Tenuous at best.

It's funny when people look at terrible tragedies and try to boil it all down to one single cause. These people are most often the naysayers, the prophets of doom and the panicked masses that try to find cause for insanity. I'm all for finding solutions and when we try to find causes for abhorrent behaviour, that's all well and good, until said people try to find the anomaly, the one thing that's different that we can attribute these acts to. Here's the reality of it: More often than not, it is a confluence of factors. People tend to ignore that and instead try to find that one variable that causes the house of cards to fall.

In the 80s, it was rock and roll. Heck, rock and roll was attributed to behaviour in the 60s and 70s too. With the 90s came movies and subsequently, when the computer went mainstream, video games. Today, we're still playing the same blame game, except that we've got more things to blame. Let's see. We have the internet. TV's still rampant. That rock music's still around. MTV still exists despite our better efforts. Everywhere we look, we can place blame.

Unfortunately, the powers that be tend to place said blame for all this on peripherals, never questioning if a machinery that has been modified and tweaked in a myriad of ways itself needs to be overhauled to take on said modifications. We take it as a given that it's all supposed to work because it always has. Therefore, if something goes wrong, it must be something that we did to it since that must be the problem.

Here's the thing, what if what we have done to the machine since isn't reversible and the actual issue is that the machinery underneath really can't handle the weight of all its necessary "enhancements"?

Let me explain:

Traditionally, roles were simpler. Work was more straightforward. Life was easier. Add to that a whole slew of productivity enhancements such as the PC, the cellphone and the PDA. Suddenly, you're a whole lot more aware of work at all times. Let's throw in the internet. Now you're connected to a world that "doesn't sleep". Shake in a handful of interconnectedness and the fact that you are no longer competing locally but globally and you're interconnected to a world that has raised expectations phenomenally and exponentially and boom! you have your end product. Can we remove any of these new enhancements? Try living in today's world without a cellphone. Try getting a job without any experience with the internet.

We've never stopped to question if the added stresses of a society that has undergone such radical changes over a short span of 10 years is perhaps a cause of the mayhem that we're witnessing today. We don't question the machine. Instead, we start by questioning the leisure activities of people who crack. What kind of video games did they play? What music did they listen to? Which celebrities do they idolise? It's all to do with what they do in their "spare time" (as if that phrase actually means anything today) rather than the society that they grow up in. Because that is surely what can help us, taking away more of what we consider to be fun. What we consider our escapes without actually dealing with the elephant in the room that nobody sees, the thing that we're trying to escape from.

Reality sucks. That's a fact. We're surrounded with news of more killings, stock market crashes and corruption and there's nothing that we can really do about it. Some people run away. Some run too far into their sanctuaries. There's no denying that. But if one is to find a root cause for all that, shouldn't we be looking at the thing that they are running from rather than trying to deny them their sanctuaries? Should we really be ready to point our fingers towards the things that actually give some people comfort in this world?

Interestingly enough, the Straits Times seems absolutely willing to do so. In fact, on Sunday, they decided to lead the charge. However, much like the emperor of old, said broadsheet decided to do so without any clothes on.

Let's dissect this shall we?

In trying to prove that video games causes violent behaviour, the Straits Times, being a bastion of good reportage and all that, gives us three examples of exceptional young men who went completely apeshit crazy and committed acts of violence...waitaminute...No...not all three did.

In fact, only one of the three actually committed an act of violence. The other two merely displayed some anti-social behaviour. waitaminute...actually, only the second one did. The third one showed an inability to conform to what was socially appropriate.

So what is the Straits Times' hypothesis then? Is it merely that video games promote a range of behaviours that are socially abnormal? But that's not what the article was about. So now I'm confused.

Actually, if you really wanted to dissect this, we can replace the term video games with a whole lot of arbitrary terms right? We could for instance replace it with "university education" or "studying". (After all, at least two of these "victims were students.)

In fact, here's a little game at Empty-Vessels, try replacing all the words in italics with an arbitrary term of your own and let's see if you can come up with some creative hypotheses as to why people are going completely apeshit. I think that this thought experiment could surprise you.

(Otherwise known as "you too can write your own Straits Times article!")

Begin here.

March 8, 2009

A link between gaming and violence?

