GT Advanced COO sold $2 million in stock after sapphire deal with Apple began to sour – MacDailyNews - Welcome Home
Opinion ArchiveAug 2016Aug 2016Aug 2016Aug 2016Aug 2016Current Headlines
Aug 09, 2016 - 05:15 PM UTC & AAPL: 108.81 (+0.44, +0.41%) | NASDAQ: 5225.48 (+12.34, +0.24%)
“An executive from bankrupt Apple supplier GT Advanced Technologies [GTAT] who oversaw its troubled sapphire production facility set up a plan to sell part of his shareholdings after the company failed to meet Apple’s technical milestones on time,” Daisuke Wakabayashi reports for The Wall Street Journal.
“Daniel Squiller, GT Advanced Technologies’ chief operating officer and the point man at the Mesa, Ariz. sapphire plant it opened in partnership with Apple, sold $1.2 million of stock in May and set up a plan under which he sold another $750,000 of shares over ensuing months before the company filed for bankruptcy on Oct. 6, according to filings,” Wakabayashi reports. “Squiller’s sales came after initial signs of trouble at GT’s sapphire plant.”
“Squiller, whom GT transferred from its Hong Kong office to oversee the Mesa facility, sold 116,000 GT shares at prices ranging from $15.88 to $20.08 per share,” Wakabayashi reports. “He retains 232,735 shares stake in GT, which have lost nearly all their value since the bankruptcy filing. GT shares traded at 43 cents Tuesday.”
Read more in the full article .
Related articles:
– October 7, 2014
– October 14, 2014
– October 14, 2014
– October 10, 2014
– October 10, 2014
– October 10, 2014
– October 8, 2014
– October 7, 2014
– October 7, 2014
– October 7, 2014
– October 7, 2014
– October 7, 2014
– October 6, 2014
– August 11, 2014
– August 5, 2014
– June 19, 2014
– May 27, 2014
Categories:
Thank You for supporting MacDailyNews!
Loading...
Name (required)
Email (required)
Notify me of new posts via email.
Recent Articles
MacDailyNews Poll
Follow Blog via Email
Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.
Join 21,114 other followersFibreculture Journal Issue 8
Issue 8 - Gaming Networks
Mods, Nay! Tournaments, Yay! - The Appropriation of Contemporary
Game Culture by the U.S. Military
David B. Nieborg - University of Amsterdam
United States (U.S.) Army recruiting did not seem to be a problem
after the terrorist attacks of 9/11. However, the ongoing war
on terror calls for more soldiers and thus more recruits. Operation
Iraqi Freedom in particular has put heavy strains on the available
manpower of the Army. A significant part of the U.S. war machine
is tied down in the cities of Iraq, requiring a steady flow of
fresh manpower and material. The Bush administration has made
it clear that it expects the war on terror will be a decade-long
battle against a shadowy enemy (Gordon and Trainor, 2006). At
the same time, government officials such as U.S. Defense Secretary
Donald H. Rumsfeld pointed out that the war on terror is also
a war on ideas'. According to him, it is a war to spread freedom
and liberty, values appropriated by and associated with the United
Information and communication technologies (ICTs) have become
increasingly important elements in contemporary warfare (Toffler
and Toffler, 1995). This trend labelled Infowar' is giving way
to the convergence of the technological transformation of the
U.S. military with networked, ICT-based warfare (Der Derian, 2003).
In all its forms, information warfare can use simulations as weapon
systems: in its hard form as a component of a weapon, or in its
soft form as (public) dissimulations:
More a weapon of mass persuasion and distraction than destruction,
infowar nonetheless shares some common characteristics with
nuclear war: it targets civilian as well as military populations
and its exchange-value as a deterrent outweighs its use-value
as an actual weapon. (Der Derian, 2003: 47)
Modern-day media have become powerful instruments of war, as
many wars are won politically, not strategically (Payne, 2005).
