James Comer, a Republican representative from Kentucky and the chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, has called on the CEOs of major game-adjacent and forum platforms to appear at an upcoming panel about online radicalization. Coming in the aftermath of the murder of right-wing influencer Charlie Kirk, Comer seeks testimony from the leadership at Valve, Discord, Twitch, and Reddit.
In a press release, Comer stated that government has a “duty to oversee the online platforms that radicals have used to advance political violence.” Comer further explained that the CEOs must “explain what actions they will take to ensure their platforms are not exploited for nefarious purpose.”
As such, the CEOs have each been sent letters requesting their presence at a House Oversight Committee hearing that will take place on October 8. According to the letters, the hearing will address “radicalization of online forum users, including incidents of open incitement to commit violent politically motivated acts.”
Information released about the suspect in Kirk’s murder suggests that he was an avid internet user and game player. In addition to engraving references to online memes and, apparently, a Helldivers 2 button combination on shell casings, the suspect also extensively used Discord, had a Steam account, and was described as “terminally online” by friends. These pieces of evidence, combined with debate around online response in the immediate aftermath, have resulted in calls from conservative officials and media to crack down on social media companies.
However, an existing research community already exists that has attempted to tease out the complex, sensitive, and multifaceted relationship between gaming cultures and communities and violent radicalization. In recent years, researchers (including myself) have devoted time and attention to studying gaming cultures and communities. Sparked by high-profile violent attacks whose perpetrators referenced gaming culture or were radicalized within games-adjacent social media, this research has focused on how socialization and relationship-building within the context of online games may interact with radicalization to violent extremism. For instance, I have worked for years with collaborators to investigate how often game players are exposed to hate speech and harassment within games, niche communities of violent extremists on Steam, and methods for building resilience to radicalization among game communities.
This research community has long been careful to focus on cultural and social dynamics and where they intersect with gaming broadly, and to communicate that there is little evidence of any direct link between gaming and violence. Video games are commonly targeted by influencers and policymakers after violent events, despite scant evidence as to a direct link between gameplay and violence. Social scientists have studied the effects of gaming since the 1990s and have found mixed results, at most, for the controversial claims around games and violence.
Despite this caution and its focus on understanding exactly when, why, and whether violence in online communities occurs in gaming contexts, this research community has been significantly curtailed by recent initiatives by the current US administration. Much of my research, for instance, was funded by the Department of Homeland Security’s Targeted Violence and Terrorism Prevention grant program, which was significantly scaled back in July. Other violence prevention research was funded by the National Institute for Health, which has also undergone severe cuts to its grantmaking efforts.
Comments are closed, but trackbacks and pingbacks are open.