If you know what I mean when I say “naughty step” you have probably come across Dr Tanya Byron, a fellow psychologist who rose to prominence on television with Little angels and House of tiny tearaways. She has recently been named as the head of a government review called “The Byron Review: Children and new technology” which is out for consultation now (responses in by November 30th).
The call for evidence states: “The Byron Review is an independent review of the risks to children from
exposure to potentially harmful or inappropriate material on the internet and in
video games.”
Not having kids, I’ve not come across Dr Byron in much detail but I am at least relieved she is a “proper” psychologist and not just a suit with an opinion. That said, I am a bit worried about the focus of the review, which appears to be conflating video games with the internet. Video games are controllable environments written by programmers; they can set exactly how much violence, bad language, or scariness appears at any given time. That game can then be rated and regulated using the same age system that governs films and music.
By contrast, on the internet anything goes. So in theory, as soon as a video game has a multiplayer element that uses the internet (or indeed any other form of communication such as LAN, wireless networks, or short range radio like Bluetooth), what happens is out of the control of the designers. Yes, if you buy your 9-year old son a copy of Manhunt (rated 18) then he is going to hammer some people’s skulls in with a ball-peen. Naughty you.
But what if you buy him The Sims 2, ostensibly an electronic doll’s house, and he goes online? Well he’s not going to be bashing anyone’s skulls in but he may well be exposed to bullying, abuse, or sexually suggestive messages from other users.
All of that has got nothing to do with the intentions of the game designers, and everything to do with the fact that a.) there are some bad people in the world and b.) any form of communication can be used for ill.
I’m also a bit concerned that the wording of the call for evidence suggests a bit of a foregone conclusion that playing games IS harmful, and they’re just looking for evidence that supports that position. Sadly this area (like violence and TV) is plagued by “correlation=causation” assumptions. Obviously you’d be hard-pressed to randomise children to have a games console or be banned from playing them, but that’s the only level of evidence I’d accept in a drug trial so it should be what we’re aiming at in this field.
The consultation is open for comments from all stakeholders; if you’ve ever played a video game you count, so get on over to the website and let them know that conflating the web and video games is like conflating the telephone system and Sudoku.
My daughters are both veterans of Sims 2 (one of them is old enough to be a veteran of Sims 1). They love it. But they rarely go online to play the game, as it isn’t an online game. They only go online when they want to download some new accessories (or whatever they are called). Sims are very clever, they make you (the parent) pay £29.99 for each update (pets, seasons, university etc) as a DVD. If you have two daughters, you have to buy two DVDs, the game is not transferrable between computers. Very clever. I hear they are working on Sims 3, which for all I know may have an online component by which players can share their Sims worlds. But as things stand, Sims 2 is totally computer-dependent. So despite living in a computer very literate house, my younger daughter had to start her neighbourhoods all over again when she got a new laptop recently (her old one crashed irreversibly), causing some angst because loved characters and families were lost forever. So yes, an online component to the actual game would be good from the player’s perspective, but possibly not a good business model.
I realise that all of the above isn’t the real point of your post. To my mind, and I am a parent, of two daughters, online is no different from TV or anything else kids do — they essentially absorb what the parents do, and I have never had any worries about my children going online (which they do all the time). In addition, online is a major component of their school lives, and they are always getting “do gooders” warning them of evils, etc. I think the online world offers great opportunities for children, teens and everyone — I wish we’d had it back in the dark ages when I was young (I am now 150).