Video games and children have long been a topic of heated debate since the development and monumentally ground-breaking release of Doom back in 1993. Many people look to this title, more than any other, as being the cornerstone responsible for the influx of first person shooters and the desensitization of the nation’s children. Although arguably one could just as easily scapegoat Donkey Kong for Atari as the first violent video game as the end goal is to murder a giant monkey with a hammer, most do not choose to do so because of the incredibly cartoonish way in which the game was made.
The big issue with video game violence and children, according to many parents, politicians, and insufferable know-it-alls with nothing better to do with their time, is that the games feature violence that is seen as too realistic and thereby makes the idea of violence “cool” and forces children to want to imitate what they see; monkey see, monkey do. And of course, there is now the new controversy being prostituted by the media and advocacy groups over Activision’s latest release in the Call of Duty series, Call of Duty: Black Ops. Undoubtedly by now, many have heard of this asinine objection to the latest commercial for the game wherein a bevy of celebrities are seen acting out a scene utilizing toy guns and explosives to promote Call of Duty: Black Ops. The most notable celeb, or at least the one taking the brunt of the objections, is none other than basketball juggernaut Kobe Bryant.
And while Mr. Bryant is not exactly what one would call a model citizen, given his past actions in Eagle, Colorado, he can hardly be held responsible for choosing to do a commercial for Call of Duty. Who wouldn’t want to be associated with the most highly anticipated video game of the year? And while typically I am not a bastion of support for Kobe Bryant, I have to point out the sheer idiocy of the people who are angry with his choice. Kobe Bryant is a basketball player. He is paid to play basketball and to fulfill his endorsement obligations. Additionally, he can choose to do whatever he wishes with his free time, in this case that meant accepting an offer to appear for Activision. In no way is he paid to be a role model to the American public.
The only reason this is a problem to people is because the American public is obsessed with fame and celebrity status. Yes, I know, I can hear the gears clicking and the mechanized motions of the collective pie holes coming open to refute my claims. But where is it stated that all celebrities are to be regarded as untouchable, infallible, heroic role models for the youth of the nation? I understand that those who achieve fame and fortune, by virtue of being publicly viewed constantly, are automatically latched onto as such and that they grasp the inferred duty of “role model” but why? Whatever happened to viewing parents, grandparents, or teachers as role models?
Oh, wait, my mistake, we all hate our parents because they are too lazy to do any actual parenting. Work is too overwhelming and time consuming, so if they have a kid it’s best to shove them in front of a TV where they can watch whatever they want and begin to form human bonds to people living in a box that they will never meet, but begin to emulate to the ire of the parents’ own existence. And once Christmas rolls around and the parents are forced to be with their children because the nanny, aka school system, is on vacation, what better way to pacify them than with video games so that they shut up and more work can be done?
And then the problems begin as the parents find out what kind of video games the children are playing. But wait, aren’t the parents, the same people who gave the child the games in the first place, the people with the money to buy such things, responsible for giving the child the video games they are now railing about? Hmmm. Of course there will always be those parents who say, “I didn’t know that was what the game was about.” Really?! You didn’t bother to do some research on what you were going to give to your child? I would say I find that hard to believe but given how little parents actually care about being parents, it’s actually a valid point. And of course, the parents then want to watchdog and turn games into scapegoats claiming that their children are being damaged and influenced by the violence in video games. Heaven forbid that a parent actually take the time to decide what is beneficial for a child.
The responsibility for how a child is raised and influenced, as well as what they watch or play, is not the fault of some celebrity who knows nothing of these children and that has been forgotten by most, if not all, parents. There is no reason to raise such a ruckus over a commercial for Call of Duty: Black Ops that uses celebrities to help boost popularity, especially not when everyone knows what Call of Duty is about well beforehand. And while some will still cry that the commercial itself downplays the situation that many troops are still actively dealing with in the Middle East , there is no reason to make this politically motivated. The commercial is there to sell the product, the celebrities are there to attract attention to the product and increase revenue and get a nice payday. If you don’t like something, don’t buy it. If you want to act like a parent, be a parent from the start. It’s not that fucking difficult to figure out.
