Examining the Role of Video Games In the US Election 81
Gamasutra is running an article discussing the influence of games and gamers on the 2004 and 2008 presidential elections. The connection, while minor, is continuing to strengthen, from allowing people to register to vote through their consoles, to in-game advertising, to games about and involving the candidates. However, it may still be an uphill climb as media-sharing becomes easier. From Gamasutra:
"There are reasons games have grown slowly compared to other technologies for political outreach. The most important one is also the most obvious: since 2004, online video and social networks have become the big thing, as blogs were four years ago. Instead of urging voters to 'play my game,' as Loftus and I surmised, candidates urged their constituents to 'watch my video.' Online video became the political totem of 2008, from James Kotecki's dorm room interviews to CNN's YouTube debates."
Speaking of politics and videogames... (Score:5, Interesting)
Pretty clever advertising, I must admit.
Re:Why games? (Score:5, Interesting)
The problem you have here is that while games are indeed entertainment, while a player is focused on the game play, the messages (billboards or whatever else) go easier into the subconscious.
This is much more efficient than making the image the focus of the player's attention, as it doesn't engage the player's prejudices/opinions/critical thinking and goes directly into the subconscious. It is the same principle of subliminal suggestions and some hypnosis therapy techniques (using multiple voices speaking over each other, with the actual message not being the loudest of the voices).
That said, I'm not sure how many of the electorate are gamers or how many need that message: if the candidate advertising himself is technology-savvy he probably already has more appeal to gamers (they being closer to technology anyway) so in a way it sounds like preaching to the choir.