Jack Thompson, an attorney who has fought long and hard against violent video games, Grand Theft Auto in particular, wrote this letter addressed to the mother of the chairman of Take Two, the company that produces GTA. (for the record, he didn't send it to her, but rather to her son's attorneys). The full letter can be found here:
http://diehardgamefan.insidepulse.com/2008/04/22/jack-thompsons-open-letter-to-take-two-ceos-mother/ .  Here is a small clip that interested me:

"Mrs. Zelnick, did you train up your son, Strauss, to make millions of dollars by pushing Mature-rated video games to children? Any kid can go right to little Strauss’ corporate web site and buy GTA IV with no age verification. Strauss is even marketing the new Grand Theft Auto IV on World Wrestling Entertainment tv shows seen by millions of kids."

Clearly WWE has enough 18+ viewers to draw the three potential presidential candidates to promote themselves on the show to potential voters. It's not as though GTA advertisements are airing during Hannah Montana (though, as an avid fan of both Grand Theft Auto and Hannah Montana, such an ad placement would certainly hit at least one of their consumers). To imply that the video game shouldn't be advertised anywhere that children might see it is outrageous; not even the alcohol or tobacco industries are held to that standard, and the health defects caused by either of those products are clear and generally without dispute.

Furthermore, any kid can go on the site and buy the game... if they have a credit card. Which means they'd have to have their parents buy it for them unless they have a credit card of their own, in which case parents have plenty of opportunity to monitor their children's purchases on it if they're concerned with what their kids are buying. This is a far cry from a child walking into a store alone and buying it with their saved allowance.

He goes on to mention a boy who murdered cops in Alabama and then stole a cop car and blamed Grand Theft Auto for the whole thing. That case is especially damning because it's similar to a scenario in the game where the character is in a police station and has to free an inmate, kill some cops, and drive off in a cop car outside. When the young man was arrested, he poetically explained that life is a videogame and claimed that Grand Theft Auto made him commit the crime.

I've always been of the opinion that one's actions are one's own responsibility, or in the case of minors, the responsibility of their parents. If a parent doesn't want their child to play violent video games, it's up to the parent to enforce this. This doesn't have to mean monitoring the things their child buys; I think it's up to a parent to educate the child on their family's views and ethics and rules about such things. It's also up to a parent to raise a child to be respectful of their parents' rules (and, for that matter, to teach a child that murder is wrong).

If a child is in the small margin of young people whose use of this media might give them the idea to recreate events they see in the game, beyond even limiting their child's involvement with a game, it's the parent's responsibility to notice red flags (that their child is displaying antisocial behavior, that they are experiencing social rejection, that they are depressed or psychotic, etc) and to get their child to a psychologist.

Clearly a large majority of young people can play games like Grand Theft Auto and not feel compelled to kill cops. The remaining few who commit crimes after playing the game did so because of their own inclination towards violent behavior. But it's easier to say that the child was playing Grand Theft Auto all day long for weeks (as was the case with the boy in Alabama) and blame the game, rather than acknowledging other factors in the young person's life, such as that he was depressed, or that he had no friends, or that he was being teased mercilessly by people at school, or that he had problems controlling his anger and emotions.

It's easier to avoid addressing the reason he was playing GTA all day long for weeks at a time or to consider that dedicating so much time to a single activity for that long is unhealthy in any case. Maybe he was playing GTA by himself in his room for weeks because he was being cast out by his peers, or because playing the game allowed him to shut out unpleasant emotions he was experiencing. Maybe he was playing with his friends and the game was just another aspect of the group's acceptance and promotion of violent behavior.

When the boy in question was arrested, he claimed that, “life is a video game, everybody has to die sometime,” he was either lying to justify his actions or he was in a delusional state. If he was lying than the whole point is moot. If he was delusional, then why not address the factors that caused him to have these delusions?

As long as we keep turning a blind eye to the other important issues that these kids face in addition to their involvement with a videogame, parents will continue to fail to make the connection between those issues and potential homicidal behavior in their kids. The more we ignore it the more it'll persist.

Download: The True Story of the Internet

I have been watching Download: The True Story of the Internet on the Science Channel over the last few weeks. Visit the Science Channel’s schedule for the series to see when it will be on next (a marathon of all of the episodes is planned for April 5). The episode titled “People Power” gives some insight into the latest social networking sites and provides some background information (remember Napster, anyone?).

