Gaming: The Answer To Global Happiness?

 

(Image source) 

In 2011, Jane McGonigal, a visionary game designer wrote the book entitled Reality Is Broken: Why Games Make Us Better and How They Can Change the World. This book ultimately reveals how we can exploit the power of games to boost global happiness. In this book she argues that the power of games can be used to fix what is wrong with our world i.e. real world issues such as poverty and global warming. She also gives examples of how some games have already changed the following sectors: business, education and non-profit organisations. This book was written not only for gamers, but also non-gamers alike and ultimately states that the future belongs to those amongst us who have the ability to understand, design and play games.

But is what McGonigal reveals in her book honestly true? Is reality really broken? And is gaming really going to “make us better”?

Firstly, I think the fact that globally we play around 3 billion hours of video games in a week speaks for itself. So many of us take a step back from reality and into the world of video gaming to seek some sort of happiness from all the problems that surround us on a daily basis. Not only this, but more human effort and attention is going into designing these artificial worlds just so that people can continue to lose themselves in a world that is nothing like our own. More time is going into creating new worlds than into trying to fix what is wrong with this one, and some may argue that this is the case because there is no solution to many of the major problems we face. Thus, it is easier to just create a new, virtual world where things aren’t so bad and we are happy. So in this sense yes, reality is broken because video games are what make us happier at the moment and there is more of them than there are solutions to world hunger!

McGonigal explains how games can change the way we approach things we know we should be doing to make a “better” life for ourselves. We crave, she argues, “satisfying work” that allows us to be “optimistic about our own chances for success”; that involves “social connection”; and that allows us to feel “curiosity, awe and wonder”.

Could gaming make us better? Well I think there is some element of truth in this. If nothing else, what gaming shows us is that we are capable of doing something. We spend so much time and effort into creating characters and doing things we probably wished we could do in reality; and this to us seems more meaningful than much of what we do in our everyday lives. However, if we put the same amount of effort into our daily lives as we do into creating a virtual world for ourselves then maybe reality wouldn’t be so bad. If you could do it in a game, I’m pretty sure you could also do something similar in reality. Thus, we would be happier with our own lives, not within a virtual world that is non-existent.

I don’t think we really need a virtual world to make us happy, but I do understand why some may think that gaming is a way to “global happiness”.

Citizen Journalism

Citizen journalism is based upon public citizens “playing an active role in the process of collecting, reporting, analyzing, and disseminating news and information” - S. Bowman and C. Willis, 2003 

 

(Image source)

  Society today has seen an increase in citizen journalism. New media technology has made it easier for ordinary people to become ‘citizen journalists’ and for others to access citizen journalism. Citizens are the ones who tend to report breaking news more quickly than traditional media reporter. With social networking sites, and the increasing prevalence of mobile phones, citizens can report on stories as soon as they happen especially if they are present at the scene.

Many see the rise in citizen journalism as a good thing. It is believed that ordinary individuals can add a wider berth to stories as they can provide information that may not have been made available to the public otherwise. They can do this by creating a blog, or commenting on a post. It’s a way of ensuring that the “truth” gets out. Peope tend to not trust mainstream media too much, and there is an increasing tendency amongst individuals to go onto news blogs rather than read mainstream newspapers.

 

(Image source)

 Social media allows citizens to bring “breaking news” to others, before mainstream media gets the chance too.

“Most people are still happy to rely on mainstream news organisations to sort fact from fiction and serve up a filtered view, but they are increasingly engaged by this information, particularly when recommended by friends or another trusted source” – Nic Newman, 2009

Citizen journalists also give out information that is clearer, and straight to the point. They give a basic view on something rather than try to hide the truth in amongst fancy vocabulary. It is because of citizen journalism that I think we are becoming more of an information society.


But is the rise in citizen journalism necessarily a good thing?

Some argue that it is not. In some instances I agree. Citizen journalists are not trained; it is not their job to report on current events. Whereas a trained journalist has to follow rules and regulation an ordinary citizen does not. They do not need to find credible sources to back up any allegation they might make in a blog or an article. If they wanted to they could make up an event or a situation in their head and write about. It is often found that such stories are often related to race. I remember reading numerous articles claiming that Barak Obama is not only a secret Muslim but that he also was not born in the United States. Even though these articles are clearly false, it has not stopped citizen “journalists” repeatedly reporting that these allegations are true!

“Legitimacy may be unknown with a blog or user-created site and, indeed, there have been cases where individuals have gamed the system, deliberately posting material they know not to be true” – John Kelly, 2009

Personally I know there have been numerous rumours spread across social networking sites about the deaths of famous celebrities which have all turned out to be vicious rumours spread by people.