This political-ideological dimension of media was most visible
during the first Gulf War. Before and during the war, television
newscasts played a significant role in persuading U.S. citizens
to support the war while distracting Iraqi officials with deceitful
and distorted information about the war's strategic objectives
(Taylor, 1998).
Today new media complement the use of older, ' media forms.
New media (technologies) have become vital tools to sustain the
war on terror in two converging ways. First, games and webpages
can act directly as recruiting tools or aids. For instance, the
U.S. Army has various websites to assist parents with their children's
decision to join. Second, entertainment media such as games directly
and indirectly provide context and justifications through simulations
and dissimulations as to why and how the war on terror is fought.
As such, the concept of infowar directly relates to the use of
game technology by the U.S. military. This paper will focus on
this dual capacity of new media technology, specifically digital
Contemporary media seem to have incorporated militarised themes
in every way possible. Television newscasts show embedded reports
live from the battlefield while retired generals act as experts
on 24-hour news channels. Hollywood movies use every special effect
at their disposal to depict an even more spectacular image of
war using leased military equipment. A great number of scholars
have analysed this symbiotic relationship between military communities
and the entertainment industries, generally known as the military-entertainment
complex' (Der Derian, 2003; Lenoir and Lowood, 2003; Stockwell
and Muir, 2003). Within this complex, countless television series,
movies, and (comic) books are continuously being produced. And
as the U.S. military uses the same simulation technologies as
commercial game developers do, boundaries between commercial games
and governmental military simulations are seemingly eroding. In
addition, the historically strong ties between military and game
technology are becoming more and more visible due to popular accounts
of the military-entertainment complex (Chaplin and Ruby, 2005;
Halter, 2006). More so than other media, digital games above all
epitomise the military-entertainment complex.
Beyond the military-entertainment complex
To deepen the understanding of the expanding military-entertainment
complex, the first state-produced recruiting game, America's
Army, will be discussed. The complex, which seems at first
sight to be no more than a technological bond between Hollywood/Silicon
Valley and the Pentagon, in fact has profound implications from
a socio-economic and political-ideological point-of-view. Solely
focusing on the mere fact that games are produced in cooperation
with the military ignores the significance of the synergy between
the military-entertainment complex and contemporary youth popular
culture. The recent success of military-developed recruiting games
impacts thinking about games and simulations and the use of these
interactive texts for advertisement, education, and propaganda.
Similarly, the appropriation of a global game culture seems to
result in a reciprocal relationship between the hierarchical nature
of the U.S. military and the participatory character of numerous
game community clusters.
The U.S. military in particular benefits in various ways from
a global game culture playing war-themed games. Military recruiters
are able to use interactive entertainment as a valuable asset
in their expansive toolbox. In what follows, the appeal of military
games as objects for military recruiting will be discussed. Through
the use of games the U.S. military deliberately chose to directly
interact with the 'Internet generation.; With America's Army
the U.S. Army tapped directly into game communities, and was able
to harness the creative and symbolic capital produced by gamers.
Whereas with commercially developed games, fans collaborate with
the cultural industries, the players of state-produced games such
as America's Army aid, however indirect and minimal,
the U.S. war effort by spreading the U.S. Army's symbolic capital.
The core of America's Army's ideology is not primarily
based upon the cultural industries' profit motive or on providing
entertainment only. Where America's Army differs from
a similar First Person Shooter (FPS) PC-game such as Counter-Strike,
is that the former is a game with a clear agenda. Namely, the
dissemination of the U.S. Army brand through popular culture.
In this paper I will argue that the commodification of play is
now, by way of the military-entertainment complex, supplemented
by the militarisation of play. Next, the two main reasons why
games have been able to become viable recruiting tools will be
discussed. First, there is the technological and economic dimension
of contemporary game development and distribution. When comparing
game technology to the development and distribution of Hollywood
movies, it becomes clear that linking militarised interactive
recruiting with digital play results in the alteration of the
rules of engagement. Second, it will be argued that it is not
a giant leap to build military-themed computer games for recruiting
purposes, considering the rich shared history of military, academic
and entertainment communities. The second part of this paper will
consider the relationship between military communities and digital
play using America's Army as a case study.
