Devereux argues that ideological analysis is essential and necessary within media studies (Devereux 2003:151). Media institutions are increasingly owned by a few media conglomerates. Media concentration and conglomeration have serious implications, since they result in a reduction of “the diversity of cultural goods in circulation” (Murdock and Golding 1995:201) Consequently, there is often “a politically unbalanced range of news media” (Devereux 2003:101). There are a number of factors that further compound this problem. First, audience members are exposed to ever-more complex media texts. Further, these texts tend to be imbued with ideological principles. (Devereux pp.151-152). At this point, we might ask what an ideology is. Thompson argues that ‘Ideology, broadly speaking, is meaning in the service of power’ (Thompson, 1990:267). In Laughey’s view, an “ideology it is a set of ideas, norms, values, and beliefs set forth by a particular social group, institution, culture or religion” (2007:201). Van Dijk, argues that when media texts are driven by ideologies they are ‘self-serving’, they organize and legitimize the ‘social cognitions’ or knowledge-aims, interests, values, norms and identity of members within specific organizations, social groups, corporations and institutions (2001:198). Early interpretations of ideology were somewhat restricted. Marx framed his understanding of ideology within a canon of ideas that hinged around macro-sociology. He charted a problematic issue in The German Ideology around ownership of the “means of production” in a specific social formation, and the determinant relationship this has with the ruling ideas of an epoch (Marx and Engels: 1976). Marx stated that “the class which is the ruling material force of society is at the same time its ruling intellectual force” and, consequently, “...the ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas”. This is a consequence of the structure of society, as “the
computer games such as Call of Duty and Grand Theft Auto” and "Daniel got far too carried away with a fantasy world where killers and video games are normal and seemed to have forgotten about reality." (Griffiths and Morgan:2012). This article is a particular bad piece of journalism. The reader is being manipulated into associating violent video games with murders. Again, no solid evidence is supplied to substantiate these claims. In addition, any other potential reasons for this terrible murder are visibly absent. Therefore, the reader is being manipulated to reach the same ideological conclusion within the text. 4.4 The Topoi for the USA This research found that within the USA (2001 to 2014) the negative and neutral topoi surrounding video games were spread throughout different newspapers. The various topoi
surrounding video games that emerged reflects the general attitude by USA journalists during this period. The findings also revealed that since the William’s (2003) article and between 2001 to 2014 there were less negative themes (discourses or topoi) generated about video games consumption within the USA. This supports the position that newspapers can in some instances oppose dominant discourses and produce neutral, objective or ideologically-free texts (Van Dijk 2001:352). This overall shift within the USA suggests that, unlike the journalists within Ireland, US journalists have become more informed have been exposed to more neutral and objective studies on the effects of violent video game consumption. 4.5 The Violence Topoi within the USA This research found three negative and five neutral texts within the USA ‘violence’ topoi during 2001 to 2014. A significant shift occurred during the period since the predominantly negative themes that William’s (2003) article discovered. The discourses surrounding video games are no longer predominantly negative; instead, they have moved towards a more neutral and balanced position. 4.6 The Violence Negative ‘Topoi’ within the USA Analysis revealed that the discourses under discussion were ideologically driven. One article begins with the findings of a study that states that “children and teenagers who play violent video games show increased physical aggression months afterward” (George:2008) which sets the tone for the rest of the article. The tone of the texts is framed with the usage of specific words, what Wodak and Meyer (2009) would describe as a form of rhetoric in order to convey a degree of certainty, authority and taken for granted knowledge (p.9). The results from one of the studies, for example, are presented as “conclusive evidence that playing violent video games has harmful effects on children and adolescents" (George 2008). Evidence that is ‘conclusive’ is beyond
doubt or an indisputable fact; all studies that are contrary to these findings must be erroneous. Therefore, the text is leading to the reader to reject any studies not presented, studies that may oppose or contradict some of the negative assertions formulated by the research that is present. This particular form of manipulation confirms Foucault’s assertion of how discourse can become so effective in executing its power (Foucault 1989:25). Throughout the article there is an appeal to authority: “lead author Craig A. Anderson, a psychology professor at Iowa State University and director of its Center for the Study of Violence” (George: 2008). The pre-modifying nouns used to describe the researcher are ‘lead author,’ which immediately connotes someone who is a front-running authority in his field. To further buttress his authoritative status he is named a ‘psychology professor’ and ‘director’ of a ‘Study of Violence’. It is clear that the journalist wants to lead the reader to think in a particular way rather than allow him/her to make up their own mind by empowering them with other studies that oppose the argument under discussion. In another article the only experts referred to were those who argued that violent video games can have terrible effects on people who play them: “psychology professor who trained at the University of California” and “Craig Anderson, an Iowa State University psychology professor who is among the top scholars studying video-game violence” argue that "[t]hings that we would never allow on television, and probably not even in the movies, we have them in video games," (De Vise 2005) Notwithstanding the fact that films like the ‘Hostile’, ‘Saw’ and ‘Nightmare on Elm Street’ franchises are filled with bloody and gruesome murders. The only two experts referred happen to be in agreement with each other. To find an opposing argument within the text we must look to a young man who is not an expert but a ‘subject’ participating in an
problem. "They think it's just a phase the kids are going through and that when you tell them to pull the plug out and put it away the problem is gone. "But it's not that simple: this is a problem on a par with alcohol or drug addiction - but with a much, much, younger age profile." Appendix 3 “Critics Takes Aim at Violence in Video Games” Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (Pennsylvania) 2007, 1 February, Janice Crompton. “Featuring everything from obscene gestures to accusations that this generation is the "most self-absorbed and egocentric" in recent history, California University of Pennsylvania hosted a raucous debate Tuesday on violence in video games. Although speakers Gerard Jones, a San Francisco culture critic and writer, and Jack Thompson, a Miami lawyer known as the "virtue vigilante," cordially debated the effects of violence on children and even found points of agreement, the crowd zeroed in on Mr. Thompson for his much-vilified views on youth and the video game industry.