Criminal Acts & Social Media

When Mark Zuckerberg first founded Facebook, I am sure he did not think that he would be giving a stage to Arab protestors so that they may express this anger with the starvation, unemployment and corruption going on in their countries. I also do not think that he intended for his social media website to become a battleground for authorities in Tunisia and web activists. But this is exactly what has happened! The results have been devastating and have been some of the most violent demonstration the country has ever seen!! 

We use Facebook to update our relationship status or to upload pictures of ourselves, they use Facebook to upload videos and Twitter feeds of the street demonstrations that are going on around them. 

“We use Facebook to schedule the protests, Twitter to coordinate, and YouTube to tell the world.” 

There have been some outrageous pictures uploaded onto Facebook of police brutality and this has only angered people more. Social networking sites have become centre stage for the “marginalized Arab masses”. It has become a place for them to share their anger and to spread their message all across the world – the message against censorship. Thus it would seem as though social media has acted as an “important resource for popular mobilization against the regime of President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali” (Todd Landman, 2012). 

Wael Ghonim: “I want to meet Mark Zuckerberg one day and thank him, actually. This revolution started - well, a lot of this revolution started on Facebook. If you want to liberate a society, just give them the Internet. If you want to have a free society, just give them Internet”. 

 

(Image source) 

It is not just Tunisians who have taken political advantage of social networking sites. Algerians, Palestinians and Egyptians have too! In Egypt Twitter and Facebook, those tools were used to
coordinate and spread the word about the demonstrations that were scheduled for January 25, 2011. 

 

(Image source) 

 Facebook graffiti in Tahrir Square, Cairo 

However, it has been argued that social media and the internet in general is not enough to cause a revolution and overthrow a government. “Europeans and Americans were quick to label the uprising a ‘Twitter revolution’” says Doyle McManus in the Los Angeles Times, “But Tunisia's uprising was made possible not by the internet, but by widespread, pent-up anger at Ben Ali's family-run kleptocracy- feelings that extended to the military”. Nevertheless, it is obvious that social media did play a significant role in Arab revolutions! 

On a slightly different note, in Britain, recent reports have argued that social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter could help improve the overall security of this country. It has been argued that police forces should co-ordinate their forces online and ensure the 24-hour staffing of social media accounts. With the police keeping a close eye on different social networking sites, they may also be able to respond more quickly to active situations such as the 2011 riots by “crowd sourcing” events as they happen. 

 

(Image source) 

So maybe social networking sites could also be the key to stopping revolutions and rioting, and keeping governments safe??

Media Bias: Can We Trust The Media?

"I think that for democracy to survive and thrive, I think we need a vigilant media. You know, we now have a lap dog, thrill up our leg, a**-kissing, suck-up, lapdog media. How do we have a thriving democracy when people can't get accurate, fair information? That seems to be hard to me." – Sean Hannity 

 

(Image source) 

Do I believe that the media is biased? Yes, of course. But I don’t appear to be the only one who believes this! In a recent survey, in which 1,054 people took part, only 9% believed that there was no overall bias expressed though Sky News. Evidently Sky News appears to display the strongest political bias of any major UK news broadcaster, while Channel 4 appears to be the most politically balanced UK news broadcaster. 

Media bias is a worldwide phenomenon. For example, in China, there are certain programs that are allowed, and other ones which are not. The same goes for stories, while some may be written others must just simply be ignored. In doing so, China is really attempting to control thinking, so
that the people of China think about the world in a particular way. This helps the government to sustain control of its people. 

The following video is titled The Propaganda Model and the Mainstream Media: Debate and the Liberal Bias. It is a debate by Noam Chomsky; a individual who strongly believed that it was the mainstream media’s responsibility to “shape, determine and restrict... how political and social debate can occur within the public discourse” (Marks, 2012). In this sense, the media is in effect a “propaganda organ for the elite”. According to Chomsky and Herman the elite “regularly take advantage of media routines... to manipulate them into following a special agenda”. 

If this is true, (and I believe it is) then the media is simply here just to serve the interests of the powerful and privileged. We are by no means getting all the facts or even both sides of the same story in some cases. We simply get the information those in power feel we should get. A trustworthy media, I think not! 


Media owners such as Rupert Murdoch use their media empire to propagate their personal views and shape the opinions of the public in matters of politics and foreign policy. According to journalist Sasha Abramsky, Murdoch: 


“has – and uses – the power to make’ and break politicians and his papers ‘have consistently opposed the peace movement, trade unions, progressive social programs … while supporting the death penalty, lower taxes at any cost and hawkish foreign policies”. 


To be honest, I think it is very difficult for journalists to obtain objectivity or impartiality anyway. All journalists have a political point of view. This is not something they automatically leave behind when they step into their job. I would like to believe that respectable journalists are well informed about the subjects they are covering. In believing this I would further argue that it is near-impossible to be well informed about a subject and not have an opinion. As Brian McNair also explains in News and Journalism in the UK, objectivity should be aimed for; however it will never be totally achieved. John Ryley, head of Sky News, told an audience at the Cambridge Union that the impartiality rules governing British news broadcasting should be abandoned!

