Long-time readers of this space are probably aware of my general cynicism toward broadcast media, mostly to do with the fact that the “news” isn’t really much about disseminating useful information than about selling advertising slots, and with vast swaths of the american public, the most effective ways of raising ratings (to get eyeballs on those advertisements) is through scandal, conflict and manipulation rather than providing reliable, objective, and detailed information.

Because actual information doesn’t necessarily interest most people…it doesn’t sell. As H.L. Mencken famously said, “no one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people.”

Local news organizations are often the worst, alternately teasing with implied danger and innuendo and manipulating audiences with schmaltz and and emotional appeals…when they aren’t busy disgusing cross-promotional advertising as news reports (a story about a reality show airing during prime time on the affiliated network really isn’t “news”, is it?).

I could go on about this, invoking Kent Brockman and Ron Burgundy, but I’m sure you get my point. To be honest, it’s not a particularly new point – it’s the kind of “water is wet” thing that Ric Romero might report*. However, these last couple of paragraphs about vacuousness in the broadcast media serve as a pretty good introduction to an examination of what I’m reasonably sure is one of the better examples of shoddy reporting I’ve seen in a long time:

I present to you Survey: Video Games Linked To Reckless Driving, reported recently by WCCO in Minneapolis, MN.

Let’s just look at some of the many problems inherent in this report, starting at the beginning:

First of all, what jumped out at me immediately is the fact that the “Survey” in the title, referred to in the article itself as “a new study” or “research” isn’t actually named anywhere. The organization or instutution that did the research is never named, cited, or referenced. I’m going to bet that any researchers working on this particular topic had to cite their sources, why does the reporter get a pass?

Further, “Reasearchers” are mentioned having said “their data should not be taken lightly since car accidents are the number one cause of death in teenagers.” There’s the scandalous checkbox being ticked off, though this might have some authority if the researchers were named.

The next paragraph claims that the “research” was conducted in three different countries, but that doesn’t matter, because the report then mentions “Grand Theft Auto,” which is all anybody’s seeing, because it’s become the ultimate strawman for “scary video game,” and if the scare sticks, the purpose of the piece is fulfilled.

The piece then moves on to equivocation/debate portion, quoting first a “video game player” indicating how GTA is fun, but yeah, involves some recklessness, followed by more unsourced statistics. The other side is represented by Doctor David Walsh, who supports the article’s title almost verbatim. The doctor’s affiliation isn’t provided, though the way the piece is composed, it seems he’s got some authority – did he do the research?

After another unsourced statistical reference about the number of teenage traffic deaths in Minnesota, hitting both the Could This Happen to You? and Local Angle tropes – referencing that 19(!) teenagers had died in car accidents this year thus far, without context, to add to the dramatic presentation.

To add some context, according to statistics from the University of Minnesota, there were 421 TOTAL traffic fatalities in Minnesota in 2009, out of total population (acording to this google search) of around 5.2 million people.

So, four percent of all traffic fatalites are teenagers; though there’s no particular connection between traffic deaths and video game playing, or even whether than the teenagers were driving. Every traffic death is a tragedy to someone, certainly, but it’s not like this is an epidemic or anything; the lack of context implies an urgency that simply isn’t there.

Returning to Doctor David Walsh, we find that he hasn’t actually participated in the research – he’s the founder of the National Institute of Media and the Family, a media watchdog group who (was…they’ve since shut down and reformed with another name) in the business of pointing out content it deems harmful to children in the media. And appearing on TV and selling books…he’s apparently the go-to guy for “video games are bad, mmmkay?” pull quotes.

Not to mention that the ESRB, the software industry’s rating board (which, for example, gave GTA IV the perfectly appropriate rating of M – appropriate for ages 17+) called out his organization for seriously flawed video game reporting, citing innacuracies, misleading statements, flawed research, and ommission of material facts (kind of like, you know, this article). Walsh has also made the claim that the video game industry was promoting cannibalism after seeing a couple of stills from a zombie game. So, an authority without much authority; not that such things are mentioned.

Rounding out the article is the following quote, still unattributed, but nonetheless seems to scuttle the whole thesis:

The findings do not directly link playing video games to reckless driving. They only show an association. Researchers say the impact of playing games like “Grand Theft Auto” is minimal.

So, that’s the article. What was the point? Not to provide information, other than to reinforce unsubstantiated (even by the research allueded to) “conventional wisdom,” with “support” from attention whores with disgraced authority.

It does, however, drum up emotional turmoil in order to draw the eyeballs of parents who are justifiably worried about their children’s safety (but not necessarily in this case), and thus drum up their ad rates, while hoping that nobody notices (or worse, that they never noticed themselves) that the article is essentially content free, even if it mentions research.

It’s almost like a producer or editor decided they needed a controversial video game story, and somebody just assembled this story to hit some emotional notes and everybody’s fretting enough about the totally manufactured controversy to not notice how shoddily constructed the whole thing is.

What’s so sneaky about this whole business, really, is how there is just a nugget of truth to support the claims; nobody’s going to dispute that exposure to inappropriate media won’t have some effect on kids, or adults, for that matter.** The message that parents ought to monitor what their kids are playing, watching, or listening to is an important one (that’s why, for example, I do this with my kids so I know what they’re doing, and can explain or filter out what’s not appropriate for them), so, most people will give pieces like this a pass, never mind that it’s misleading, poorly researched, and written badly.

For me, though, even if it’s a good message, I can’t get behind the mischaracterization and manipulative delivery. Passing on even valuable information under false pretenses isn’t the kind of message I want to pass along.

___________________

* – Romero’s not disingenuous, he’s just severely behind the times, though to be fair, so is most of his audience. And he’s got a good sense of humor about it.

** – I can provide plenty of personal anecdata about this. After I go through a cycle of playing a bunch of Gran Turismo (a very realistic racing sim) for a couple of weeks, when I find myself behind the wheel of a real car, I sometimes feel a small urge to take a corner with the proper racing line, which would definitely cross a yellow line. Doesn’t mean I do, nor does it mean that just because teenagers play GTA despite the rating (which is definitely not a realistic experience), they’re likely to go ahead and start jacking cars, shooting pedestrians, and visiting prostitutes for the health bonus then beating them up to get their money back because the video game influenced them to do so.** If they’re doing so, there’s a bigger problem at work, and it’s going to take a lot more parental involvement to fix it than just taking the video games away. Sadly, there aren’t any simple answers. Sorry.

** * Just like when I was a kid, I didn’t start worshipping Satan or believing I could practice witchcraft because I rolled some dice and drew maps on graph paper. My penchant for footnoting footnotes might be related, however.