Before I get into Activision’s role in this story, I think it’s wisest to start by pointing out that I find it virtually impossible to understand the pain that people who lose a loved one, and especially a child, must go through. under such dire circumstances as those accompanying a shooting, assault or any type of similar action. I can try to empathize, as can anyone, but only someone who has been through something like this can truly reach the level of depth of pain that needs to be experienced.

As a result of this pain and the enormous difficulty of coping with a loss that goes against nature, we hear of many cases where they focus almost exclusively on the search for justice (if justice can be considered to exist). ). beyond what can be justified by common sense. And mind you, this is not a value judgement, because, I repeat, I am not able to put myself in the shoes of people under these circumstances, it is just a cold assessment (something beyond the reach of said people).

Fruit from this somewhat distorted perception of realityand in the subsequent search for those responsible, we are on many occasions met with accusations which, as I have already said, go beyond what is understandable. This is something that Michael Moore already reflected in the final reflection of Bowling for Columbine, which also gave the film its name. Although the perpetrators of this massacre were at the local bowling alley early on the fateful day, bowling is not to blame for what happened.

The day before yesterday marked two years since the Uvalda Massacre, a shooting at an elementary school in Uvalda, Texas that left 21 dead (including the shooter) and 17 injured. And now, precisely on the occasion of the second anniversary of the massacre, we have learned Relatives of Uvalde victims sue Activision over Call of Dutyas well as Meta pro, according to the lawsuit, allowing images and promoting gun sales on its platforms.

The reason for suing Activision for Call of Duty and Meta for Instagram is, as you’ve probably already guessed, that Shooter Uvalde was a Call of Duty: Modern Warfare player for the former, and which was the target of an ad by Daniel Defense (an American arms manufacturer) on Instagram. That last point raises more questions because, although Meta says it doesn’t allow gun advertising, a Washington Post investigation previously reported that the company provides gun sellers with up to 10 strikes before kicking them off the platform.

The debate over whether video games, in this case Call of Duty, can induce violent attitudes in their users has been open for decades, and in cases like this, it will resurface like pollen in the spring. Over the years I have seen significantly more evidence to deny this than to confirm it, and in this case I feel we are facing a lawsuit a lawyer who decided to earn money and prestige with an argument that shouldn’t have too much coverage. But again, that’s just my opinion. What do you think?

More information