 

(Image source) 

Cyber Warfare?

 

(Image source)

There has recently been a very popular topic taking over our news feeds – Cyber Warfare. According to Eugene Kaspersky “we are at the beginning of a new and dangerous era of cyber warfare”. It seems like the potential threat is so large that even the government appears to be taking steps in order to protect our nation. In fact, it is not only our government, to the best of my knowledge 12 out of 15 of the world’s largest military powers are building some sort of cyber warfare program which assess “tactics and capabilities” which shall be vital if there was ever a war in the future. 

The country at the top of the accusation list for the potential to set up a cyber attack is Iran. According to U.S Air Force Space Command leader General William Shelton Iran is or will become “a force to be reckoned with”. But what do we understand “cyber warfare” to be? The guardian wrote: “Hackers now are either criminal’s out to make money, activists out to protest or governments engaged in targeting their own citizens or attacking other governments, whether for espionage or cyber warfare”. But not EVERY malicious attack falls under the category of cyber warfare. The fact is that not many people really understand what an actual cyber attack is, it’s huge! We seem to have a misconception of what we believe it is which means that most of the time we are simply being paranoid over nothing! 

Take the following report for example: 

“Recent cyber-attacks have illustrated the ability of terrorist groups and foreign governments to cause havoc on the Internet. The United States Sentencing Commission’s website was destroyed when activists attacked the site to protect the federal prosecution of Bart Swartz which eventually led to Mr. Swartz committing suicide. For years, the Chinese government has launched massive daily attacks against our government and private industry which are aimed at disrupting government operations, stealing trade secrets and undermining economic activity.”  (Source)

Technollama use this report to show how minor incidents are blown out of proportion. The fact is that it was just a placid act of protest against a website which apparently was an example of “terrorist groups and foreign governments”. Hmm, okay then... To me this is pretty much the same as just tearing down a poster!! Major attack alert...! 

This small act of protest suddenly equated to “daily attacks” according to newspapers from Chinese hackers. Really, there are ‘daily’ attacks? Where’s the evidence? There doesn’t appear to be any. It’s just a reason for more money to be sent on cyber-security measure if you ask me.

So what is Cyber Warfare? 

Kaspersky defined cyber war as activity that uses cyber weapons to cause physical damage. However, this definition is not really accurate as it is possible for a cyber attack to occur without there being a physical damage. For example, imagine all the bank records of a single nation were erased, that nation could very well say that they were victim to a cyber attack even though no physical damage would have occurred. Perhaps a better definition is that given by government security expert Richard Clark in his book Cyber War. He defined cyber warfare as "actions by a nation-state to penetrate another nation's computers or networks for the purposes of causing damage or disruption”.

Nations prepare for a Cyber War? 

It has been predicted by security analysts that this year is the year that nation-sponsored cyber warfare will go mainstream. There are some that think that these attacks may even lead to actual deaths. 

Back in 2012 it was discovered that there had been extensive cyber attacks targeted at the Iranian government. Due to this, it is believed that Iran has also launched attacks aimed at American banks and Saudi oil companies. Whether this information is wholly true, I do not know. But if it is, then it would appear as though a cyber ‘Cold War’ is happening already. Security companies just think that the battle will become even more intense this year. I guess we will just have to wait and see on that!

The Digital Divide

The digital divide is a global issue. But what exactly is the “digital divide”? Well, it’s a term used to describe “the discrepancy between people who have access to and the resources to use new information and communication tools and people who do not have the resources and access to the technology”, for example, technologies such as the internet. It also describes the difference between people who have the skills and knowledge to use such technologies and people who do not. 


The gap between those who have access to technology and those deprived of access has widened considerably over recent years. There are many people in the world who are at a great disadvantage as they cannot or do not have access to new technologies such as the internet and the ranging opportunities they bring. You could say that these individuals are “socially excluded” and are on the wrong side of the “digital divide”. 


The diagram below shows the ratio of people online / offline in various countries across the world:

 

(Image source) 

Here are some facts and figures about the digital divide in the UK: 

* 1 in 4 adults in the UK have never used the internet 

* One third of the UK does not have access to the internet 

* 49% of the people in the UK who do not have access to the internet are in the lowest socio-economic groups 

* 70% of individuals living in social housing do not have access to the internet 

* 39% of the people who do not have access to the internet are above the age of 65 


For more facts and figures check out the following website where I found the above information: www.21stcenturychallenges.org

 Technologies such as the internet are very much a luxury, one I probably take for granted. I could not imagine a life without access to the internet, for me it is an essential. I use it every day for hours on end. Not only do I use the internet to socialise and communicate with others, but I use it to do my work. Some people’s careers revolve around the use of the internet, that’s how much of an impact the internet has on some people’s lives. Yet there are so many of us in Britain alone who do not have access to the internet. 