Some video clips are online, but I don’t think they really give you as much as the entire show does. If you can’t watch the shows, though, I would suggest viewing the one about Web 2.0 and the one about YouTube. (I hope those links work.)
It’s an interesting show in general if you like anything “techie.” I’ve found it really fun to learn about the introduction of some sites I use every day and to relive the history of some sites I remember from their beginnings. (My best friend won a Google t-shirt from the site before anyone was using it. She used to read Wired to find the newest stuff. And I’ll admit, I was a member of the Napster generation. I was a freshman in college in 1999, the year it took off.) The host is a “technology journalist” who has firsthand knowledge of the tech industry. Interviews with the founders of many of the sites, from eBay to Google, make this unique.

It would be an interesting collection of videos to add to a public library collection (high school audience or above – or middle schoolers especially interested in technology). It is amazingly up-to-date considering the amount of time it likely took to put everything together. I’m sure there were a few bits that were out-of-date beyond the 1 or 2 I noticed, but overall, they’ve done a good job with it.

The show’s website was a bit slow for me this morning when I was exploring, but I’m pretty sure that was because I was using Mozilla instead of IE (it seemed to work better in internet explorer). However, once you get something to load, it has some interesting details. For example, the Timeline will tell you the exact moment that the World Wide Web was launched – 10 years to the date after I was born, interesting enough – unfortunately it ends in 2003 and doesn’t discuss everything in the shows. The Slideshow has a mug shot of Bill Gates from a 1977 traffic violation arrest as well as a picture of Bill Gates playing Guitar Hero with Slash.

What I really liked about this show was the discussion it sparked between my husband and me. We talked about what we remembered and what was ahead. I think that this might spark some discussion among adults as part of a workshop to increase technology awareness. One thing that we discussed was the tech bubble. When we went to college, everyone was getting jobs easily, but by the time we graduated, we went off to grad school because job prospects were pathetic. Many of the episodes of Download discuss the meteoric rise of sites like Amazon (one of the sites that began the internet bubble) and the crash of the tech industry. I found it fascinating to hear more about what actually happened.

Looking to the future, in the “People Power” episode, they briefly made mention of Facebook going public, which I had never heard about (and for those of you who don’t know, I spent a lot of time last semester reading about Facebook). I decided to do a Google News search for Facebook IPO to see what was going on. I found an interesting Business Week article from March 6 that discusses the wariness of the new Web 2.0 sites to go public because of the recession and the fear of another bubble. (For those of you who were wondering, Facebook was apparently rumored to have plans to go public in 2009, but it has been pushed back to 2010 or later.) Mark Zuckerberg, founder and CEO of Facebook, noted that companies are being much more cautious than in the past: “In the past, a lot of companies viewed it as their goal to go public. We'll do it when it makes sense for us.” I’m sure a lot of people want to get their hands on a site that has 67 million active users, 45 percent of whom return to the site each day (from Facebook’s statistics site.)

As I read this, I thought that it would be a great lesson for a class studying current business trends, the history of the stock market, or even just to spark discussion about the popularity of the internet today (economics aside). Facebook is still somewhat independent (they had a big deal with Microsoft last year), while MySpace, another popular social networking site, was snagged by Murdoch’s News Corp in 2005. Students could discuss their personal habits online, survey friends, etc. They could do research about the financial history of the sites and other websites. Concerns about privacy and predators are always at the top of the list when discussing these sites, but students might appreciate learning more about them or finally hearing from an adult about something other than the dangers of the sites. (I’m not saying you shouldn’t mention these things, but that you shouldn’t make them the center of every conversation.) Now, I’m not a teacher, so maybe this isn’t possible in school, especially since so many schools ban the sites, but it is interesting to explore and discuss. Part of media literacy is understanding who owns what company, who owns the information we put out there on the internet, and what rights we have to use that information.

Media Literacy & Teenage Entrepreneurs

Stories and interviews with 10 kids who've been blogging, starting internet companies, inventing new ways to do solar heating...

Meet the Whiz Kids: 10 Overachievers Under 21
by Dan Tynan, PC World (March 9, 2008)

These kids are all pretty awesome, but I love the last line, from Catherine Cook:

"When you're a teenager, it's virtually risk-free to start a business: You're still dependent on your parents, so really there are no major risks," says Cook. "Even if you fail, you'll still have a really really great college admissions essay, so just do it already."

Great Resources from Educause

If you're looking for a fast way to get up to speed on new technologies and practices such as Skype and digital storytelling, take a look at these fact sheets (7 Things You Should Know...) from Educause:

http://connect.educause.edu/taxonomy/term/5373
--Carol

Technology and Teaching

The administrators in the district where I teach are having a bit of a debate over how much money should be spent on technology. Today, I was sent a link to an article in the Washington Post that details some problems that some teachers are encountering now that their districts are so focused on integrating technology with the curriculum. It brought to mind a favorite history teacher at our middle school. Students love this teacher. They love his lectures because he is a master storyteller. Listening to this teacher transports students to Colonial America. While his teaching tools do not include anything "techy" beyond a filmstrip projector and slide projector, he is a very effective teacher.

