The Media and Gaming Addiction

Now unless you have been hidden under a rock for the last few weeks you may have noticed some articles and videos appearing regarding gaming addiction. I’m here to clarify some things that the media may have missed in their desire to jump on this in a way to criticise gaming.

The World Health Organisation (WHO) classified gaming addiction as a recognised condition in January. Now several articles and videos have been appearing from various media outlets have jumped on the diagnosis and created some worry amongst gamers and parents.

The specifics from the Q&A section when this was announced in January 2018 are as follows:

“Gaming disorder is defined in the draft 11th Revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) as a pattern of gaming behavior (“digital-gaming” or “video-gaming”) characterized by impaired control over gaming, increasing priority given to gaming over other activities to the extent that gaming takes precedence over other interests and daily activities, and continuation or escalation of gaming despite the occurrence of negative consequences.

Also following on from this, there is criteria which are required in order to diagnose the condition as described by “For gaming disorder to be diagnosed, the behaviour pattern must be of sufficient severity to result in significant impairment in personal, family, social, educational, occupational or other important areas of functioning and would normally have been evident for at least 12 months.” Both quotes taken from the WHO announcement/online Q&A on their site from January 2018, accessed by myself for this article in June 2018.

I think the mass media may have missed these specifics.

This does not mean all gamers are addicted. It also doesn’t mean that all children will necessarily be addicted to gaming. Nor does it mean that gaming for an arbitrary length of time a week equals gaming addiction. Now BBC, and other media outlets, repeat that paragraph after me please. I’m going to be focusing on the BBC in this article, since they are meant to be one of the more trustworthy sources for news and they, in my opinion, have been implying that gaming addiction is based on time spent playing.

The BBC posted this video regarding gaming addiction, entitled “WHO: Gaming addiction a mental health condition“, the first time I spotted this was as shown in the image above. The title shown in the tweet says “Computer game addiction: I spend 20 plus hours a week gaming”. The first title sounds factual, the second heavily implies something that simply isn’t cut and dry.

The implications in this video are that gaming for 20 hours a week is a gaming addiction. It is not that simple. Gaming 20 hours a week could be perfectly healthy and is for some people. The implication is this condition predominantly affects kids, and also suggests that Fornite (the game du jour for the media to mention) is involved in these cases.

I have some queries about this video as well. The children in this video could have been recorded for another purpose, with the text about gaming addiction added later, or it could have been recorded specifically for this piece. The first possibility I would say is misuse, the second is laziness on the side of the journalist as instead of getting relevant material they went with a group of healthy and not addicted children who quite like Fortnite and both options are misleading. BBC you can and should do better. One of the children in that video even mention that they play a bit less on weekends as they like playing outside, as in they still take part in other hobbies and activities. This hardly sounds addicted, so there is some disparity between the video and the text applied to the video. The only bit of this video containing is brief and appears disconnected to the rest so doesn’t add anything, in my opinion. Perhaps this was the only dedicated bit recorded for the gaming addiction purpose.

Another video shared by the BBC surrounding gaming addiction is entitled “How does gaming affect your brain?“. This focuses on Hamish, who loves playing Fornite, and his brother Noah, who doesn’t, playing Fornite and scanned whilst playing to see how their brains are affected and how they differ. Basically the results show that Hamish is immersed and connected to the game, whilst Noah isn’t. Hamish’s scans show that it is a rewarding experience for him and he is engaged with it. Then they had to ask if this shows addiction. A game can be enjoyed without addiction. They also suggest that Hamish may be less focused and need more stimulation because of this. I get connected to, engaged by and have emotional responses to games, as well as TV shows, films and books. It is possible for this to happen in a perfectly healthy way. Obviously this doesn’t go into detail but the assumption that someone who enjoys a particular game, with a scan showing he had a connection to it, could mean he is addicted is dangerous and premature. It is a leap that I think a lot of people could have made based on how this was produced.

The problem I have with gaming disorder is that it is quite vague. The WHO definition is not the clearest definition and the reliance on interpretation and guesswork for timescales may not act in a patient’s best interest. Terminology such as “gaming taking precedence over other interests” is not cut and dry. I would say my top four hobbies, in order for the moment, would be gaming, writing, cross stitch, photography. In a few months that list could be cross stitch, reading, gaming, writing. Or writing, reading, photography, gaming. My point is the order of preference for hobbies change for me, it depends on how I am feeling, what I feel like doing, what the weather is like, if I feel in the mood for. That is only considering a small selection of my interests. So if I’m prioritising gaming it could be natural, and just how I feel at the time.

At the moment I game more, there are games I want to play and games give me some time away from the real world into one where I can be anything and I can focus on something else. Am I prioritising gaming over other hobbies and interests? Technically yes. Is this unhealthy? No. The other difficulty with terminology I see is “negative consequences”. In terms if a diagnosis what would count as negative consequences, or at least what counts as sufficient negative consequences for diagnosis. This is down to the view of the medical professional, which is likely to vary by doctor, by practice, by city, by country, by whatever other demographics you could throw in. And once more into the breach with terminology, “for at least 12 months”. I have also seen it quoted, though I am unsure if the accuracy, that in severe cases this can be shortened. This calls into question what classes as severe, at what point do we begin measuring the time scale from in order to make a diagnosis and if this is helpful or not.

Whatever the case is gaming addiction is here to stay. What we need to be careful with is not to overreact and not to jump to conclusions. (If any journalist is reading this, please be reminded of this point be careful, don’t jump to conclusions and don’t imply something that simply isn’t true.)

