Bully: When Does a Video Game Cross a Line?

Ever since video games became more than just two dots on a screen that you paddle back and forth, people have cried out that they're too violent, send the wrong message, or make kids lazy. The last two points are debatable, but game-makers will have to plead no contest to the violence factor, which is rampant in many of the most popular games today. But at what point does a game go too far?

Reports flooding the 'net claim that a group of teachers acround the world are requesting that a new video game, called Bully: Scholarship Edition, be banned from stores. According to the Globe & Mail, the game includes all of the teen angst and self-confidence issues that are often found in the high school scene, complete with fights (including shoved heads in toilets!), naked photos for laughs, and the like.

Let me start by saying that I've seen (or heard of ) some pretty violent video games involving everything from chain-sawed killings, to ripping someone's insides out, biting off heads, and even picking up prostitutes and stealing cars. When it comes to teens and pre-teens, I've always felt that, as long as they understand the difference between fiction and reality, these games are simply for the purpose of having "fun", enjoying comraderie, and perfecting hand/eye co-ordination. But when a game involves realistic situations tailored to a young crowd (the game is rated Teen for those 13 and up), a red flag goes up in even my typically open-minded head.

What's more, the game is apparently a sequel to the already-available Bully, which also caused a stir when it was released a few years ago, although it still managed to make its way to store shelves.

It's very unlikely that a kid will find himself in a lone dungeon with some weird creatures dressed in metal, so separating that fiction from reality should be a fairly easy task for any sane-minded kid. And being a gangster that pulls people out of cars and has random shooting sprees on the streets is pretty far-fetched as well (again, for any sane kid). I don't believe that participating in games like this will affect a child's mindset in the slightest. But when you're looking at a real world environment that's just like his, especially if the kid playing the game is typically on the receiving end of such bullying in real life, it's a bit disturbing. The issue, I think, isn't so much the violence as it is the probable ability to relate to these sensitive situations.

I won't make a judgement call on the issue without having actually seen the game (which the publisher, Vancouver-based Rockstar Games, claims is "one of the funniest games you will play.") Perhaps it isn't as bad as people think. But all I can think when I read things like this is thank God for good ol' Super Mario and clean, fun (and G-rated!) games like Rock Band and Guitar Hero.

And the No. 1 Invention of the Year is...

Time magazine has deemed Apple's iconic iPhone the "invention of the year". If this doesn't indicate the importance of design, functionality, and, most important, consumer attention, in creating products and services that will "make a difference," I don't know what does!

Some may not agree with this decision, however, especially since so many other influential inventions have come forth in 2007: products and technologies that help combat environmental damage, help prevent injuries or harm from natural disasters, and even advances in medical science. There have even been tons of technological innovations for the physically disabled, like more advanced electronic prosthetics for amputees, and even high-tech wheelchairs that help make life easier for their owners.

According to the Globe & Mail, the reason the iPhone was chosen was, not surprising, because of its look, functionality, and features. "The features themselves may not be groundbreaking," reads the article, "but the way in which Apple presents them is." I can't disagree with that: Apple certainly knows how to market products, and get people excited about them which, after all, is what technology should be about.

As for Time's list, I get the impression it's meant to be taking light-heartedly anyway: last year's top invention was online video sensation YouTube.

I look forward to reading the entire list, which is scheduled to appear in this Friday's issue.

What product/technology would you deem the top invention of 2007?

Swear Like a Sailor - It's Good For Morale!

In most offices, swearing is considered a "no no", and highly discouraged, if not reprimanded. However, according to a report in the Globe & Mail, a team of British researchers have found that swearing in the office can actually help boost employee morale.

I can believe it: if you're apt to swearing in the office, it's highly likely that you work in an environment, and with people, for which you feel comfortable. After all, dirty words wouldn't be spewing from your mouth in front of just anyone! Sure, it would be déclassé to even think of engaging in such behaviour when there are visitors in the office or meetings taking place. But if it's just you and the team, why hold back when you're frustrated? As long as no one is offended, go ahead and break out a few choice words if your PC crashes, or you're under a lot of stress with deadlines!