This article contradicts some of the ideas we have already shared on this blog. Many of us have noted how the use of technology has improved the learning experience for students. I do believe that teaching is an art and that teachers need to use instructional methods that they feel comfortable using. Finding the balance between the human and machine components of teaching is important.

"How'd you get thumb callouses?" "Oh, they're from writing my latest novel"

John's post earlier today about the Kindle made me remember a Wired article about the popularity of cell phone novels in Japan. (There's also this NYTimes article about it here.) Here's what Wired describes it:

A mobile phone novel typically contains between 200 and 500 pages, with each page containing about 500 Japanese characters. The novels are read on a cell phone screen page by page, the way one would surf the web, and are downloadable for around $10 each. The first mobile phone novel was written six years ago by fiction writer Yoshi, but the trend picked up in the last couple years when high-school girls with no previous publishing experience started posting stories they wrote on community portals for others to download and read on their cell phones.

It's no Kindle, but it works. The NYTimes chimes in when discussing how cell phone novels have been published on paper and turned into bestsellers. Much like critics who are wary of the effect of the internet, videogames, and other technologies on people's atrophying, book-starved minds, naysayers are worried that "the dominance of cellphone novels, with their poor literary quality, would hasten the decline of Japanese literature."

Gosh. Where have I heard that before? Meanwhile, I'm just excited that stuff like this is even possible. I wonder if this kind of online distribution would be possible in the States for amateur writers, such as participants of National Novel Writing Month. I just find it very inspiring that a bunch of unpublished high school girls can spawn a whole industry this way.

The Kindle from Amazon

I was reading Entertainment Weekly this week (like I do every week). Once a month, Stephen King writes a column for the magazine. This week’s column has a lot to think about regarding books, technology and reading. EW may not be the most scholarly journal, but take a look. Here’s the link to the column on the web:

http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20172616,00.html

The first thing I thought about when reading this article was the purpose of books. In the article, Stephen King’s friend suggests that books are a type of furniture. I tend to agree with King’s friend. Books do serve as a type of furniture. I have many books that have spent more time decorating my book shelf then I have spent reading them. In fact, many of the books have not been read at all. Like other furniture, the books we use to decorate our book shelves tell visitors something about ourselves. From the books on the shelf, you can tell who lives in the house, what age they are, their interests, their values and a multitude of other factors. When I go to somebody’s house I always look to see what is on their bookshelves. It’s my equivalent of rummaging through their medicine chest. Furthermore, furniture can serve as a status symbol. Think about the stereotype of the mansion with the huge library filled with expensive volumes of books that haven’t been read but make the owner seem educated and urbane. It’s a very Great Gatsby image. Like King, I think the real value in books lies elsewhere.

In many of his columns King praises the value of books as the most portable and easy to use form of entertainment available. Books are a lot easier to use. Just this semester, I have begun to appreciate the portability of books. With so many readings for all of my classes available n-line I have been tied to my computer to complete the readings. This system, however, does help save me money on course packs and books, so no complaints there. I do, however, enjoy taking a book to a lounge or a café somewhere or in the spring sitting outside and just reading for a couple of hours. Even today with laptops and wireless, a book is still easier. As King says books aren’t going anywhere. Despite changes in technology, books have been around for a long time, and people still enjoy books.

King, however, comes to an excellent conclusion. The medium does not matter as much as the message. I have never used the Kindle, but I can relate to his thoughts about audio books. I used to have a fairly mind-numbing office job. (Most of the time I liked it, but it was a lot of sitting at a desk). To pass the hours, my co-workers and I would listen to audio books. I would say I’ve read these books just as I’d say I’ve read a paperback I held in my hand. The stories were still captivating, and sometimes I learned things, just like when you read a “regular” book. I disagree with King when he says that the story drives the audio book. He downplays the importance of the reader. There are audio books that I could not get through because of the reader, but I quickly read through the paper book. On the other hand, the reader can add a lot to the book. The performance of Jim Dale as he reads the Harry Potter series is as compelling as any of the performance in the movies. Another reader/performer would have handled the material differently. The reader (as well as the listener) interacts with the stories in audio books.

