Violence in the media certainly seems to be a hot topic in the US. With the recent release of the Byron Review in the UK, it seems the same problems plague Europe as well. Many facets of the media have been blamed in the past for the perceived increase in violence - TV, film, art, etc. It's no surprise that an interactive form of entertainment such as video games are now being blamed and targetted as well. Some of the recent articles by the press seem to incite a hysteria about gaming - as if it is corrupting our youth into violent commandos intent on shooting up the world.

Now I'm not foolish. I certainly acknowledge that violent games, shows, films, etc. will certainly have some influence on susceptible individuals. There is truth to the densisitization and glorification of violence games can cause. I'm not going to stand in front of all the scientific and behavorial evidence, stick my head in the sand, and ignore it. However, I also have different thoughts on how this should be handled. Detractors of video games insist that violent games must be either censored or outright banned. I completely disagree.

The world, itself, is a violent place. As much as we want to shield our children and loved ones from the image of violence, it is a reality. Rather than have us stick our heads in the sand and pretend we live in utopia - as those detractors would have you do - I advocate a little more responsible approach. Parents need to be parents. Plain and simple. While there are many factors in determining a person's value system and judgement, parents play the primary and most influential role. More so than videogames. More so than the TV. More so than film and books. Many of these supposed experts are quick to point out the detrimental role of video games, but why don't they - in all of their knowledge - point out the bigger issue. Parenting. Adults in our society need to step up to the plate and do their job. Parenting is a full time occupation. It requires an incredible investment of time, energy, emotion, and discipline.

Most of us aren't going to play a game of Ghost Recon or Halo, and then decide to shoot up the world. We find it ridiculous that such associations would even be suggested. Why? Because we can tell right from wrong. Because we were raised by caring parents. People that took the time to know what we were doing. People that kept tabs on us. People that weren't afraid to tell us "no" when we did something wrong.

Todays parents are failing in those tasks. Many of them don't have the time and sadly the desire to be a positive influence in their child's life. These adults have busy work lives, and with a changing society, often both parents work. This translates into less supervision and less time with their children. Is it no surprise that children of today are having more issues? They're being raised by the internet rather than their parents. That does leave them more suscpetible to outside influence. However, the solution is not to ban every video game other than mickey mouse and the happy house, but rather get the parents more involved. Games have ratings on them. Every game I've bought in the last several years has a big E, T, or M on it. Any parent with half a brain can easily determine whether a game is too mature for their child just based on that. It's not that hard to keep tabs on what your kids are playing - if you're willing to put the time in. The government should not take the role of the parent and regulate what kids can and can't play. That's the parents role - and the child would be better served if the parents played that role. Why don't these so called experts see that? Are they too busy scapegoating games to make that connection?