So why is it that some people do not have access to such technologies?

Well, there are a number of reasons. Income is one; some people simply cannot afford to have new technologies in their homes. Location is another in terms of internet access. Rural areas generally experience lower levels of connectivity and lag behind cities in terms of broadband connectivity.
But how important is it for people to have access to technologies such as the internet? Would it make much of a difference to their daily lives? The government seems to think so! A previous report from the government’s Policy Action Team stated some possible benefits for those currently deprived of access to the internet. These possible benefits include gaining knowledge and developing skills, pursuing hobbies and opportunities that may be available to them and having the ability to campaign and take part in the democratic process. 

So far, there has not been much success in narrowing the digital divide, and I doubt there will be any time soon!

The Rise Of Game Culture

So how exactly have video games evolved over the years? Very drastically I’d say. Some of the first versions of video games were not exactly devices that could be used by an average person in their homes. They were developed by programmers using huge university computers. In 1962 a group of students in Massachusetts Institute of Technology developed a game known as ‘Spacewar’. This game went on to have a great deal of influence on future game, but it could only be played at the Institute.

Then, in 1972, engineer Nolan Bushnell, and programmer Ted Dabney started a company in California known as ‘Atari’. This company produced coin-operated video games and their first major release was a game named Pong. It was basically like an electronic form of ping-pong that was simple enough that almost anyone could play it. They became very popular in arcades.

Another major brand at the time was Magnavox. They were the first to release an official home video game console – the Magnavox Odyssey.

 

(Image source) 

 
Much like early films, this console did not feature any recorded sound and its graphics are pretty much ancient by today’s standard. During this era, video gaming was very much an adult novelty. The market was mostly university educated males.

Atari’s game Pong was so successful that in 1977 they decided to launch their own home console – Atari 2600, which eventually sold 30,000,000 units.

 

(Image source) 

Following this Magnavox also launched an improved version of their Odyssey system. In fact they released more than one improved version of the original!
 

 

(Image source)

The novelty of video games did suffer a setback in 1983 when the market turned much of its attention to other devices such as personal computers. Not only this but many consumers were demanding newer versions which were continuously delayed, and then when production was rushed they would be badly designed new systems. The “great video game crash” drove most of the major video game players out of business.

However, not long after this crash other companies in Japan such as Sega and Nintendo started to make similar games but they were more smartly designed, had simpler controllers and they very much narrowed their focus games for children. The next few years saw the release of classic games such as Mario Bros, Final Fantasy and Donkey Kong.

(Image Source)

Nintendo also found success with the handheld Game Boy.

 

(Image source)

The years following 1991 saw a change from 2D video gaming to 3D video gaming, as well as the introduction of online multiplayer games. The first multiplayer game to be released was Neverwinter Nights. Then in 1992, came the Wolfenstein 3D which launched the first-person shooter genre.

In 1994, Sony made its entrance with the leading Playstation.

 

(Image source)

The Playstation had a more complex controller, it used a lot of licensed music, it has a more mature range of titles and was able to capture a more teenage audience than its competitors. Sony slowly became the dominant player in video gaming.

Today, the three major competitors are: Xbox 360, Sony Playstation 3 and Nintendo Wii. With a full 1080p HD graphics for both the Xbox 360 and the Playstation 3, and with Wii’s ground-breaking remote for sensing 3D movements, I think it is fair to say that video gaming has come a very long way!

 

 

(Image source) 

Video games are very much become an important part of our digital culture. The gaming industry today is at an industrial scale. A recent study has indicated that the average gamer is aged in their mid-late 20’s, with 60% being male and 40% being women. There are a large number of games now developed specifically for adults. Video games are not just for children or teenagers. They connect millions of players from all across the world. I would say that we have an unprecedented online gaming community amongst us.

Games even have an impact on journalism! Games have entered the news as shown in the book Newsgames: Journalism at Play by Ian Bogost, Simon Ferrari and Bobby Schweizer. Much of the book is based on explaining what games really are, and the functional and ethical challenges their creators face which happen to be very similar to those found by infographics and visualization designers. Journalists have started to borrow data visualization techniques from computers scientists and artists. Infographics and video play a huge role online and have become a vital part of digital journalism as they get audiences to interact with the news. Play the News claims to be an “engaging, community driven experience – imagine fantasy sports meets the evening news”.

With the Olympics the Guardian came up with the interactive game “Could you be a Medalist?” which gave readers a way to be a part of the games. The Guardian challenged readers to compare their personal best to the athletes competing from around the world.

 

(Image source) 

Games are a part of our everyday life now in ways that some people may have thought unimaginable. In the future gaming will only get more advanced.