First, let's rewind a bit. In February 2004, 17-year old Warren LeBlanc bludgeoned and stabbed 14-year old Stefan Pakeerah to death with a claw hammer and knife in a park in Leicester. Yesterday, Warren was found guilty of murder, and is due to be sentenced next Thursday, when he is expected to receive a life sentence for his horrific crime. And - you guessed it - this is where videogames come into the story. Or more specifically, one videogame: Manhunt, the Playstation 2's Rockstar-developed dystopian adventure, which quickly gathered notoriety for it's graphic displays of violence and murder.
See, a number of Warren's friends informed the press that Warren was 'obsessed' by the game (this actually reflects rather poorly on Warren's taste in games, but that's another debate). Indeed, the Daily Mail article published today describes how Warren was so incensed by losing, that he once 'threw his controller against the wall.' (This arguably makes any of the PALGN staff potential murderers, but yet again that's another debate). This was echoed by the mother of the murdered boy, who laid the blame for Stefan's tragic killing squarely at the feet of the game and it's developers. Legal action against the publishers of the game, she assured the newspaper, was being considered.
Déjà vu anyone? Yes, we've been here before. This link between videogames and violence, as every reader will know, is nothing new. Videogame history is littered with miscreants and scapegoats: Mortal Kombat, Duke Nukem, Grand Theft Auto and numerous others have all, at some point or another, had the blame pinned on them for acts of real-life violence (PALGN recalls with some amusement an anti-Goldeneye piece, again in the Daily Mail, informing readers of a 2-year old who'd become so addicted to Goldeneye that his parents had purchased a special portable version for him - this presumably being the same portable version that noone outside of Rare and Nintendo had ever heard of).
So what should we do in response to this latest slur on our beloved hobby? Should we react angrily, bombard the Daily Mail forums and write furiously to the editors to jolly well set them straight? Do we hit Google and dig up our own scientific evidence supporting our side before e-mailing it to the newspaper? Do we politely inform naysayers that Manhunt was certified by the BBFC as a game suitable only for those over 18, so the fact that Warren got his hands on a copy technically leaves the publisher blameless? The answer is none of the above - instead, we should wait. We should wait because eventually, there will come a point when the moral guardians will stop turning videogames into scapegoats.
Currently, games are undergoing a rite of passage that all cultural mediums have experienced before. In the 1940s, comic books were viewed as risque and corrupt, as a threat to the innocence of their target audience. In the 1950s, television was - and in some quarters still is - portrayed as a component behind various declines in society. In the 1960s, it was pop music that was seen as the new threat. In the 1970s, Elvis Presley's sexually suggestive dancing had conservative onlookers in uproar. In the 1990s, video nasties were widely condemned. And so forth.
The Daily Mail article published today is without any trace of valid scientific evidence. It is also hysterical, uninformed, speculative, simplistic and designed solely to pander to it's audience and their fears. You and I know this. But directing anger towards such an invalid piece of journalism is a pointless exercise. It's pointless because publications such as the Daily Mail will continue to print reactionary rubbish whether we like it or not. And it's pointless because in less than two decades, when every home has an Eyetoy as standard, PALGN would happily bet that the more pious sections of the media will have found a new scapegoat. We can't wait. But waiting may just be the best answer.
Loading...
