Video games are not to blame for the English riots

It's an argument that's been heard many times before: that computer games are making the 'youth of today' increasingly prone to violence.

But can we really hold violent video games accountable for the recent UK riots?

There are voices in the media that certainly think so. Noel Gallagher, former frontman of Oasis, blasted the actions of the UK rioters in an interview with Bang Showbiz last week, blaming the 'age of violence' that has been created by the range of 'brutal TV and video games' on offer to teenagers today.

Jo Frost, the infamous TV 'Supernanny', agrees. In an article for the Daily Express, Frost lambasted the 'horrific games' for being 'so brutal they completely desensitise' players, while making them more aggressive.

However, it's not just media personalities; during the riots, an anonymous police constable told the Evening Standard that he blamed Grand Theft Auto for making teenagers who play the game 'want to live it for themselves'. But is there any truth in this theory?

Internet users were quick to respond to the accusations. Some chose to counter the constable's claims by pointing out that many of them were life-long gamers who had never committed an act of violence. One poster on a gaming website applied the same logic to other video games, pointing out how 'it's clear Pacman is responsible for obesity in the over 30s!'

Links have been found between prolonged exposure to violent games and an increased apathy towards violence. In 2006, Bruce Bartholow, a psychologist at University of Missouri, found that chronic players of violent games felt less aversion to violent images than players of non-violent games.

However, the problem during the riots wasn't apathy towards violence but people committing acts of violence themselves - no links have been found between violent video games and actual violent behaviour.

In fact, many of the rioters should not have been exposed to these violent video games, as the video games industry does a lot to warn about the suitability of specific games with the PEGI age rating system.

Grand Theft Auto, for example, is rated either 15+ or 18+, depending on the version. It is not the fault of the video games industry that these restrictions are not followed, although from next year laws will come into force requiring sellers to check the ages of games buyers.

Shops can be prosecuted if they sell games to under-age customers. Younger players may be more easily influenced by these violent games (although there are no definite links to prove this either) but the games companies cannot be held responsible for the actions of sellers who ignore the guidelines.

There is no evidence to link playing violent games to the acts of violence committed around England last week - to blame them seems little more than the reaction of a media and politicians desperate to blame someone for the destruction of the riots.