Kotaku on JT's NIU Claims

School shootings are horrible tragedies. I want to be clear right from the start that no one should be made to endure a loved one's murder or suicide, particularly in such a painful and public manner.

In the aftermath of such an event, we all want to know why it happened. But speculating about motives before we have concrete information is foolish in the least and can be harmfully misleading. Mere speculation, though, can be forgiven. Using a tragedy to advance a wholly unrelated agenda cannot.

It is with this in mind that we watch a video of one infamous Florida attorney, whom we followers of video game culture sometimes call He Who Must Not Be Named. Inexplicably, this man is allowed on Fox News to throw out his claims that major tragedies are caused by video games. The shooting at NIU on the 14th was no exception.


An analysis of the claims in this clip has been made by Brian Crecente of Kotaku, which I will reproduce for you here.

1. We find from brain scan studies out of Harvard that if you get started playing, for example, violent video games you can more likely copy-cat the behaviors in the games.
   Verdict: False
   Evidence: While the study of adolescents by Harvard and Indiana university researchers found that video games can spur "emotional arousal" and lower self-control it never made that final leap. In fact David S. Bickham, a research scientist at the Center on Media and Child Health at the Harvard School of Public Health in Boston, told the Washington Post that the study, while interesting, wasn't conclusive.


2. The disturbing thing that keeps popping up in many of these as in Va Tech, Columbine, Paducah, where I represented the six parents of the three girls shot and killed, is that you can rehearse these types of massacres on simulators which are called video games. And you can therefore made more proficient in doing this.
   Verdict: False
   Evidence: Va Tech shooter Seung-Hui Cho only had a passing interest in gaming years before the shoot[ing]. A lawyer tried to draw a connection between the game Doom and Columbine shooters Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, but that was tossed out by a federal judge. Paducah shooter Michael Carneal also played Doom, but that was found to not be connected to the shooting. Video game as murder simulator and training tool just doesn't hold any water.


3. The worst school shooting in history until Va Tech, was by Robert Steinhauser in Erfurt, Germany who trained on Counter-Strike Half Life. That's the game that Cho at Va Tech trained on in High School.
   Verdict: Not exactly true
   Evidence: While it is true that Steinhauser and Cho both played Counter-Strike at some point in their lives, with more than a million copies sold, that could probably be said of a lot of college students. Saying that Cho "trained on" the game is a bit of a stretch.


4. And um the effect, the affects the psychological affect of the shooter, plus his attire is suggestive of a couple of the games in which the "hero" wears this type of attire.
   Verdict: Likely false
   Evidence: The description by those present don't make it sound like he had a flat affect. One person said "It looked like a theatrical thing the way he walked onto the stage." Others described his behavior leading up to the shooting as erratic. Not surprising of a man who had recently been dumped by his girlfriend and had stopped taking his medication, possibly anti-depressants. Simply wearing black doesn't mean he was dressing up like the "hero" from Counter-Strike.


5. I lost my train of thought. I wrote a book...
   Verdict: True
   Evidence: Jack did indeed write a book, and I think he lost his train of thought about two decades ago.

Wonderful skeptical analysis of an opportunist. Kudos to Crecente, and I wish I had wrote it myself.

Continue Reading...

Pediatricians Against TV Show

Check CNN for the full story. Also, you can click here for the press release from the American Academy of Pediatricians. You can also click here to read the letter sent to ABC.

The largest group of pediatricians in the nation is upset over an upcoming ABC show called "Eli Stone" because

It features British actor Jonny Lee Miller as a prophet-like lawyer who in the opening episode argues in court that a flu vaccine made a child autistic. When it is revealed in court that an executive at the fictional vaccine maker didn't allow his own child to get the shot, jurors side with the family, giving them a huge award.

The writers of the show claim they would be "deeply upset" if parents were not vaccinating their children because of their show. I would ask, then why make let the nonsense triumph in your show?

I say kudos to the American Academy of Pediatrics for fighting the reason and for reminding me why I don't watch television.

Continue Reading...

Ho Ho Hustle!

I just had a post-Thanksgiving get together with my family. The news item on everyone's lips was that Santas everywhere have been banned from saying "Ho ho ho." Apparently the onomatopoeia "ho" could be offensive to women and Santa shouldn't be heard saying that! My family was aghast. Was nothing sacred? This is political correctness gone too far! How, they asked, could anyone be so bold?