Branding the U.S. Army
Recruiting soldiers for the U.S. Army has never been an easy
task. In the late nineties, partly due to the favourable economy,
the U.S. military's annual recruiting goals were missed one after
another. Then in 2000, the tides seemed to turn and for five consecutive
years enough recruits were drafted to fill the ranks. In early
2005 however, the U.S. Army again failed to meet its annual recruiting
target. Today the U.S. military has to rely on its recruiting
efforts more than ever before. Because of full-scale troop deployments
the U.S. military is stretched thin. Newspapers report of soldiers
refusing to report for duty and U.S. politicians made clear that
reinstating the draft is out of question.
One of the biggest problems faced by contemporary military recruiting
efforts is its lack of effectiveness, and something had to be
done to re-establish a long-term connection with the American
youth. Mass media have been used for recruiting purposes since
the 1970s, and today a quarter of today's 600 million dollars
military advertising budget is spent on TV commercials (General
Accounting Office, 2003). Advertising money used to maintain and
expand the U.S. Army brand is also spent on sponsoring events
and sports teams and on other promotional activities. In a report
by the U.S. Army Research Institute, the media habits of America's
youth were examined and two important media for individuals who
might possibly join the Army were identified: television and the
Internet (Morath et al., 2001). An icon of youth popular culture,
the music channel MTV was identified as an outlet to reach the
core recruitable audience of 18 to 24-year old males. To improve
Army recruiting via the Internet, the functionality of the U.S.
Army recruiting
was enhanced. But besides hip
TV commercials, recruiting offices, recruiters visiting high schools,
and various other ways to attract new servicemen, the Army acknowledged
the enormous potential of digital games to spread the message
that: The U.S. Army is the most powerful, most respected and most
feared ground force in the world' (Army Game Project, 2003a: 3).
As mentioned earlier, military-developed or -sponsored games
are as much weapons in the war on ideas as they are interactive
recruiting tools. This dual role of advertisement (recruiting)
and persuasion (spreading U.S. ideology) makes games capable candidates
for the dissemination of propaganda. This holds especially true
in regard to the U.S. military's own definition of propaganda:
Any form of communication in support of national objectives
designed to influence the opinions, emotions, attitudes, or
behavior of any group in order to benefit the sponsor, either
directly or indirectly. (Department of Defense, )
While the focus in this paper is primarily on the role of simulation
technologies and digital games, it is worthwhile to look at the
place of Hollywood movies within the military-entertainment complex
and Hollywood's linkage with the U.S. military establishment.
Why is the military establishment so eager to use game technology
for propaganda purposes in the first place, and why has there
never been a state-produced movie with a similar (dual role) as
America's Army?
Propaganda and popular culture
Communication scholars Garth S. Jowett and Victoria O'Donnell
argue that the Hollywood film industry never lent itself to overt
propaganda' (1986: 72). Apart from the preparedness films' made
in the 1930s, Hollywood never made a commissioned war movie to
deliberately and systematically shape the perception of the U.S.
military. While the U.S. military refrained from producing a blockbuster
propaganda movie, it did have a significant influence in shaping
many war-themed movies. David Robb's Operation Hollywood:
How the Pentagon Shapes and Censors the Movies (2004) provides
a detailed and well documented insider's look at the relationship
between the movie industry and the U.S. military. Robb explains
how Hollywood movie studios have only gained access to expensive
military material and expert knowledge if they were willing to
put up their scripts for editing. The U.S. military makes sure
that a sponsored movie informs the public about the U.S. military
and that the military is authentically' portrayed in order to
help military recruiting and retention' (Robb, 2004: 44). The
indirect dissemination of military propaganda may be a common
practice and profoundly shape many box-office hits. Robb also
demonstrates that military-entertainment collaborations are in
many instances the result of tough negotiations.
