first draft done

I just finished my bibliography using various websites and junk to try and make it look the way it's supposed to. I'm still not sure it's 100% right, but it looks legitimate enough for me. It didn't take me very long to do, so my post won't be all that long. I did it tonight after the music concert, because tomorrow i plan to start rounding up notes and things for finals. Now while this may be last minute compared to what other people are doing i find trying to learn all of my subjects at the same time a few days in advance just jumbles information. Just make a list of things to know, write it out so you've gone over it once, and don't pull it out again until a day or two before your its the day of that final. The easiest way is to go over the closest things the most and push everything else to the side or out altogether if you've already taken it. With that in mind i finished my paper earlier.

editing

So, tonight i edited my paper and polished some last ideas. What i'm beginning to worry about is whether or not my citing various sources is clear enough. I refer to various works belonging to different people who compiled work from the same few people. I'm not sure if it comes out clear enough, or if there's more i should do to straighten this out. I think i'll wait and see what comments i get on the first draft. Other than that i think it's going well. Other than the issue with two of my electronic sources being highly similar, the rest is all going fairly straight forward. I have yet to worry about and start my bibliography, but i'm in no hurry to start that. In all honesty i'm only doing this much work on my paper in an effort to avoid thinking and focusing my energies on finals. I'm not sure how i'm going to drag out blogs for the rest of this week, but i guess my next exciting chapter will be on the thrills and chills of a bibliography.

+

I think what i've found is that the arguments defending games are always the most rational and simple. They simply cite data and people without trying to drag research in. Today i found an article that actually said something similar to what i put in my paper, about how Anderson tends to be the only name associated with some research claiming links between aggression and violence. The article i found tonight claims that the links simply don't clearly exist. They even admitted that there could just as easily be the same amount of research discrediting that of others as they have to deal with. The key points i noticed them hitting on were that although games are taking heat from Clinton, Lieberman, and researchers, the average age of a gamer right now is 30 years old. While it is true that mature 17+ games find the way into the hands of kids, the fact of the matter is the gaming audience is becoming older. They also hit on the fact that violence is a staple in the lives of many americans now. You can't blame games, and go home to find that 90% of tv content and hit shows are sexual or feature a murder as the main plot. Violent crime rates are on the decrease and surprisingly so are sex rates in teens. The article claims that this research seems to simply be crying wolf. They equated it to banning alcohol, simply because drunk drivers kill people. or. Banning guns because there are those who use them for crimes. It is a punishment of everyone just because someone misuses a right.

Paper Complete

So today i started and finished my expository paper. It went a lot more easily than i thought it would. Having already gathered sources, it went fairly smoothly. I have yet to create my works cited, but i think i'll put that off for as long as possible. I'm still not sure how to go about my actual proposal paper. I have ideas, but i think that it will be necessary to keep gathering research and information even though it wasn't used in my expository paper. I'm fairly pleased with how it went, but it'll take a lot more straightening out and work to get the actual paper done. I'll have to edit at some point this week, but it'll happen when it happens. What did surprise me in writing my paper was how quickly it seemed to come out. I didn't double space my paper until i was done and it just kept coming steadily and slowly down the page with the occasional break to double check a text. 

D-Dub and Mr.Dad

Two interesting finds this evening. The first was an adult game making company that sells downloadable content lashing out against those who attacked it. The post said that they were merely a website and a software company making games that they found amusing and appealing. What should really be the focus of attention is violent video games and what affect it has on children. They argued that not only were they safely out of children's hands not being in stores, but that they appealed to much smaller and specified crowds and wouldn't be a problem unlike disc games found in stores. I should also point out that they also bashed the ratings companies for giving them a hard time, which kind of sets them out against the whole industry since no system or mainstream company feels comfortable touching them. The second point would be that i found a sent in response from a worried mother to one MR.Dad. She worried about the affect of violence on her child and asked if it was a concern. What was interesting is that he quoted a book and various studies the author of this book made. It was called "Grand Theft Childhood." The interesting part about it was that it equated video games as being no different than any other popular new thing of anytime. Statistics equating it with violence, aggression, or anti social behavior are blown way out of proportion. Mr.Dad compared it to switching from 5 holed flutes to 6 at the time of Plato and how this was scandalous for the time and thought to destroy entire western culture. He then compared it to Rock and Roll and how this and its mandated sex, drugs, and partying were also supposed to be the downfall of entire generations. 

let's play some frogger and tetris

            What I didn’t know was that some of the pro video game arguments is that video games do just as much to improve hand eye coordination and focus as they do in stimulating any emotions at all. Emotions are argued to be temporary and circumstantial to the usage of the game at hand. The learned hand eye coordination and other characteristics stay with you beyond the game. What is arguably bad about games, and I would agree, is that in many cases it may cause very bad social affects. Kids lose the experience of social interactions and can only relate to what they’ve observed with no first hand examples from their own lives. Many parents and government agencies have tried to ban games or make them change their content, but there have been a series of successful first amendment defenses that have protected games and their rights to make content to an audience deemed competent. The main argument for the cases I saw were that the only way to handle the problem is to limit child access to violent games, and let them grow into more mature subjects. Let them grow and develop with harmless productive games with a reasonable amount of focus and attention.

Let us Play GTA IV while we Ponder

So I took a cursory glance down my options today since I’ve already got a good idea about what I want. What I found was a combination of random citeless information, most of which was either claiming neutrality and fence riding on whether or not aggression could be linked with video game violence. Among the anarchy of news reports and blogs, I did manage to find two clear articles both pro and against this argument from seemingly credible sources. One was from a PhD and the other a child psychologist. Both credibly argued their points and seem valid, but the internet does seem biased and lacking substance on the side of defending video games. It’ll be easy to find and examine arguments against video games, which will be nice when I plan on ripping them apart. What will take some time is looking up other credible sources who defend them. I was also surprised to see the volume of focus from politicians. It wasn’t simply lawyers and news casters making it an issue and riling up distressed parents. Among the things I found were a blog about gamer relief that Hillary Clinton would be in Obama’s cabinet, so she would no longer be a threat to the industry. There was also one fearing OBama’s approach to the issue as president. I found this amusing since the video game industry seems like the least of his worries at the moment, and I think we’ll all be safe at the moment.