Slashdot Mirror
72% of Xbox 360 Gamers Approve of "More Military Drone Strikes"
An anonymous reader writes "During the latest presidential debate, Xbox 360 owners were being polled live, as the debate was progressing, on a number of different questions, and asked to answer 'Yes,' 'No,' or 'Don't Know' using their gamepad. Out of these questions, one particular question produced a surprising result: Xbox 360 owners were asked 'Do you support more use of drone aircraft to attack suspected terrorists?' 20% answered this question with 'No'. 8% answered 'Don't know.' And a whopping 72% answered the question 'Yes.' This raises an interesting question in and of itself: Is the average Xbox 360 player at all aware that drone strikes in countries like Pakistan cause a serious number of civilian deaths on a regular basis? Or do Xbox 360 gamers live in a parallel, game-inspired universe, where a real world 'Drone Strike' is something seriously cool, just like it is cool to use it in popular games like Call of Duty? In other words, does playing simulated war games like COD on a game console on a daily basis, and enjoying these games, cause gamers to become blinkered to the at times seriously dire real world consequences of using military tactics like drone strikes for real?"
How many military-esque games have civilians (particularly in multi-player mode)?
In any of the games I've played where drones etc were an option, it's just "your team" (good guys) and the "other team" (bad guys).
A drone strike/airstrike/satellite bombardment/etc only hurt military characters. Heck, on many settings you don't even get friendly-fire.
Is your average gamer going to know what a real drone strike is like? Probably not. Accompany the poll with some documentation + pictures of mangled civilians and see if what approval rate you get.
It probably didn't help that that question was more loaded than an Irishman at a wake on St. Patrick's Day. If you ask "Do you support doing X to attack suspected terrorists?" you could pretty much get at least a two-thirds majority no matter WHAT the "X" in question was.
What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
Or, as so well put in "Yes, Minister":
I was somewhat naive in those days. I did not understand
how the voters could be both for it and against it. Dear old
Humphrey showed me how it's done.
The secret is that when the Man In The Street is approached
by a nice attractive young lady with a clipboard, he is
asked a "series" of questions. Naturally the Man In The
Street doesn't wants to make a good impression and doesn't
want to make a fool of himself. So the market researcher
asks questions designed to elicit "consistent" answers.
Humphrey demonstrated the system on me. "Mr. Woolley, are
you worried about the rise in crime among teen-agers?"
"Yes," I said.
"Do you think there is a lack of discipline and vigorous
training in our Comprehensive Schools?"
"Yes."
"Do they respond to a challenge?"
"Yes."
"Might you be in favor of reintroducing National Service?"
"Yes."
Well, naturally I said yes. One could hardly have said
anything else without looking inconsistent. Then what
happens is that the Opinion Poll publishes only the last
question and answer.
Of course, the reputable polls didn't conduct themselves
like that. But there weren't too many of those. Humphrey
suggested that we commission a new survey, not for the Party
but for the Ministry of Defence. We did so. He invented the
question there and then:
"Mr. Woolley, are you worried about the danger of war?"
"Yes," I said quite honestly.
"Are you unhappy about the growth of armaments?"
"Yes."
"Do you think there's a danger in giving young people guns
and teaching them how to kill?"
"Yes."
"Do you think it is wrong to force people to take up arms
against their will?"
"Yes."
"Would you oppose the reintroduction of National Service?"
I'd said "Yes" before I'd even realized it, d'you see?
Humphrey was crowing with delight. "You see, Bernard," he
said to me," "you're the perfect Balanced Sample."