http://www.gamejudgment.com/are-video-games-the-downfall-of-society
This website offers an interesting blog entry by Anthony Arvizu. Arvizu, an avid gamer, believes that video games are unrelated to the societal issues that they are often linked to, including violence, bullying, and anti-social behavior. He also provides a brief history of video games, especially games considered to be “violent,” and points out that it is easy for almost anyone to buy an M-Rated game which could expose them to crude and violent situations. This blog is extremely relevant to our class because it evaluates video games’ relationship to modern-day society and societal behaviors.
Although Arvizu brings up correlations between violent video games and violent behavior, he refuses to acknowledge any situation where video games may have been the prime cause of violence. He blames parents, not the video game industry, for children’s exposure to violence in video games; furthermore, he considers violent situations where violent video games were found to have been present prior to the situation’s occurrence and rules them out as a contributing factor. Overall, Arvizu brings up interesting points but is missing things in his essay that could help further prove his point.
From what I understand, I believe you are arguing Arvizu’s article to be not convincing because he is missing things. I’m a little unclear as to what he is missing. In the beginning of the second paragraph you state that Arvizu “refuses to acknowledge any situation where videogames may have been the prime cause of violence.” Arvizu dedicated an entire paragraph to the Columbine High School Massacre, an example of violence that may have been caused because “they pent up so much anger in this virtual world that they finally unleashed it into the real world leading to the deaths of several classmates” (Arvizu).
Arvizu goes on to later explain that he believes videogames were not the cause, but that irresponsible parenting was the cause of these videogames getting into the hands of children. A similar argument can be made about the guns involved in the Columbine incident. The guns and gun salesmen are not to be blamed for the shooting, it is the responsibility of those who buy the guns to keep them away from children and those not qualified to use them.
From what I understand, he addresses situations where videogames may have been the primary cause of violence; Arvizu just nullifies the blame on videogames by placing it instead on parents. He does not argue over whether video games cause violence or not, but he does bring up times where that was the accepted cause.
I just wrote a lengthy reply to a similar post. Here’s a link, for completeness.
http://samplereality.com/gmu/hnrs353-2011/archives/88#comment-6
I hope that fills in some of the holes for you. I see Icarus has already mentioned the Columbine incident, while I visit another example.