Greetings from the 12th Nordic Youth Research Symposium held in Tallinn, Estonia.
It was my first international conference on youth studies. I chaired a working group
called "Youth, games and digital cultures". Before that there was another working
group with the same thematic, "Youth and digital games: practices,
communities and gaming culture". Even though my working group was among
the last sessions, we had an active audience of researchers and developers.
Gaming seems to be a relevant theme in youth research. Children and adolescents
are no strangers to games whatever is their medium (Internet, video game consoles,
Facebook, iPad, smart phones, etc.). They are seen as the digital natives, while their
parents remain behind as digital immigrants. This divide was a constant issue during
the conference, because all the young people in this world are not natives on the
same level and adults can learn to use technology as well.
Another divide emerged during the sessions on gaming and gambling. It seemed to
me that researchers in gaming studies are very proud of the fact that they have a hip
and media sexy research topic. Everything is about cool games and videos and
photos of young players. Violence is not an issue, because it is not about the
content of the game in question - it is about players, movements of their body and
facial expressions. I was left wondering what are the theoretical frameworks
and methodological paths in gaming research. What about the social and cultural
contexts of playing? Roger Caillois was timidly mentioned, but what then?
Then there was the big question of money games. Do I consider gambling and
gaming as money games in the same way? Well no, I don't. If I see "poker games"
on a gaming site, it catches my attention. Poker is a money game, even though
you can practice it for free or play it with virtual currencies. Or you can have white
beans at stake, but it is by definition a money game, a form of gambling. Then
I was told that everything can be played for money. Sure, but gambling is not like
gaming. You cannot pay to get to a next level during a poker game. You are not a
team player despite the fact that you belong to a poker stars' team. If
you don't play well, it is your problem. Gambling has a different moral, social and
economic history which has been modified by national and international regulation.
There is a lot more at stake than money.
I wanted to organize a working group on gambling and gaming. While researchers
in gambling studies are interested in social gaming and social casino gambling,
researchers in gaming studies seem to know everything better. I was told that
you don't need to buy virtual currencies with money and gambling can be done for
free. Really? At the same time, I was thinking about the Fantasy football league
gaming and the temporal consumption included in this type of betting. When I
participate in a session, I want to hear about theoretical standpoints and
methodological choices. If I talk about girls and gambling and try to find
out what gambling studies could learn from girlhood studies, is money
really the issue?
Gaming can be a path to gambling. Gambling operators offer online games
and other games like chess. Gaming operators offer casino gambling games
and card games. Gaming researchers should be interested in this coexistence
of different games and start to think about topics like gender, age, social
class and socio-economic status. As a researcher, I would like to know more
about players' motivations, expectations, choices, values, conceptions of
reality/virtuality, social life (peers and parents) and identifications. What
does society think about the gaming market? What are the national
and international subcultures formed around a particular game? How is culture
transformed by gaming? What about those who do not play but hang
out with gamers?
What about ethics and researcher's own position? The reasons behind
asking a 6-year-old to play a first-person shooting game or filming adolescent
players should be explained. What does gaming mean to children? How
did adolescents react to the researcher and his/her constant presence? What
kind of interaction is there between researchers and youth? Research is
not about knowing the games inside out and being familiar with
the most famous poker players - this kind of knowledge is a priority to
operators, developers and sponsors. Research is about theories, methods,
ethics, analysis and interpretation. Research should relate to innovation
and discovery.
NYRIS seems to be a conference where cool and hip people meet.
There was a strange gap between great keynote speakers and sessions
where absenteism seemed to be a norm. Youth was a concept, not
always the topic of a presentation. Perhaps it was more about being
youthful and stylish? Anyway, Tallinn was wonderful and the University
was a great place to have the conference.
I want to thank David Smahel (Masaryk University, CZ) and Matilda Ståhl
(Åbo Akademi, FI) for their exciting presentations. I also want to point out
Reidun Follesø's (University of Nordland, NO) moving presentation on youth
at risk. She showed that young people do not always see themselves
as individuals at risk and that is why she talked about "hovering youth". At the
end of her presentation, she showed a very touching music video
made by a former 6-year-old boy, Erkki Muhonen.
I think that researchers could learn a lot from each other - whether the
research topic is gambling or gaming. These two topics coexist: after all,
it is about play and work.
A day in the life of a female gamer:
http://themetapicture.com/a-day-in-the-life-of-a-female-gamer/
Introducing Team Siren:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Gz9um3wV1o
Girl gamer who became a poker star (Charlotte Van Brabander):
http://www.pokerstarsblog.com/pokerstars_women/2010/belgiums-girl-gamer-shines-at-benelux-co-076983.html
Erkki Muhonen with Band:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BgHitXWYXQg