Jowett and O'Donnell present three reasons why the military seems
to be reluctant about the in-house development of a propaganda
movie (). First, a global audience is used to high standards
and, thus, to fairly expensive movies. It seems highly unlikely
that U.S. Congress would authorise the U.S. Army to spend a hundred
million dollars on a recruiting movie, in the obvious absence
of any guarantee of success. A second factor is the convention
of a fictional narrative complete with (expensive) Hollywood stars.
The medium of the motion picture is therefore totally limited
to the values and ideologies that are an integral part of the
plot structure' (Jowett and O'Donnell, 1986). These limiting values
could seriously hamper the accurate portrayal of the complex and
often tedious tasks of U.S. Army soldiers. Equally, a hero's singular
point-of-view, think of Tom Hanks' Captain John H. Miller character
in Saving Private Ryan, conflicts with the U.S. Army's
Army of One recruiting message. Third, the distribution system
for films is tightly organised and difficult to break into as
an outsider. On the other hand, producing and distributing a Hollywood-like
U.S. war movie is easier than in the 1980's. As we are entering
the age of media convergence' the means of movie production have
become cheaper and easier to use while the Internet can function
as an inexpensive and open distribution channel (Jenkins, 2003).
Nevertheless, making a successful Hollywood movie is even for
the U.S. military a risky and expensive adventure.
Comparing these factors to the development and distribution of
digital games, it makes all more sense why developing a full-blown
propaganda game is far cheaper and easier than producing a high-profile
movie. New game formats such as the Grand Theft Auto
series and The Sims franchise, show that game design
conventions are continually being altered. Even in the somewhat
formulaic FPS genre and the sub-genre of tactical shooters, experimentation
with certain design elements is commonly praised by gamers. Another
obstacle, the factor of distribution, can be bypassed because
of the near-ubiquitous Internet access in the United States. Gamers
have proved to be willing to download large files and to share
content through digital and physical peer-to-peer networks.
In addition, in contrast to Robb's analysis, Hollywood military-themed
movies are seen by America's Army project director Wardynski
as stereotypical and sensationalist representations of the military'
(Li, 2004: 40). Also, movies are an ineffective way to spread
information because they are external, independent intermediaries
beyond Army control' (ibid). Jowett and O'Donnell came to a similar
conclusion two decades ago, claiming that: movies never became
the powerful propaganda vehicle that its critics thought it would
be', despite having the greatest potential for emotional appeal
to its audience, offering a deeper level of identification with
the characters and action on the screen than found elsewhere in
popular culture' (1986: 72).
Conversely, contemporary game culture seems like a perfect place
to exert full Army control. The U.S. Army already has a vast marketing
apparatus to spread their U.S. Army: An Army of One' message,
and games fit perfectly in the marketing mix of Army recruiters
(van der Graaf and Nieborg, 2003). Digital games have been, and
increasingly will be, used for various marketing purposes (Nieborg,
2006). While popular culture may be largely outside the direct
control of the Pentagon, the dissemination of propaganda via military-controlled
game communities has become a valid and attractive option. The
U.S. Army does not have to make an expensive movie or produce
their o they are able to tap directly into
existing technological and socio-economical frameworks of the
military-entertainment complex.
Good morning soldier, welcome to the U.S. Army!
The representation and simulation of modern war in computer
games shows that there is already a common understanding about
(virtual) war (Nieborg, 2004). The war on terror is both explicitly
and implicitly simulated in a wide range of FPS PC-games such
as Battlefield 2, Kuma War, and Counter-Strike,
and in budget action titles as Desert Fury, Airstrike
II: Gulf Thunder and Terrorist Takedown. The ubiquitous
availability of war-themed games is not solely industry-driven,
nor can it be set aside as the result of a lack of imagination
in game designers and publishers. Gamers themselves display an
unequivocal need for the simulation of past, present and future
military conflicts. Take the user-created total conversion modifications
(mods) of the World War Two themed FPS PC-game Battlefield
1942. Every significant conflict involving a Western country
has its own mod, from the Korean war to the Falklands war to the
conflict in Somalia (Nieborg, 2005a). Similarly, only a month
after the release of Battlefield 2 there were already
over fifty military themed mods in some state of development.
do not like the original game's conflict, they simply recruit
people that have a shared interest and develop a mod of their
own. Therefore, most gamers will not be the least bit surprised
by a military-themed game, even if it is developed by the military.