Experts say there is no direct link but in extreme cases, multiple risk factors are involved

By Jamie Ee Wen Wei , Mavis Toh , Huang Huifen

Three gamers were in the news last week for the wrong reasons. Two are dead and a third is in jail after they hurt themselves or others.

Is there a link between gaming and their aggressive or violent behaviour?

Studies by Iowa State University's Distinguished Professor Craig Anderson, one of the world's foremost scholars on media violence, show that playing violent video games causes people to think and act more aggressively, but he does not believe playing video games will turn 'normal 12-year-olds into school shooters'.

Social psychologist Angeline Khoo, said that the link between violent computer games and aggressive behaviour is co-relational rather than direct.

Dr Khoo, who is the National Institute of Education's associate professor of the psychological studies academic group, explained: 'When people read sensational news like this, they tend to think, it must be the evil game. But there are many people who play violent games and are perfectly normal.'

What most people fail to understand is that physical violence, like stabbing, is only an extreme form of aggression. It rarely happens, she said.

More common manifestations of aggression are verbal, like raising voices or spurting vulgarities, she said. 'The aggressive tendencies tend to be short-term. They can dissipate. For example, if you listen to soothing music after playing a violent game, you will calm down.'

Experts agree that in extremely violent cases, there will usually be a convergence of multiple risk factors. These include gang involvement, anti-social parents and peers, substance abuse, poverty and media violence. Males are more at risk.

On the ground, psychiatrists and social workers are reporting more gaming-related problems among youths. At Touch Cyber Wellness and Sports, counsellors have seen more than 140 cyber- related cases in the past three years.

Dr Brian Yeo, a consultant psychiatrist at Mount Elizabeth Medical Centre, said he sees at least one patient daily who has gaming or Internet related issues.

'Some of them have avatars, and when their avatar dies or gets killed, they can become very angry, and in extreme cases, they may throw things or scream at their parents, or threaten to commit suicide.'

Gamers are, however, upset that violent games have been fingered for the recent incidents.

Referring to the stabbing incident at Nanyang Technological University last week, Mr Nicolas Khoo, 31, co-founder of the Cybersports and Online Gaming Association, said: 'Such incidents happen to a minority of gamers...In this incident, there could have been other reasons that led him to do it, so why was gaming blamed?'

Those interviewed also said they have not experienced any violent behaviour, although they said their relationships may have suffered.

Ms Sabrina Ong, 25, a blogger and avid gamer, said: 'I don't become violent, but I tend to be more engrossed when I'm killing a character in shooting games like Left 4 Dead. I will shoo people away when they come and talk to me.'

Technician Eddy Zhang, 28, said: 'I became a bit reclusive. My girlfriend also broke up with me as she felt that I was spending more time playing games than with her.'

Dr Khoo said studies have shown that parental involvement is vital in managing the violent effects of gaming.

'For instance, if someone utters a profanity in the game, the parent can tell the kid, we are not going to imitate this person's behaviour. There will at least be some guidance.'

AsiaSoft, publisher of games like Maple Story, has created pop-up messages to remind gamers to take breaks. By the fourth hour, the gamers are asked to quit the game. Its spokesman said: 'It's all about moderation.'

End here.

David Hartanto Widjaja, 21

Online activities: A fan of the computer game World of Warcraft, the Indonesian student from Nanyang Technological University (NTU) spent as much as six hours a day in front of his PC.

What he did: He stabbed his lecturer, Associate Professor Chan Kap Luk, 45, in the lecturer's office last Monday.

What happened to him: Shortly after the attack, Mr Widjaja fell four floors to his death at the NTU campus.

Captain (Dr) Allan Ooi, 27

Online activities: The Singapore Armed Forces doctor was an avid Warcraft player who became one of the top 10 Warcraft players in Singapore, and was among the top 100 in the world.

What he did: He had been absent without official leave since last October, reportedly cutting off all contact with people close to him.

What happened to him: He was found dead in Melbourne last Tuesday.

Xia Yun, 19

Online activities: He played games from the multi-player online gaming site, AuditionSea.

What he did: Two years ago, he met a 10-year-old girl at the gaming site, and eight months later, they had sex.

What happened to him: He was charged with two counts of carnal connection. If he is not granted probation, he faces jail of up to five years and a fine of up to $10,000 for each charge.