This is an image of the first page of Google for the search: “esports, violence.”
When you search for “TV, violence” or “movie, violence” or even “radio, violence,” you get commentary after commentary on the meaning and social impact of violence in the respective environment.
Considerations of the impact of violence on TV, the movies, videos on YouTube, or even radio programs dominate the results.
The impact on children and young people in general, the impact on society at large, and the impact on those who eventually decide to take up real firearms against real people, at the mall, or at school.
As you can see, this is not the case with “esports, violence.”
Not on the first page, or the second, or the third page or the tenth.
For esports, this search is dominated by one event, the comments by IOC President Thomas Bach that violent esports would not be a part of the Olympic Games, and the almost universally negative and disparaging responses to those comments from people in the esports community.
This, in an activity which is dominated by young men for whom some standard terms of art are “kills,” “massacre,” and “headshot.”
Something is wrong when there is virtually NO reflection about the oceans of blood that are cybernetically shed in these games.
And this is not the blood that trickles down a battered boxer’s face [bad enough] or that dampens the tape on a fullback’s hands [also bad enough, not to mention the very real head trauma associated with that violence].
No… this is the gushing blood of annihilation… of killing.
When a YouTube reviewer broadcasts a cover like the one below, you know that things have gone too far.
A bridge too far.