How do you think the media has coped with the announcement of a gaming addiction?

18 thoughts on “The Media and Gaming Addiction

  1. Awesome piece. About time someone actually dug into the fine print of WHO’s revision of the ICD, and called out the media for their constant lack of comprehension of it. Nice one 👍

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Thanks, I just wanted to clear up some things and point out that it isn’t as bad as the media seem to be making out. I just would like the media to try to understand and present it properly so people can understand it better rather than fearing that spending an arbitrary amount of time or being connected to a game means addicted.


  2. This was a very thorough analysis that puts a clear point across with convincing evidence and brilliant explanations. I feel like the BBC and other news outlets have been treading the same ground for many years over this topic, and it appears to be the case that they disorientate non-gaming viewers into creating an ideological, binary stereotype about this – they look to convince audience viewers into believing that gaming is ‘bad’. Everything out of moderation could be consider in some form ‘bad’, but that’s not to say that these things can’t also have many positives. For instance, puzzle games are known for lowering chances of dementia and some games, especially in the Wii and Pokemon Heartgold/Soulsilver era, influenced gamers to actually go outside and promoted healthy lifestyles.

    BBC saw their chance to exploit Fortnite’s popularity for an article, instead of discussing the larger issue at play here – parenting. Maybe in a few years time the detached audience will see games as an art form, not something desperately trying to negatively impact those playing them.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Thanks for reading and commenting.

      I have mentioned the benefits of gaming before within another article and just wanted to explore these videos specifically this time. The media does tend to enjoy creating something along the lines of games being bad and everything being really simple. It is going to be more influential to non-gaming parents who could be really worried by this. Everything in moderation and a number of hours or having a response emotionally or connecting to a game isn’t automatically a bad thing or an addiction. There are good things from gaming and not everything within gaming is the same (games aren’t all GTA/CoD/Fortnite etc).

      The other issue around children and gaming that needs to be considered is parenting in terms of a parents understanding of what their child is playing and for how long etc. Parenting is tough but you can see the times where the parents don’t know what is appropriate or what is being played. For adults especially non-gaming adults, hopefully it is understood that gaming addiction exists but it isn’t necessarily everywhere although given the media attention that is very one sided it may not be easy to get that through to non-gamers.

      Liked by 1 person

  3. This is an excellent, excellent article. This is what journalism should be like.

    The media’s reaction to this creates a viscious circle – some people don’t approve of gaming in the same way that they approve of, say, reading. The media knows this and also knows that gaming is popular and therefore their articles about gaming will get lots of views from both sides. However, by deliberately making their articles negative in tone, they encourage more people to have a negative view of gaming, and the more people have this view without actually understanding or bothering to read the facts, the more negative articles we are going to see. The mass media vilifying gaming isn’t new and is extremely frustrating.

    Sadly, I don’t think it is going to go away any time soon, but we can all keep stamping our feet and you never know, maybe they will see reason and concentrate on reporting the facts rather than making anti-gaming propaganda.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Thanks. The media do create a vicious circle with the reporting of any gaming related article. They will get a lot of views from them which won’t encourage any change in the way they report on gaming in the future. I do wish they would at least be careful in how they word things as for non-gamers, especially parents who don’t understand gaming, it has the potential to be influential on their opinions and not in a helpful way.

      Maybe one day an article on gaming won’t immediately be negative and will be measured and appropriate with facts.

      Liked by 1 person

  4. Short answer to your question: they’ve handled it very poorly.

    This is a great article, and I think you outlined the difference between a hobby and a real problem very clearly. I’ve written a couple of articles on this, myself, so it’s nice to see other people looking at the issue with a more critical eye, as well.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Thanks so much for this comment Athena. You speak about these things so well, I was fairly sure you had done some posts on this in the past but wasn’t 100% sure.

      I was trying to make sure that if anyone read it they could see that there is a difference and simple definitions don’t exist on this subject despite what the media tries to say. I haven’t seen an article that mentions that there is diagnostic criteria and doesn’t try to overly simplify things or immediately cast all gaming with the one brush.

      Liked by 1 person

  5. Awesome write up! The media seems to love attacking video game at every opportunity. I blame slow news days, haha. It use to make me angry now I just kinda eye roll about it. I also wish the WHO would do a study or something (I know nothing about how they operate, haha) on the benefits of gaming as well as the problems. I truly believe that video games have the potential to be powerful therapy tools for various medical issues (depression, stroke recovery, etc.). I would like to see more effort put into researching that.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I know there have been studies on benefits of gaming, not related to WHO as far as I know, but they never seem to get the same sort of press. I think games have amazing potential for helping in so many ways and I think they do.

      Liked by 2 people

  6. Short answer, very badly but I’m not entirely convinced on the rationale or reasoning behind this push. Many activities if you use the narrow field of time spent involved as a leading criteria could be regarded as an addiction requiring intervention. The subjective viewpoint arguably would suggest an industry being denigrated from a position of moral authority, with no tangible or objective ‘good’ or measure of output then of course time spent gaming will be seen as ‘bad’ because you can’t measure a tangible benefit as a consequence of gaming. Arguably, the same viewpoint I would imagine was made about television a few decades back and is now seen as a viable form of entertainment in moderation so while the original WHO ruling is somewhat broad and encompassing, its legacy I don’t see having to much of a detrimental impact on the hobby.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s