How, I asked, could anyone believe that story?

I didn't say anything at the time, because I didn't have any sources on hand, but my skeptical alarm bells were ringing. First, there was never an identified antagonist behind this ban, only a vague "them." To me that smacks of urban legend. Second, the scale of this story is implausible. The idea of changing a lovable character's catchphrase simply because of an alternate slang definition is silly. There may be a few (very few) people who think it's a good idea, but instituting some general "ban" would never gain traction. So my prediction was either, a) someone had suggested this as a "What's next in the War on Christmas?" hypothetical that got twisted into a ban, or b) a small group made a small suggestion that someone somewhere might want to consider thinking about changing "ho ho ho," and it got picked up by media sources as a ban.

Upon reaching home, my first step was a quick Snopes search. Sadly, no results. Either this hasn't reached bona fide urban legend status, or it wasn't in a popular chain email. I moved on.

Step two was a Google News search, with the search string "ho ho ho". I caught the trail here. Most of the results are editorials in several newspapers. One common thread: all the stories mention the flap is over Santas in Australia, not America. Eventually I found an article mentioning the original source: Australian newspaper The Daily Telegraph.

This article does mention a ban, saying

Santas across Sydney are rebelling against attempts to ban their traditional greeting of "ho, ho, ho" in favour of "ha, ha, ha".

They also cite the motivation being the alternate definition of the word "ho,"

One would-be Santa has told The Daily Telegraph he was taught not to use "ho, ho, ho" because it was too close to the American slang for prostitute.

Mixed in with the emotional anecdotes is the real story, however.

Recruitment firm Westaff - which supplies hundreds of Santas across the country - has told its trainees that the "ho ho ho" phrase could frighten children and could even be derogatory to women.

A Westaff manager Sari Hegarty clarifies the situation:

Part of our advice to our Santas is that they should be mindful of children having their first Santa experience.
We ask our Santas to try techniques such as lowering their tone of voice and using 'ha, ha, ha' to encourage the children to come forward and meet Santa. We wish you and your family a very merry Christmas.

On their website, Westaff has statements regarding this incident. In a press release, they assure "the public we celebrate Santa's signature saying, 'ho, ho, ho,' and no directive forbidding the language, for any reason, was issued by the company." A longer document (PDF) is full of information on the company's stance; it is, needless to say, not against the phrase "ho ho ho."

This sounds much more plausible. A Santa training company told its wannabe helpers that a hearty "Ho ho ho!" might start the little ones crying, and they should perhaps consider saying "Ha ha ha!" in a softer tone. This sounds nothing like a ban, just a suggestion that got blown out of proportion. Even the accusations that the alternate definition of "ho" was a motivation came from non-Westaff sources, so I consider them suspect.

How, then, did this myth get started? Knowing that no ban ever existed or was attempted by anyone, let's read the first few lines of the Daily Telegraph article again.

Santa fury at 'ho, ho, ho' ban
HE is an unlikely revolutionary but this Christmas, Santa is a rebel with a claus.
He is having the last laugh on political correctness - and it's a great big fat belly laugh.
Santas across Sydney are rebelling against attempts to ban their traditional greeting of "ho, ho, ho" in favour of "ha, ha, ha".

"Santa fury"? A "revolutionary"? Santas are "rebelling"? Where did they get any of that? The Westaff sources are quoted in the article, so it should have been clear that this story had nothing backing it up. However, the authors wasted no time in going far beyond the evidence, reporting trumped-up anecdotes to combat "the latest example of political correctness gone mad." This is simply irresponsible journalism. And most other news outlets just parroted the original story with no investigation at all. Shame on them.

Not all media outlets are guilty, however. I did find a few sources questioning this story, and they deserve mention. Sign on San Diego initially reported the story credulously, then retracted a few hours later as new information came in. Kudos to them. And Canadian news site CBC.CA ran a great piece pointing out flaws in the article and The Daily Telegraph itself. Good going for them.

So next time you're enjoying a little turkey and hear a story that doesn't sound quite right, file it away. Chances are you could probe the surface just a little and find something a lot more plausible.

Continue Reading...