This piece originally appeared as an article in the NY Times. Do you find it to be as balanced and objective as most other newspaper articles? Give a couple of specific examples to support your answer.
Do you agree with the author's claims? How would you use your own experience playing these games to argue against his position?
**IMPORTANT** I might have the class meet in a computer classroom on Friday. I'll email you all if that's the case, so watch your inbox, and you can always email me with questions.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
19 comments:
This article was not as balanced as many news paper articles are. it lacked examples from the viewpoint that video games are not as racist as shown mostly in this article. To balance this article the author could have included quotes or statements from people who believe that the video game/s are not racist. The article was well supported but somewhat one sided. I agree that some video games do represent certain races inappropriately and i do believe that this fact incourages racism. I don't play video games and really don't care what happens in or with them but i am against racism.
I personally felt that this article was as balanced and objective as most other newspaper articles. The article talks about the video game "Grand Theft Auto". The article talks about those who are against violent video games such as this, and gives examples that this game and others are as racist as shown in this article. The author uses quotes and statistics to help support the fact that many people are extremely uncomfortable with this game. Also, the author introduces other racial-labeling games to compare how many games are racist and/or violent. I, however, only somewhat agree with the author's claims. I play a lot of video games. "Grand Theft Auto" was one of my favorites. I am not racist, and I do not like anyone who is. The author claims that young kids are playing these games, so they are growing up with racist ideas. On the other hand, the game comes with a rating level, such a "M" for mature. Little kids should not be playing this game in the first place, it simply depends on whether or not the parent lets them play the game. I do not feel that playing a video game like Grand Theft Auto at a mature age will cause someone to suddenly become racist. To me, racism depends on ideas from your family and friends, and how you were brought up. I feel playing a video game can suddenly cause you to be racist.
I don't think this article is balanced as well as it could be. It lacks evidence showing video games aren't as racist as Grand Theft Auto is. I do agree with the author that video games have become more racist over the years. And I believe children shouldn't be playing games as violent as Grand Theft Auto. The games is rated M for a reason. I'm not sure that simply playing the game will make someone racist but it doesn't help the situation any. I think to an extent it is up to the parent's to tell their children who play the game that it is inappropriate behavior in real life and they should never do those things to people.
I don't think this article was as balanced as most news articles. Although it provides support for the author's view on the subject, it does not provide facts from the other side of the argument. Grand Theft Auto can be viewed as racist because they have mostly black and mexican characters committing violent crimes, but there is also white people in the game as well. I don't think that any form of racism in video games is good, and it doesn't teach children good values.
I do not feel that this article is not as balanced as most newspaper articles. My reasoning for this is because I felt it was more geared towards one side and did not evenly show both sides. The majority of this article talks about how video games such as "Grand Theft Auto" stereotype people and are racist. It talks about how it can influence young people to think negatively towards others and encourage such bad behavior. The article briefly mentioned how these video games are not racist. I agree with the fact that some video games do represent people, such as blacks and Mexicans, badly. I have played some video games and one of them was "Grand Theft Auto." I found this game quite enjoyable, but to me it was nothing more than a video game.
I do not find the content of the article to be objective at all. The author starts out right away saying that Grand Theft Auto is bad. While I do believe that he does a decent job at providing his opinion and insight into why the game is bad, I do not believe he is effective at all in providing counter evidence. He does bring up some of the points made by executives of game producing companies such as Rockstar, but shoots them down right away without even taking them into consideration.
I agree somewhat with the authors claims, I do believe that the game is somewhat unsuitable for children that are younger than what the game is rated. This is a bit contradicting though because the game is rated for kids older than seventeen. Just like movies, I believe that with underage kids, it is the responsibility of the parents to not allow their children to play game which are inappropriate, some parents are irresponsible and will not do this though. I do not believe this irresponsibility should be the fault of the game manufacturers who I believe to be making an honest living providing entertainment for a crowd that is supposed to be over the age of seventeen.