The demographic composition of FPS game culture matches the main
pool of potential Army recruits. The militarized masculinity'
of FPS games exhibits a strong gender bias where violent themes
are ubiquitous (Hall, 2003; Kline et al, ). And, almost
as a natural progression of the military-entertainment complex,
the U.S. Army ordered the development of the first publicly available,
state-produced military entertainment game in 2001. The army's
move to venture into games proved to be worthwhile when the game
was eventually released. On July 4, 2002, the first version of
America's Army was made available on the official website.
days, servers were swamped and the game proved to be an instant
success. For over four years the game has ranked high in the list
of most played FPSs, attracting and retaining a considerable group
of a couple of hundred thousand dedicated players. Every couple
of months the game is significantly updated, with bug fixes and
the addition of new maps, weapons and training elements. America's
Army is part of the sub-genre of the tactical FPS, which
means that gamers in online multiplayer sessions fight each other
in a setting modelled after a place in the real world. The inner
workings of America's Army have been explained in detail
elsewhere (Li, 2004; Nieborg, 2005b).
Militarised play
It is important here to address the game's multi-modal character.
What makes America's Army fairly unique and sets it apart
from commercial games as well as military simulations, is that
it is an advergame, edugame, test tool and propaganda game (Nieborg,
2005b). The game constantly balances between the expectations
of gamers (shaped by FPS genre conventions) and the game's design
rationale (shaped by its four dimensions), not to mention, numerous
technical design constraints such as hardware and software limitations.
Although the game is part of the sub-genre of tactical FPS games,
America's Army is more than ' or only a 'sophisticated
. The official America's Army-brand
definition is revealing in this respect:
America's Army is the only official Army game designed, created
and developed by the U.S. Army. As such, it is the most authentic
Army game ever made, as it strives to provide an accurate, comprehensive
and dynamic portrayal of the Army experience. Based on the seven
fundamental values embodying the U.S. Army - Loyalty, Duty,
Respect, Selfless Service, Honor, Integrity and Personal Courage
- the game teaches players about personal growth and teamwork,
while immersing them in real-life training and combat missions
(Army Game Project, 2003a: 3).
America's Army has been carefully designed to propagate
the U.S. Army ethos. This ethos simulates the rationale and legitimisation
of U.S. foreign policy, giving the game its propaganda dimension.
America's Army shows that the U.S. Army is a highly trained
professional force, willing to fight against terrorists. This
is achieved via its interactive dialogue with gamers worldwide
through both the game and its community.
The Army harnesses the collaborative nature of online game communities
and uses it to its advantage. On the one hand it spreads the Army's
symbolic capital and ideology, and on the other hand it attempts
to recruit possible military enlistees. With the introduction
of various semi-commercial, military endorsed games (e.g., Full
Spectrum Warrior, Close Combat: First To Fight)
or even military produced games, the U.S. military directly taps
into the very fabric of popular culture. This process of acquisition
seems to be taking off right now and, as discussed earlier, this
modus operandi entails much more than a technological
collaboration. With continuing reports live from the battlefield,
war has become an intertextual commodity', cross-promoted by the
Pentagon and global media conglomerates on television, the Internet,
in movies and in games (cf. Marshall, 2002). Therefore, military
themed games have become part of the long history of the synergy
between the political and domestic sphere (Hall, 2003). The efforts
of the U.S. military to invest in the military-entertainment complex
is a major leap forward in the merging of the military and the
domestic spheres in the realm of audiovisual cultural forms' (Crogan,
). By developing or ordering the development of military-themed
games for educational, advertisement or even propagandistic purposes,
the U.S. military can directly appropriate a global youth culture.
