because the effect she's claiming to explain doesn't exist. If that's true, who cares what the explanation is? All we've got here is Fox News publishing false and stupid statements from people with questionable credentials in order to use an issue they don't actually care about to drum up controversy. In other words, par for the course.

Also! Carole Lieberman is the author of Bad Girls: Why Men Love Them & How Good Girls Can Learn Their Secrets, a book on a rarely-addressed subject that must have been truly groundbreaking when it was published in late 2010.

Wow. You must have worked real hard to use that many words to explain such a simple concept. I must admit, though, that I have no idea why you would expend so much energy on such a silly topic that doesn't have anything to do with my post. You must have missed me.



It's a fair article. I'm guessing you haven't even read it.

I'm saving the informal arguments for when you understand the formal ones.

Doesn't seem worth the effort altogether. The Fox News article simply alerts people to the sexual innuendo in the game. That certainly exists. I don't know if I would have known about this had I not seen this topic discussed here.

Whether or not the doctor's arguments are valid are a separate story but many here like Tibby would probably believe that they are. Of course I'm likely to disagree with Tibby on most things.

Right! We should never underestimate the news value of pointing out that there's sexual innuendo in a specific work of entertainment.

Edit: I almost forgot; it's very important to link that sexual innuendo to devastating, inhuman real-life crimes. For pageviews.

What a terrible thing to say about yourself.

Glancing at the product page for her book was completely worth it for this.
http://www.amazon.com/Bad-Girls-Learn-Their-Secrets/dp/292386512X

"What Do Customers Ultimately Buy After Viewing This Item?

35% buy Bulletstorm by Electronic Arts Xbox 360"

It's a pretty major release. I don't see anything wrong with pointing out the sexual content of the game. As a parent I think it's important to be informed and the content of this particular game is pretty gruesome and over the top.



They quoted a doctor's opinion. They also concluded the piece with a contradictory opinion. "It's been praised for encouraging innovative thinking. Bulletstorm involves developing new moves and dispatching of enemies creatively. Plenty of emotionally unstable adults will play the game and they’ll be fine,” [Hal Levy with the National Youth Rights Association] said.

Fine, let's stipulate that that's a perfectly good reason to write a bombastic article about the "worst game ever."



In order to link sexual innuendo to devastating, inhuman real-life crimes. For pageviews. Ask me again what I think about that.

The article title was in the form of a question, not a statement.



The doctor made that link, not Fox News. As for page views, I would think the knee jerk infantile gaming "news" media industry reaction is driving that more that a short innocuous article that really wouldn't have had very many otherwise.

Oh, of course. "We're just asking questions."



Why publish her statement?



Um, yes. Otherwise Fox's transparent attempt to generate controversy wouldn't have worked.

What I find most repugnant about this story has nothing to do with video games. It has everything to do with Fox shoehorning in an inaccurate and unnecessary quote about a very serious thing simply because it'd get them more attention.

"Is Obama a pedophile? I'm not saying Obama is a child molester.... but I'm not not saying it either." - the last 3 years of Fox News.

Guess what? It means they know they're lying. If they posted their "answer" to the question they would get sued and they would lose every time.

I love all of the melodrama their stories cause. The "sexbox" incident showcased an informed and intelligent guest that made the guest panel look like fools. The real story was told in that segment. This article featured two different opinions but because gamers don't like the opinion of the doctor they just rail against Fox News. As if they needed a reason.

I've broken your post into two parts because I want to address it that way. With reference to part A, and I know the pedophile description is an exaggeration but can you please cull from your vast left-wing resources an example that actually illustrates that accusation?

With reference to part B can you please show how that describes the article this thread [should] be based on? It might also seem relevant to consider that game publishers thrive on the controversy they intentionally instigate.

I'm not saying he doesn't like white people. I'm saying he has a problem. This guy is, I believe, a racist.

I’m not saying that God, is, you know, causing earthquakes. I’m not not saying that either. ... Whether you call it Gaia, or whether you call it Jesus, there’s a message being sent and that is, “Hey, you know that stuff we’re doing? Not really working out real well. Maybe we should stop doing some of it.

Those aren't examples of reporting. Or are you just going to represent comments by Glenn Beck as "the last three years of Fox News"? But, since those are your examples, what do you believe is wrong with them?

Ah Wookie, I'd always heard references to your idiotic arguments, and I really thought they were joking that you'd defend Fox News to any end. You must have been doing it in threads I had no interest in reading through. I didnt really believe that someone could be like that... but now the stars have aligned, I was interested in reading through this thread, and you defended Fox News on this idiotic piece of reporting. The people of massassi were right. How I could have ever doubted them...

KOP_Snake, it's gotten to the point where most of us just give up, there's really no point.

Until I linked to the actual story nobody was actually commenting on the reporting. Again, the piece seems fair. Stated facts about the game and then presented two oposing views about the situation. I'm actually a bit surprised that there has been so little discussion on the topic of the story, Bulletstorm. Mostly this thread was a rape-joke banfest until I brought up the actual article.

Holy crap, you're right. We completely missed the point and content. Geeze.
Guys, let's start over from the top.

No thanks, Wookie just turned the thread into another Fox argument, that's the last thing we need.
I didn't post it as a "omg look at what fox has done now" thing, but of course Wookie took it as an attack on his precious Fox and leaps up to defend the indefensible.