The article was in many places one sided. It was constantly refering to people who are against video games and when it did showcase people defending the games they were criticized shortly after the statement appeard. The author refers to the black community many times and his statistics are for the most part, one sided. At one point in the article he cites that out of the black characters found in video games during a survey over eighty percent of them were African American. This statistic proves his point but doesn't highlight how many of these characters are put into a positive role and become role models for young children. I personally play soccer and football video games such as madden and FIFA world cup and I always find that the non-white characters are portrayed as world class athletes and not portrayed in any negative light. Furthermore they are never represented better or worse than the white characters. Games like "Grand Theft Auto" do show minorities in compromising situations but as the article said they market to an age appropriate group. The people playing these games are old enough to decipher between fantasy and reality.
My first impression of this article was that it is completely one-sided, but as I thought about it more I did see a bit of balance but definitely not unbiased. It's hard to compare to other articles though being that many reflect the author's point of view, I would say that this is less objective than many though. Marriott backed up the claim that video games promote violence with personal stories and even statistics. He did not give the opposing side such evidence or time in this article, barely mentioning the video game developers' counter remarks. I agree to an extent with the author's claims. Racism and violence should not be viewed as fun, they are very serious matters and I think that kids could get the wrong impression. I think though that since games such as these are rated "M" the responsibility lies on the shoulders of the parents. They need to be aware of what their children are playing and what their children are being taught at a young age. So although I do agree with the author's claims that video games have pushed certain issues to the limit, I disagree with where the blame is placed.
I felt that this article was as balanced as other newspaper articles because, while it did argue the prejudices of video games being produced, the author did not say that all video games are promoting these types of stereotypes. Author Michel Marriot targeted Ubisoft, Midway Games, and Rockstar Games (the publishers of "Notorious: Die to Drive", "Def Jams", and the "Grand Theft Auto" series), for their stereotypical portrayal of minorities, associating these groups with violence. The author does not go after the entire video game industry and even includes Mr. Morgan's statement that he restricts his 7 year old son to cartoonish games for Nintendo. Leaving Morgan's statement in the article helps establish ethos because we are aware that the author is not just ranting about the horrors of the video game industry, but has concerns with a particular area.
I agree with the author's claim that there is a trend of "video games that play on racial stereotypes, including images of black youths committing and reveling in violent street crime", however I feel he is making this trend appear much larger than it actually is. With the number of games that do come out, I doubt (I don't have any stats to back this up) that there are that many games portraying minorities this way. However even if the number is small, it is still an issue to keep in mind when buying games for children. I'm not a gamer, but I have played the "Grand Theft Auto" games and do find them entertaining, but I am an adult who can distiguish reality from a game. Especially in "Grand Theft Auto: San Andres", the language and stereotypes are overwhelming, but they are targeted for mature players. Video games should be played at your own caution. If you don't want to play a game you consider to be promoting violence and inappropriate stereotypes, then do not buy them for your children.
I don't feel that this article was well balanced for the reason that arguements from another point of view were written about. Yes its true that on Grand Theft Auto killing among races are shown, but if that alone can't be said to make young children racists. There are rating on these types of games for a reason. "M" stands for "mature", and if you, or your child isn't mature enough to know and understand that its just a game, maybe you should consider staying with the "E" for everyone games. I don't agree with the author's arguement because love and morals are taught within family, a video game can't make you become a racist, but the way you are raised and the values of your family can.
I felt the article did not give balanced view points. It seemed the whole thing was about all the different games that portrait black people in a negative way. Apparently its not only "Grand Theft Auto". The article says "Def Jam Fight for NY", "25 to Life", and "Notorious: Die to Drive" all have negative images toward black and/or hip-hop-style characters. Also, four out of five pages in the article are dedicated to saying how bad the games are. The one page that quotes Rockstar Games is negative toward Rockstar before they get to say anything. It says, "After repeated requests for an interview, Rockstar Games responded with an e-mail." This statements makes it so that no matter what Rockstar had to say the reader had a negative attitude toward their statement. Even though the argument is convincing, I do not agree with its claim. I have played the video game "Grand Theft Auto" many times and to be honest I never realized that the majority of character where of color. I simply saw the game as violence, not who or what race was committing the violence. I think the game is going for entertainment and things like the way we view people of color comes from family and friends. Not a video game.
