April 03, 2019
When trigger warnings are not enough, nor are they a valid reason to potentially traumatise an audience
But they do create curiosity, viewing and increase the ratings of a video because human beings are intrigued by trauma and yet many cannot handle the impact.
Why Brecks last game is likely to create a panic and Cybertrauma
Gaming is inherently and mostly safe, as is the world we live in. Our nervous system responses have and are increasingly tapped into by the skewed narrative that is available through social media and new media outlets. Research from leading academics/scientists and researchers such as Steven Pinker has highlighted that as a society we have become less violent as a species and that the rates of homicide have decreased. However, this doesn’t sell news stories, does it? This narrative doesn’t keep your nervous system in high-stress response state, commonly known as fight/flight. It’s unlikely that you will believe in trust and safety if your newsfeed tells you otherwise. Gaming and the ‘negative issues’ that exist are often collected within this narrative. I write about these and know they do exist, however they exist in a small minority of cases and some of them are myths, not facts.
Current myths that are being argued by academics relating to gaming are focused on the hyperbolic claims that you will or have likely read online or in a newspaper. These are gaming does not (mostly) create addiction or disorders. violent video games do not produce violent gamers in the real world. The benefits of gaming outweigh the very few negative issues that we researchers are interested in and exploring to date. I have a number of podcasts on this subject matter so please go there to learn more.
However, this blog is about something that cannot be commented on YouTube (as the video comments have been disabled; of course)! I have actively studied, teach about and consult on. This is the framework of my theory and my PhD. It is called Cybertrauma and it relates to how we can be vicariously traumatised by media that we see, hear or read.
You see I am a trauma specialist and I work with children, adolescents and adults. I work in a practice whereby I know the impact of being a witness to another person’s trauma through and through and its why I teach on the subject of vicarious (cyber)trauma and self-care in the profession of being with and around trauma.
The impact of traumatic media upon the viewer
Traumatic means many different things and what is traumatic to one person is not always traumatic to another; You can’t or don’t get to decide that for another person, even if you are a professional. You are not the receiver of the image, video or text. Writing trigger warning actually creates a propensity for some to press play and watch or read/view. If there’s a slim chance that you will traumatise someone why do it? (see my previous blog on Cybertrauma by professionals for the why people actually do this).
Educating on the dangers to look out for online
I know we need to educate parents, professionals and other adults on the dangers we need to look out for in terms of young people and their online activities and perhaps we can also educate young people on these issues.
However, we must remember that even if your chorological age is 20, 30, 70 or 15 you may not emotionally be capable of processing images, videos and sound without having a traumatic response to that media. You may also have a background in which you have your own trauma and viewing material that is uncomfortable or traumatic may jiggle, unsettle or trigger your own nervous system stress response in a traumatic way. You can be traumatised by hearing about a traumatic event. If this can happen to an adult with a fully formed and mature brain imagine the impact on a developing brain of an adolescent.
A video that contains many CyberTrauma Issues
Today a video went live that contains many Cybertrauma issues. Whilst it comes from a place of best intent by the producers of the video it contains victim blaming language (such as the phrase “if only he had believed us” this is a trauma trigger for victims), it contains images of a grieving parent (mirror neuron responses, empathy and trauma triggers and is meant to create sadness and outrage in you- it’s a manipulation of your nervous system) and it contains a very scary message aimed at children and young people, yet the film has a suggested viewing rating of 15. This message, which is about trusting online friends, suggests that YOU (the child) are responsible for knowing who your online friends really are and every aspect about them and their abilities and patterns of potential grooming behaviours. Yet this grooming set of behaviours is not explained in the video, which leaves a deficit of knowledge about what to look out for, yet insinuates that you need to know this. How confusing for adolescents!
Do you really know, or should that be could you ever really know who everyone is you talk to online?
This video WILL be and HAS been shown to young people and no doubt will hit the million mark on views on YouTube very quickly. This of course will increase traffic to the makers of the film, who have previously created a number of films like this with all of the above issues. This will potentially win awards, be talked about as a great resource for education and yet the issues above miss the very important message as it is disguised as one that young people will be ‘fed’ as their responsibility.
Hyper-Rational Thinking Patterns
As young people think differently and have hyper-rational thinking patterns this message will be lost to normative maturational processes. To use a phrase you may have heard before: ‘it is likely to go in one ear and out the other’, but the trauma, oh that will be processed and may create further issues. I can tell you from the adolescents in my practice that this occurs and we as the adults show them it in the name of…scaring them into responsibility? How odd.
Sharing the trend adds to the algorithm
When you share that image/video of the trend, you add to the existing algorithm of the ‘trend’ and if it is an intention of perpetrators of a crime to advertise their product, i.e. to entice children to find out about their videos or games then the best people to do this for them already exist in a fear-driven world and they are the adults. Children do not have this advertising power, you do and so do schools, child-relatedd clubs, professionals who support children and other fear-driven parents. You literally advertise for them for free. Each and every time.
I wonder how many under 15’s will see this as it’s on YouTube? How many shares will take place over social media platforms in the very same fear-driven act that made ‘Momo’ so famous? I wonder how many children (adults and people with anxiety) will have nightmares become afraid of everyone they now speak to online? (what about the real world, where grooming exists too?). I wonder if this really was the best way to communicate this message?
Perhaps we need a rethink… actually, I’m suggesting that this is actually what needs to happen, pronto.
Shock/Horror, Shame, Fear and Victim blaming are not the way to educate.
Latest Blog Posts
April 08, 2019Online Harm Or Harm Online Online Harm or Harm online can be difficult to define accurately in a quantitative frameOnline Harm or Harm online can be difficult to define accurately in a quantitative frame. The subjective nature of this...
February 27, 2019 The ‘Human algorithm’ that schools and parents feed through fear concerning social media 'trends' > How perpetrators of crime are relying on you to advertise their products for free; and you do. > How you may be adding to the online...
Presenters, media and conferences – Cybertrauma by experts; the shock factor! Is it naiveté, ego, traumology or unconsciously malicious?
November 26, 2018 Presenters, Media and Conferences - Cybertrauma by Experts; The Shock Factor! Is it naiveté, ego, traumology or unconsciously malicious? I have a very positive view of human beings and believe we are all trying to do our best in...