King talks about the monetary saving attached to the Kindle. I question if there is any savings. Sure, each title may cost less than buying a brand new hardcover in the store, but there are a lot of other costs associated with getting Kindle books. Almost all of these costs are related to the technology. You must have a computer, the Kindle, internet access, and other miscellaneous costs. This adds up and ends up more expensive than advertised. Luckily, I know a way to get books for free! Go to your public library! You can read the book with no costs. If you like it, you can read the book as many times as you wish, and while you’re not using it, your friends and neighbors can read it.

Another take on social networking for kids

I just found this story about Kerpoof, a website for kids designed to act as both a "social networking" site and a multimedia tool set.

It's an intriguing idea - unlike MySpace or Facebook, the "networks" are groups that require passwords to join, keeping the connections private and much more secure. The idea seems similar to Ning, a social networking site where anyone can set up their own "network" based on a shared interest or other connection. The difference here seems to be the extra level of privacy controls so kids, teachers, and/or parents can be careful who kids connect with online.

According to techcrunch's Mark Henderson,

"Kerpoof is working on making it possible for kids to collaborate over movies and stories, too, and on adding support for games and social puzzles later in the year. A type of virtual currency will be coming soon as well."

Evidently the plan is to transition into a subscription-based fee service in the future, but for now it's totally free. People working with kids may want to get a good look at it now before they have to pay for it.

If you are just starting to check out social networking sites, the Library 2.0 Ning group may be something you want to look into - it's a group setup just for people interested in figuring out new services and features libraries can develop using recent technology and media trends.

Media production

Tyner hits on an interesting dilemma for our nation’s schools – gathering technology vs. using technology. She notes that schools have primarily focused on acquiring digital tools, but that their use in the classroom has been limited. Part of this has to do with a lack of training as well as a lack of research related to technology in the classroom. While everyone assumes that schools should have computers in the library, no one is exactly sure why they benefit students. In addition, legislators focus on computers and access to packaged tools rather than students’ own production. While I’m sure things have changed and that more studies are available since Tyner’s book was published in 1998, it is clear that more research is needed and more training is needed.

There is also controversy related to technology, especially iPods and cell phones. I’ve read articles in the past (and am frustrated that I can’t remember where or when) highlighting the odd disconnect students feel due to the bans on cell phones and iPods many schools enforce. They spend much of their time outside of school with headphones on or with cell phones glued to their ears, but such activities are often strictly forbidden in schools. I’m not here to argue about whether students should be able to text message during class, but what I am going to suggest is that schools and libraries should be technological leaders and educations. We should teach students to use technology and we should teach them how to create their own media. We cannot just have a blanket ban on cell phones and iPods – they’re out there, students are using them, and they are great tools. Why not have students take pictures or video with their phones and turn them into a project for a class or the community?

One example of this use could be digital storytelling, which Nell and I learned about as part of a group project for Youth Services Librarianship. Whatever the uses, as Tyner points out, students need to be able to go beyond access to fancy websites and technology packages and begin creating their own media. Librarians, especially those like all of us in this class who are interested in media literacy, can be leaders in this field. Many of you are teachers, and I know that there isn’t enough time in the day to learn all of the new things you could implement in your classrooms. This is where partnerships between schools and public libraries or teachers and school library media specialists can come into play. I hope that this post as well as Tyner’s analysis will inspire us to explore and experiment with media literacy.

Co-existing

Some of Tyner’s writing made me think about when and why some new technologies REPLACE other older ones, while other new electronic formats co-exist with older formats.

I like Ong’s explanation about how new technologies that are based on the older ones actually can help reinforce and strengthen the older ones. Just like print and oral traditions blended together to produce a new, stronger form of oral language and discourse, other forms of electronic media can strengthen its base. (Tyner 56) I found some comfort and common sense in Graff’s conclusion #9: “Literacies co-exist. One form of communication does not automatically displace another” (Tyner 39). Writing didn’t replace speaking, the music video didn’t kill the radio, and in my opinion on-line books and readers are not going to replace paper books. (Although the author of this article, If cars can replace buggies, e-books can replace p-books would disagree.) These things can build on each other without eliminating one.

However, lots of new technologies definitely do replace old ones. Sometimes this happens when newer media and technology have the same exact purpose as an older item, such as the online computer databases replacing card catalogs. The online catalogs have taken the place of the cards, for the most part since they can work more efficiently. For another example, record players have been replaced by newer music technology (8-tracks, cassette tapes, CDs, MP3s….). That’s not to say there isn’t some that don’t still appreciate the value that the older items have, such as the handwritten notes or even the smudges on the card catalog, or the crackly sound of a record, but they aren’t something easily found by the general public today.

So is it possible for older technologies to be able to transcend time?