Upon first reading of this article, I thought the claim was that video games are, in essence, racist. The author seemed to feel that the video game industry makes a practice of singling out African-Americans as deviants. I looked up Grand Theft Auto (I've played the games before, and seemed to remember there only being one game with a black protagonist), and it's true. In the first several games the player is either white or Italian. It wasn't until the 2004 release of GTA: San Andres that the game featured an African-American cast. I felt that the author was being selective with his information. Why did he feel this was a primarily black issue? Was he disregarding the white and Italian characters because he felt they were inconsequential, or was it that they didn't support his argument because they weren't black?
Then I read the article again. Taking into consideration that the characters (in all of the games, not just San Andres), are indeed negative stereotypes. Tommy Vercetti, the main character in GTA Vice City is a low-life mobster with no redeeming qualities. Most Italian people would probably prefer to NOT be associated with the mafia, even though that is a common stereotype. It's the same with Toni Ciprianni (in Liberty City Stories), and Claude Speed (the original GTA character). The author, I would have to say, is right, these games do represent negative stereotypes.
As far as whether or not this article is objective, well, let's let the article speak for itself. The author mentions John Vignocchi, a designer for Midway games (who produced NBA Ballers). Marriott mentions Vignocchi's involvement with Ballers after a paragraph that is clearly not in favor of the game. Marriott then makes a concerted effort to point out race, stating: "Vignocchi, who is white." Is this really a black and white issue? Why is it so important to point out the designer's race? It feels as though the author is convinced that it's not just games enforcing the stereotypes, it's white people.
The article was published in the New York Times, which is under constant scrutiny for its bias (be it liberal or conservative). The mini-biography of Marriott states also that a series of his features inspired Spike Lee's film "New Jersey Drive", which (if you look it up, or have seen it), is about two young black teenagers who engage in their favorite past-time, STEALING CARS. Wait...what?! Um, I would have to say that this article is a PRIME example of the pot calling the kettle (no pun intended) black.
I think the author's claim in this article is mostly that the "Grand Theft Auto" video game is bad. This article tried to be balanced and objective, but it failed to do so because even though both sides of the issue were discussed, the sources and quotes given by the author were either from adults that didn't seem to have ever played video games and were only criticizing the issue as second person; or people from the video game industry that were logically in favor of the "Grand Theft Auto" video-game types.
I don't strongly agree or disagree with the author's claims. From my own experience with the video games (which is quite limited), I never saw violent or nonviolent video games as a resemblance of issues in real life. Video games are a type of entertainment, the same as movies or other activities, to forget about reality at least for a moment. However, it's also true that there are some people so immersed in video games that they may not distinguish reality and virtual world which would become a bad thing. Video games may only be a virtual world (like a fantasy), but games like "Grand Theft Auto" that usually have African-American and Latin-American people as members of gangs characters, can be a bad influence because in some way it's stereotyping and racism.
This article doesn’t seem to have as much balance of most other newspaper articles, it is more bias. Although this article does have an objective, Michael Marriott makes a point and for the most part sticks with it. This article comes off across more as an editorial because it seems more like a rant about the negativity of Grand Theft Auto. The ironic point of this article is that Marriott argues Grand Theft Auto is not a good game and the negative aspects and characteristics it portrays on race, but then he has and African American, Russell Simmons state his opinion. He says he doesn’t mind the games and that in fact he believes “ they had been good for the country.” The fact an African American person doesn’t seem to mind doesn’t help his case. Also the fact he mainly talks about one race, African Americans, when in fact Grand Theft Auto has both Hispanics and African Americans. This article comes across that Hispanics aren’t as important or they don’t seem to care about the games.
Unfortunately advertisers and video game creators have the right to make these games. I’m not saying I approve of the games, but video game makers do heave the right. Advertisers and game makers’ job is not to necessarily please us. They basically want to influence us whether we like it or not. If we feel as if the game isn’t good or appropriate for our kids or us we shouldn’t buy it. If a large amount of people felt this way and didn’t buy it they may take it off the shelves, but people are buying it so why should they stop selling it. Obviously, not all people feel as strongly or believe it has the effects Marriott believes it does.
