Dopass.com

Please understand when you read this, that this was written with my tongue planted firmly in cheek and my tin-foil Napoleon hat cocked at a raucous angle. This is satire.

This is the story of what's Really Going On, the RGO of the industry arch-nemesis and champion for constrained speech, Jack Thompson...

You all know me here, I'm Snipehunter - the wage slave MMO designer and zealot for free speech. You've heard me talk about Jack Thompson, before. I think Jack Thompson is irrational. I've confided that I think he needs to seek help. I've explained that I think he's essentially the worst kind of evil we breed in America today, the fundamentalist zealot. There are few people I respect less than Jack Thompson (though, unfortunately for his case, many of those that I do respect less are game developers).

So, please understand the grave tonality of my soul when I report to you that I believe that Jack Thompson may in fact be the single most inspired plot the game industry has ever unleashed upon the world, for the sake of profit. That's right. You heard me. Jack Thompson is a mole. Let me explain.

In the aftermath of the recent Virginia Tech massacre, the first person to exhibit our trademark American vulgarity - to use the massacre for his or her own ends - was Jack Thompson. There he was, not even a full day after they occurred, not even a half day after they occurred, linking the massacre to video games. To Counter-Strike, the oh so realistic murder-simulator that trained this man to kill. Never mind that the network prediction code in counter-strike was so bad that real marksmen actually fair worse in the game than people who have no idea how to shoot a gun, never mind that the shooter in fact likely hadn't played the game in years - if he played at all - it was the game that did it! The news was happy to put him on and let him jabber on about it.

Then we found out that the killer wasn't an avid gamer, but did that stop Jack Thompson? Oh no, he went on Chris Matthews to say it all again. Only, this time? This time it was different. Jack was taken down a peg by the old hard hall questions. He seemed a little shaken, a little more like the apparently crazy man I've come to loathe. To make matters worse for Jack, he just settled his case with Take-two in a settlement that included a provision disallowing him from bringing personal action against the company for its games. He's lost his primary soap-box already and here was the TV, barking back at him and essentially demanding that he face reality.

I have to admit I was happy, at first.

But then I was pointed to PaulLevinson.net, where he explains what happened during an appearance he had with Jack Thompson on CNBC. In the blog, Mr. Levinson asks (paraphrased), "Why do these people give Jack Thompson the time to speak?"

Why do they give him the time to speak? I thought, to myself. It's almost like they're working with him, whether they know it or not. Right then, I remembered a recent BBC study that finds a direct link between the popularity of a game and its negative publicity. The more a game, like say Grand Theft Auto, is covered as being too violent and dangerous, the more youngsters want to play it, because it's "bad" or "forbidden."

That's when it suddenly got cold, and the blood drained from my face. That's when it occurred to me ask, "What if Jack Thompson isn't real?"

Think about it. Jack Thompson's targets have almost always turned out to be major sellers, or were major sellers that were just about done in terms of sales cycle (like Doom). What if the entire point of Jack Thompson isn't to actually ban or block video games, but to keep them in the public eye?

That's right. What if Jack Thompson is a plant? Maybe it started as something other than a conspiracy... Maybe during his first game lawsuit the game publisher or developer ponied up some serious cash for Jack to throw the case... Maybe after that he offered, or maybe word that he was for sale spread through the back channels of the industry's execs.... Or maybe it didn't. Maybe Jack Thompson was always working for the industry fat-cats. Either way, it explains a lot.

Why his laws are so horribly constructed that they never pass constitutional muster, for example (they're just for show, so the industry can "fight" and win). Or why he always seems to irrational and persistent, even in the face of facts (he's selling you the "games are bad" image; he's not trying to actually convince you of anything). To be fair to the media, I doubt they know - this whole "wag the dog" plan of theirs only works if the media behaves appropriately, which they have done brilliantly. By following the ratings, indulging fundamentalist America and using sensationalism to sell ad space they played right into the industry's hands. Until recently, they could throw Jack up on TV and sells us his brands ("games are what the cool bad kids do" for the kids and "games are the reasons your kids are bad, not you" for their parents - they need to play along too, just like the media).

So, what changed? The national attention span ran out. Jack was getting tiresome, so Take-two used him for one last glorious outing - they had him start the lawsuit fiasco that ended with the recent settlement. Then they made him a patsy, so the world could say "he went too far" and ignore him in the future, without feeling bad about it. It was brilliantly executed; I expected to see him on TV after the massacre. His behavior didn't seem odd at all, but then I expected he had some small inconsequential fact to fall back on when questioned, but he really didn't this time. What little truth did turn out to be involved was literally that, inconsequential... Then he got grilled on TV...

Then I started to think. You should, too. The next time you hear Jack Thompson - if you even do - don't listen to him!

Jack Thompson isn't real.

- Snipehunter

Technorati Tags: Gaming