Interestingly, the study discovered that hospital nurses were one of the top offending groups (yet they're always pleasant around patients, right?); and women overall actually swear as much, if not more, than men. Other industries that were high on the swearing list included restaurants and construction sites.

"The researchers hope that the study will serve not only to acknowledge the part that swearing plays in our work and our lives," cited the Globe report, "but also to indicate that leaders sometimes need to think differently and be open to intriguing idea."

Translation: an office with a more open environment where people feel they can speak candidly (so long as its not abusive or offensive to anyone) can help ease the stress of a day's work.
$&%@, ya!

E.T., Phone….My Cell?

Remember the days when you had to be some fancy-schmancy business person, or a well-connected techie with deep pockets in order to own a cell phone? And even when you did own one, it was a huge, brick-styled contraption that surely didn’t spell convenience in every sense of the word. Today, cell phones have grown so much in popularity, that recent reports indicate they’ve actually surpassed landline phones!

The Globe & Mail cites figures of $36.1 billion for cellular and Internet services in Canada in 2006, compared to just $9.75 billion for local phone services. Cellular phones accounted for 35 per cent of the total revenue with an impressive $12.64 billion.

According to a recent report, two-thirds of Canadian homes have at least one cellular phone; while about 7.5 million residents have broadband Internet access. I represent a growing category of consumer that doesn’t even own a landline service or phone, and strictly uses a cell phone and the Internet for communication.

In fact, I touched upon this very topic in the December 2006 issue of Marketnews Magazine (High-Tech Telephony, pg. 66). With the growing number of people who own cell phones, the traditional “home phone” is becoming a thing of the past.

The key word, however, is “traditional”, as neat, new home phone incarnations attempt to rejuvenate the category. These include things like Bluetooth phones, which connect with your Bluetooth-equipped cell phone to allow for making and receiving calls in areas of the home where you might not get adequate cellular reception (e.g. a basement); and Skype-capable multi-handset bundles that let you chat via the Internet in every room of the home using a traditional-looking handset.

It’s great to see even the home telephony sector moving forward with technology. Members of the consumer electronics industry can read High Tech Telephony by logging into the digital edition of Marketnews Magazine. Consumers can check out Talkin’ on the Cheap, a hands-on review of five Skype phones, on pg. 86 in the December 2006 Holiday Issue of here’s how! magazine (Click Here to download the full issue in PDF format: http://www.hereshow.ca/Uploads_Issues/vol5_no6_FullIssue.pdf)

[Photo: GE’s 28300EE2 2-in-1 Internet phone system can function as both a traditional landline phone, and an Internet phone. This model, and four others, were reviewed in the Dec. 2006 issue of here's how! magazine.]

AOL Settles Suit

AOL has just settled a U.S. suit for $3 million bucks. The money will be awarded to customers who claimed the company continued to charge them for service even after they canceled their accounts.

Apparently it was difficult to cancel an AOL account. VERY difficult. The first thing that comes to my mind about AOL in Canada is the massive marketing promotion it held back in the dial-up days. I’d be surprised if there’s anyone out there who doesn’t recall having received an AOL installation CD through the mail, or some other promotional means. The CD was clearly emblazoned with the promise of a “free trial”. The only exception was that you had to provide a credit card number, and, unless you called to cancel before the trial period was up, charges would begin incurring each month. Fair enough, as long as the rules and regulations were clearly stated. Ahh, memories...

Anyway, back to the U.S.: according to the suit, which was settled with 48 states and the District of Columbia, AOL will, in addition to refunding money to subscribers, ensure that customers are able to easily cancel an account online.

The Globe & Mail report cites one particular consumer complaint as helping to get the wheels of this suit in motion. One Vincent Ferrari not only wrote about his cancellation woes on his blog; he also recorded and posted audio conversations he had with reps trying to cancel the account! This led to a swarm of commentary from others, as well as a slew of TV and radio interviews.

It’s safe to assume that AOL call centre reps in the States have been provided with updated training on dealing with account cancellations.