Personally I have never played Grand Theft Auto, but my cousins play it. To be honest it is funny in some instances it is true. Some people are sheltered and they don’t think people actually live this way everyday. Of course, this game shouldn’t stereotype all people of that race, but its not like instances in this game never really occur. If you don’t want your kids to play it, don’t buy it. You can’t and won’t stop advertisements around you, you just deal with is and I believe that is the case of the Grand Theft Auto issue too.
This article doesn’t seem to have as much balance of most other newspaper articles, it is more bias. Although this article does have an objective, Michael Marriott makes a point and for the most part sticks with it. This article comes off across more as an editorial because it seems more like a rant about the negativity of Grand Theft Auto. The ironic point of this article is that Marriott argues Grand Theft Auto is not a good game and the negative aspects and characteristics it portrays on race, but then he has and African American, Russell Simmons state his opinion. He says he doesn’t mind the games and that in fact he believes “ they had been good for the country.” The fact an African American person doesn’t seem to mind doesn’t help his case. Also the fact he mainly talks about one race, African Americans, when in fact Grand Theft Auto has both Hispanics and African Americans. This article comes across that Hispanics aren’t as important or they don’t seem to care about the games.
Unfortunately advertisers and video game creators have the right to make these games. I’m not saying I approve of the games, but video game makers do heave the right. Advertisers and game makers’ job is not to necessarily please us. They basically want to influence us whether we like it or not. If we feel as if the game isn’t good or appropriate for our kids or us we shouldn’t buy it. If a large amount of people felt this way and didn’t buy it they may take it off the shelves, but people are buying it so why should they stop selling it. Obviously, not all people feel as strongly or believe it has the effects Marriott believes it does.
Personally I have never played Grand Theft Auto, but my cousins play it. To be honest it is funny in some instances it is true. Some people are sheltered and they don’t think people actually live this way everyday. Of course, this game shouldn’t stereotype all people of that race, but its not like instances in this game never really occur. If you don’t want your kids to play it, don’t buy it. You can’t and won’t stop advertisements around you, you just deal with is and I believe that is the case of the Grand Theft Auto issue too.
I felt this article was as balanced and objective as most other articles. it showed both sides, how video games like "Grand Theft Auto" are racially inappropriate, as well as the point that "games are games". I can somewhat see the authors point of view.Michel Marriott supports her claim that video games can be portrayed as racist. But I do not so much agree because video games are fantasy as stated in the article. They are not meant to portray reality, or influence it. If parents are concerned about what games their children play they should be more careful about what games they buy or play at their friend's houses. The game is rated Mature for a reason. It is age appropriate for only 17 year olds and older. I agree that racism is bad but not that video games contribute to it.
I think the “Color of Mayhem” by Michel Marriot was balanced to an extent. You could still see the bias that Marriot has against video games like “Grand Theft Auto, Def Jam Fights, and NBA Ballers.” He goes against these video games by saying they are full of “dangerously reinforced stereotypes.” I do not think that Marriot feels that children are capable of just playing the game. He takes the game and makes it something more serious than it really is. ITS JUST A VIDEO GAME. I know my siblings and cousins do not play these games and then have prejudice against any race. I think Marriot is right to a certain sense in her article about how the games are getting to gory but these video games are put out for fun, not subliminal messages.
I found this article to be like other newspaper articles but not very well balanced. This article lacks the other side to the story, it does not have examples to support how video games are not racist. It has very good examples and statistics on how they do come off to be racist, but they do not do a very good job doing that for the other side. The author article Michel Marriott could have very easily pointed out that there are white people in the game Grand Theft Auto instaed of just saying "Grand Theft Auto features a digital cast of African Americans and Hispanic men". But instead in all of his examples he just points out the bad in everything which makes the article very unbalanced in that sense.
I think the article was not balanced as many stories that newspapers publish. It had no examples of how video games are not racist. If it could have listed statements or even quotes from people that believe video games are not racist. It was a very "one-sided" paper. It was supported very well for lacked the opinion for others. I do play video games and i love video games but I think that video games can have racism in them but so does a lot of entertainment in todays world.
Post a Comment