Kotaku reported that the Red Cross recently investigated whether the Geneva and Hague conventions should be applied to the fictional recreation of war in video games. If found in violation, governments might be "encouraged" to adopt laws to regulate the video game industry.
The investigation was precipitated by the 2007 Geneva-based The Forum for Human Rights in Lucern (TRIAL), which published a report examining whether and to what extent international humanitarian law is respected in computer and video games.
At heart of this debate is the subject of immersion. First-person shooters in particular place the player in a character's shoes, and there has been plenty of hand-wringing in the past over whether or not exposure to virtual killing makes real life players better killers. The moral consequences of the player's actions go beyond merely killing opponents:
"The practically complete absence of rules or sanctions is nevertheless astonishing: civilians or protected objects such as churches or mosques can be attacked with impunity, in scenes portraying interrogations it is possible to torture, degrade or treat the prisoner inhumanely without being sanctioned for it and extrajudicial executions are simulated," they wrote.
One has to wonder where this train of thought ends. If video games are under review, what about other forms of entertainment with deeper immersion? Is the tabletop role-player who plays an evil character at risk? Or the live action role-player (LARPer) who commits in-game murder?
After a firestorm of controversy over the investigation, the The International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement (ICRC) posted a response on their web site:
The 31st International Conference met in November 2011 in Geneva with the overall objective of strengthening international humanitarian law and humanitarian action. In a side event, participants also explored the role that the law of armed conflict plays, or does not play, in simulations of war. They considered various ways in which the rules applicable in armed conflict could feature in simulations. The side event was an informal discussion; no resolution or plan of action was adopted.
Comments