Chosen Post: “Book Burning and 'Violent' Video Games”

     Tim Biggs the author of the article “Book Burning and 'Violent' Video Games” discusses the event that were set to take place in Southington, Connecticut in response to the Newtown tragedy. A campaign for a mass burning of violent video games is the object of discussions as the author alludes to the 'archaic' proceeding of book burning in past societies. The central argument revolves around the claim that no matter what the reason, simply setting fire to literature or media will not the dissolve the ideology or meaning within said works and is therefore and insensible practice (refers to it as negative). The author suggest it is more important address the violent content found in today media and control exposure to those, especially children, who are incapable of interpreting context of mature material.

     I agree with Biggs' suggestion that monitoring the activity and content in which children are exposed to is more important than destroying that content outright. I find it hard to believe that eliminating ever last violent video game, movie, or book would cause violence to decrease among humans. As the author points out, it is hard to imagine that by setting fire to a text or video, one can destroy the ideas and concepts behind the work as well. This could make matters worse, instead of explaining the context of situations in which our youths will inevitably be exposed to involving violence, we show them that it is justifiable to burn things they don't understand.

     Examining the other side of the article, the campaigners efforts and intentions were driven most likely with the their community's best interest in mind. As the author states the campaign received national attention and brought to light to an issue that may have been overlooked by adults/parents across the country. However as mentioned before the practice of burning video game disc accomplishes little to no positive outcomes, therefore the focus of the attention was misguided. I find it more practical to prevent children from having access to violent media (i.e. not buying it or limiting access to it) instead of burning copies of it, which most likely had to be purchased by someone in the first place.

link: http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/01/14/book-burning-and-violent-video-games

1. Do you believe that if every single written copy of a religious text were destroyed that people would stop believing in it?
2. Is there a chance a positive way to use 'violent' media as a way to teach young minds about violence and its consequences?
3. Is the content in which we receive on the internet, TV, and so on a product of what we desire/demand or whats available and accepted among society?