Hsu, Dan, Reasons For Beating, #59

AngelHedgie · **AngelHedgie**

(A milder version of this is posted at the EGM forums. But I need to vent, so you get the full version.)

I just picked up the June issue of Electronic Gaming Monthly, and as I was reading it, I saw the article titled "Head To Head" (pgs 30-33). And as I read it, I had only one thought:

"How the living fuck could the EGM staff give press time to Jack Thompson?"

Being both a political junkie and someone who leans leftward, I often spend time reading liberal blogs. And one point that they've consistantly stated with regards to the media holds true here:

Reporting fairly does NOT mean "giving both sides equal time" or balance when one side is completely off base. It means reporting the facts honestly. And if that means saying "one side of the argument has no basis and to be honest is completely batshit loco," then so be it.

Yes, Thompson is one of the leading "anti-violent game crusaders" out there. He also:

*Used slanderous comments against Janet Reno in a 1988 race for the Dade County district attorney's office with regard to Reno's sexuality. Thompson lost the race handily, and has since continued to slander Reno as she moved on into the position of US Attorney General.
*Was responsible for the infamous obsenity charges leveled against rap group 2 Live Crew back in the late '80s.
*Has acted as a "man on the ground" for such extreme right wing "news" websites such as NewsMax, most notably during the Elian Gonzales case in the late '90s.
*Uses blackmail as a means to pressure rivals and opponents into making statements. (Hrm...maybe we just found WHY EGM would give him time...)
*Harassed Miami DJ Neil Rogers to the point where he took out a restraining order against Thompson.

Don't believe me? Try Googling Thompson. Or just look at these links:

General info on Thompson
http://conwebwatch.tripod.com/outthere/otthompson.html
http://popularculturegaming.com/archives/000089.html

Thompson specifically stating that he prefers lawsuits to laws:
http://www.buzzcut.com/article.php?story=20031122042658659

Thompson's infamous CBS News online Q and A session:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/02/24/tech/gamecore/main676446.shtml

(In comparison, the other side of the argument is fronted by Henry Jenkins, who is a professor at MIT and has published several scholarly works about video games.)

Thompson isn't doing this because he wants to protect kids, folks. He's doing this because he sees the video game industry as an easy mark. The fact that he prefers the use of lawsuits as opposed to common sense regulations is proof enough. We shouldn't acknowledge him - we should note that his arguments are ridiculous and insane, and move on.

EGM is not only doing gamers a disservice by giving him free time in their magazine - they are legitimizing a man on a poorly based crusade (that just so happens to have the side effect of putting cash in his pockets) that we should not even be giving the time of day to.

For shame, EGM. For shame indeed.

Edit: You know what the sad part is? EGM has a pretty large reader base - if they would actually do an aricle on Thompson that detailed the shit he's pulled in the past and the public statements he's made, he would go away for good. The comment that he prefers litigation to regulation would alone sink any case he's connected with, and there's potential for his disbarment there, one would think.

EGM shouldn't be letting him be voiced. They should be exposing him to sunlight.
_________________
Proud creator of the Wikipedia RX-78 mobile suit series article.

Best line from a Cartoon Cartoon: "Sometimes love hurts, Pud'n. And I love you very much."

counterparadox · **counterparadox**

Being at a rather good liberal college (I'm neither liberal nor conservative, btw. I don't believe in parties, I belive in free thought) I can say that during the past election, we were QUITE divided as a nation. In recent history, we have not ever been so divided.

And a lot of times I heard "Man, that point that the Republicans make is SO LUDICRIS how can they believe that how do people believe them how can they be respected?!?!?!"

But, see, the thing is, and I mentioned this at the time, that there were, most likely, groups of people elsewhere saying the exact opposite, and believing it just as strongly.

So who's to say who is right? Fact of the matter is that on a lot of issues there is no right or wrong.

Is this particular guy the best to hear the opposing side from? Don't know. But from that standpoing, perhaps litigation IS the best way. It's amazing how many facets of our laws are defined by courts, and how much easier and lasting it can be. Regulation, however, takes the combined efforts of many more people and is not nearly as easy to co-ordinate. If I were on that side of the issue, I would most likely take the same approach.

As for slanderous comments towards Janet Reno, so did SNL. That's the first point. The second point is that there are a large amount of people in this country that are not tolerant of gays, or blacks, or 2 Live Crew's lyrics. And if we're looking at all sides of an issue, these people need to be heard.

In short, it's fair, and warrented, and I will argue that to my death, because to stifle someone is to proclaim that you should too be stifled.
_________________
anime is teh s uck

Play City of Heroes/Villians? Look me up, Pinnacle server, @C Paradox

AngelHedgie · **AngelHedgie**

CP, as much as I like playing devil's advocate, I think you miss the point.

In the debate over global warming, should Michael Crichton, a popular fiction writer with no formal training in climate studies be given the same amount of time as the supermajority of climate researchers who have come to the conclusion that yes, global warming is real after years of painstaking research?

The mainstream media has thought so. And that's the problem. And it's the same principle here. You have a lone nut (and trust me, if you've read some of the claims he's made, you'd agree that he's ready to go to the Planter's factory) being placed side by side against a representitive of researchers who have all come to the conclusion that while media in its myriad forms may have some influence on our actions, it is no way the proximate cause of real world violence.

Some of the people have argued that this was a setup - placing Thompson against Jenkins would make Thompson look ridiculous. I don't think that works, though. The past two election cycles are in many ways testiment to that - sensible discussion was trumped by fearmongering. Thompson is on the fringe, and every time he's used as the "anti-" representitive, it fucks up the debate in two fundamental ways:

1. It deliniates the debate as being between Thompson's position, which is very much an outlier position, and the industry's position which is much closer to center.
2. It defines the face of the "anti-" faction as Thompson, even if a large number of those on that side of the fence disagree with him.

I'm not saying we shouldn't have the debate over violence in video games. We should, and we need to. But Thompson is a parasite, using the debate for his own gain. And because of that, he shouldn't be treated as anything more than a fringe player trying to use this to his benefit.
_________________
Proud creator of the Wikipedia RX-78 mobile suit series article.

Best line from a Cartoon Cartoon: "Sometimes love hurts, Pud'n. And I love you very much."

AdmiralGreer · **AdmiralGreer**

For the record, Joe Lieberman, who really needs to switch his party, is public enemy #1 for gamers. He was interviewed by the now-defunct Daily Radar not long before the 2000 election. Thompson is much more crazy however.

There's always going to be morons who run around yelling about some particular subject, and in a way that alienates them from most civilized society. We let 'em have time in the spotlight because it's fun to watch them rant, and because having people around to hate is always good. Thompson, Ann Coulter, Tom Coburn (maybe Oklahoma has a problem, need to research their mindset), Jar Jar, Judge Judy, and I suppose you could throw Michael Moore on the list as well.

Let the guy show his face in a gaming magazine. Everyone will laugh at him all the more.
_________________
Ice cream has this erotic sense to it- kinda like the one choclate and strawberries have.
-Me


	Disclaimer: Toonami Infolink, its creators and their kin are not owned by, affiliated with, or bossed around by Williams Street, Cartoon Network, Turner Broadcasting, AOL Time Warner, Long John Silvers, Tremont Corp (they do something with titanium), or the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. All opinions expressed on Toonami Infolink are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect those of Dave Coulier, George Stephanopoulos, Selma Hayak, Mark Mothersbaugh, or Ron Santos. PHP-Nuke Copyright © 2005 by Francisco Burzi. This is free software, and you may redistribute it under the GPL. PHP-Nuke comes with absolutely no warranty, for details, see the license. Page Generation: 0.07 Seconds