Did you even read the op? We'll talk about the fact that you wrote it later, but did you read your own link?

I see no comments about Fox that can be disputed.

Of course you wouldn't.

Of course I would. I'm an intelligent, literate person of good breeding.

Find one mention of Fox to which you legitimately take exception.

I've already addressed one in this thread. But that really doesn't matter, let's look some more at the link in the op. You hate Fox News but what do you think of trolls slamming books on Amazon they've never read just because they disagree with the authors. Would you do something like that?

Yeah, we've been over this Wookie... that thing you brought up? You're wrong.

I don't know what planet you're living on, where Fox News' article could ever be considered balanced.... yeah, they didn't literally state that Bulletstorm is the "worst videogame in the world," but they did just as well. Their article was slanted, profoundly negative. They focused on the violent content and the sexual language in the achievements, the (totally unsubstantiated) social consequences of violent games and gaming in general, the (totally unsubstantiated) sales of violent video games to minors, the industry efforts to block legislation banning the sales of violent games to minors, completely fraudulent claims that playing video games causes people to commit rape, and one weakly-worded, wishy-washy quote at the end saying "Lots of people play games, most of them are fine" to maintain their pathetic, threadbare claims of "unbiased journalism."

So what's your point, exactly? I think you forgot to make it.

I think it's good that people learn about where their information comes from.

For example, it'd never take an act of congress to force me to get an American citizenship. What do you think of Rupert Murdoch?

Actually, no, I was referring to the "sexbox" incident that I brought up earlier and I literally have no opinion of Murdoch.

I guess I would be doing a disservice to not acknowledge the content above. I don't have time for lengthy debates right now but I'll comment where appropriate.



Well, it's a relatively negative topic. You have a video game with graphic content. I guess they could have cited some studies that show the most effective military on the planet is a large consumer of such graphic games to illustrate the positive influence they exert.



To be perfectly honest, this is where I think epic is over the top. There's no call for it. I don't care though. I'd probably enjoy playing the game and it's mature rated. So long as parents are aware of what their kids might be playing.



This is a contentious topic. I don't think mature games are going to cause otherwise healthy people to commit acts of violence. Of course I wouldn't doubt that there are studies showing that people could be influenced by being inundated with all sorts of graphic media.



I believe it's relevant. It is also sad that communities can't enforce legislation requiring stores not to sell mature rated content to minors. Following this logic, they should be allowed to buy porn, cigarettes, beer, and the inevitable abortion.



Yeah, my problem is when people seem to comment outside their knowledge base. I certainly don't think this game matches that criteria. I suppose if there are some games, maybe some of the GTA games?, that have some sort of violent sexual content the case could be made. I don't have any experience with games that might have that content.



It seems to me that what you want is an article that cites studies showing mature rated games are good for consumers (including minors). I think an argument could be made for that and maybe there are studies that show that.

Here's an anecdotal piece of me. I let my 5 year old mess around with Duke Nukem 3D on the XBox. I don't know that I'll let him do the same with Duke Nukem Forever. It's not the violence in games that bother me so much. Many games are extremely violent now. DN3D was "cartoon-ish", DNF will feature characters with much more highly rendered "assets".

Yes, they could have cited some studies.

If you'd left it here I was going to say "Good job, Wookie06!" and then send you a booklist about the philosophy of science which we could talk about.

But then you posted this trash:



When you finally go back to school, take an introductory applied stats class. It's the second most important course you'll ever take (after microeconomics.)

"excess of profanity," "particularly gruesome," "ugly, graphic violence," "[experts] universally worried," "too graphic to reproduce entirely."

You think? Who said you're allowed to think? Fox has already decided that it's "particularly gruesome!"

I agree that it's important for parents to know what their children might be playing. Do you think Fox is saying anything useful or meaningful here? Exactly what decision are they leaving for the parents to make, after reading an article with such obvious, damning bias?

None of this changes the fact that Fox made unsubstantiated claims about it.

(1) None of this changes the fact that Fox made unsubstantiated claims about it.
(2) No, this has absolutely nothing to do with Bulletstorm.

We have been saying over and over again that her statements were lies. This is not about being "outside [her] knowledge base," this is about maliciously making statements which she almost certainly knew were completely false. There are no games which match her criteria because the statement she made is completely false.

Fox published something false, made no attempt to verify if it was factual, made no attempt to verify if the woman had a reputation for making fraudulent claims, made no attempt to verify if the woman had any expertise in the area, and (based on history) will never publish any sort of apology, retraction or correction for that claim.

There is no defense for either Fox or their source. In terms of professional integrity they both did absolutely everything wrong, both the Fox journalist and the source as a doctor and scientist. This is not about opinion, this is fact. Defending this **** is just making you look crazy.

Wookie06, I would be so ****ing embarrassed to be you right now. What a pathetic, self-indulgent, entirely-masturbatory attempt to polarize this issue.

We aren't talking about whether or not Fox's message is right. The problem is that Fox chose the ****tiest, most unprofessional way of communicating that message. The fact that you can't distinguish between the message and the messenger is honestly just sad. It makes me feel genuine pity for you.

ABSOLUTELY!
Wookie, stop acting childish (re: your post directed at me) and read the article again, but this time pretend it's not about a Fox news cast, pretend Obama's press secretary wrote it or something, and try and tell me you'd respond the same way.