Controversial Video Game Art

[ezacharyk]

Let me ask this:

Why is it when Wafaa Bilal made his Virtual Jihad game (http://www.gamepolitics.com/2008/07/21/renewed-controversy-over-iraqi-artist039s-virtual-jihadi-game) about recruiting a suicide bomber to kil George Bush, the majority of gamers came to his defence, but when Douglas Edric Stanley made his game (http://www.gamepolitics.com/2008/08/22/leipzig-con-artist039s-mashup-911-and-space-invaders-creates-controversy) about the futility of our current counter terrorism strategy, the majority of gamers attacked him?

What was the difference? Both were discussing almost the same thing. Both were part of art exhibits. Both were games. What was the difference? Why did one band us together in its defense while the other was collectively despised?

I would like to understand this better.

[GamesLaw]

Let me ask this:

Why is it when Wafaa Bilal made his Virtual Jihad game (http://www.gamepolitics.com/2008/07/21/renewed-controversy-over-iraqi-artist039s-virtual-jihadi-game) about recruiting a suicide bomber to kil George Bush, the majority of gamers came to his defence, but when Douglas Edric Stanley made his game (http://www.gamepolitics.com/2008/08/22/leipzig-con-artist039s-mashup-911-and-space-invaders-creates-controversy) about the futility of our current counter terrorism strategy, the majority of gamers attacked him?

What was the difference? Both were discussing almost the same thing. Both were part of art exhibits. Both were games. What was the difference? Why did one band us together in its defense while the other was collectively despised?

I would like to understand this better.

It's because people have a tendency to use concepts like "Freedom of speech" and "artistic merit" to cover for their own personal biases.

[Thefremen]

Let me ask this:

Why is it when Wafaa Bilal made his Virtual Jihad game (http://www.gamepolitics.com/2008/07/21/renewed-controversy-over-iraqi-artist039s-virtual-jihadi-game) about recruiting a suicide bomber to kil George Bush, the majority of gamers came to his defence, but when Douglas Edric Stanley made his game (http://www.gamepolitics.com/2008/08/22/leipzig-con-artist039s-mashup-911-and-space-invaders-creates-controversy) about the futility of our current counter terrorism strategy, the majority of gamers attacked him?

What was the difference? Both were discussing almost the same thing. Both were part of art exhibits. Both were games. What was the difference? Why did one band us together in its defense while the other was collectively despised?

I would like to understand this better.

It has very little to do with the subject matter and much more to do with the presentation which people will take offense at.

Personally, I have no problem with either but I'm not one to easily take offense. I'd say if anything some people see it as him saying "lol two towers were destroyed by aliens".