A militarised participatory media culture
To get hold of this process of militarisation and to critically
approach the Army game as well as its relation with FPS game culture,
Joost Raessens' (2005) notion of participatory media culture'
will be used to reflect on the game's political-ideological implications.
Participatory media culture, according to Raessens, encompasses
three domains of participation: interpretation', 'reconfiguration'
and construction'. The three domains have a political-ideological
dimension which refers to: [&] the tension between the
dominant and the critical, social and cultural practices in the
realm of computer games' (Raessens, ). These tensions
are then defined by three elements. The first of these is top-down'
versus bottom-up', referring here to the question concerning the
results of the access to the practices of the media culture' (Raessens,
). The second pair, homogenization versus heterogenization',
discusses the question of the reproduction of ideologically charged
values through games. And thirdly, there's a distinction between
the real versus the possible'. Next, I will elaborate upon Raessens'
three domains and subsequently analyse the political-ideological
presuppositions of America's Army before I end this paper
with a discussion of whether America's Army contributes
to culture participation' or a more desirable participatory media
The first domain of participation deals with the interpretation
of a game and is based on the notion of an active audience as
conceptualised by cultural studies scholars such as Stuart Hall
and John Fiske. Interpretation as a mode of participation can
be heavily regulated, trying to facilitate what Stuart Hall would
dub a dominant reading' or what Sherry Turkle calls simulation
resignation' where gamers surrender to the seduction of the simulation'
(Raessens, ). America's Army&s simulation
model as well as its external discursive framework, are meant
to let gamers internalise the rules of the game, to the extent
that the Army-dictated rules of play are seen as natural. Through
the process of what Ted Friedman (1995) calls demystification',
America's Army is deconstructed in a way that is dictated
by its regulatory and strict rule set, seeking full simulation
resignation. The notion of authenticity plays an important part
in this process as many choices in the game's design are justified,
by both designers and players, as being '. For realism's
sake, the gameplay is much more structured and bound by the rules
of physics and warfare compared to similar games in the genre.
Players become soldiers with a persistent record. Shooting team
members is ruled out, and maps, weapons and player roles cannot
be changed. Friendly fire always results in punishment.
Gamers seem to wilfully accept the many ideological preconceptions
in America's Army's simulation model. An important element
in this respect is the fact that gamers seldom question the fact
that they are not able to play as '. Via a software
trick online, players see themselves always as a U.S. soldier
and their opponents as ', a unique feature for online
multiplayer FPSs. The simulation of the us-versus-them' dichotomy
is present in almost every war game with a contemporary military
theme. There is only a binary choice, coalition versus Iraqi Forces,
U.S. Forces versus Arab/Muslim terrorists, good versus evil. The
America&s Army player however is ' with
the U.S. army and thereby deliberately loses the viewpoint of
' (cf. Hiebert, 2003). The loss of context and the subsequent
vilification of ' is a well-known propaganda instrument
(Taylor, 1998). Players may deconstruct the game's simulation
model only to find a regulated and explicitly singular, or homogeneous,
perspective: that of the U.S. Army.
The propagation of U.S. Army values is an important part of the
ideological construct underlying the game's simulation model.
The attention the values receive in both the game and the game's
community may seem strange to outsiders, but reciting the seven
values within the non-virtual U.S. Army is seen as just as vital
as learning how to properly throw a grenade. Soldiers are expected
to live up to the values around the clock, even when they are
off duty. The developers explain how they tried to simulate the
Army values in the game:
[America's Army] rewards soldierly behaviour and penalizes
rotten eggs. This works out in practical ways. In basic training,
for example, you can opt to become a combat lifesaver. Doing
so reflects duty and selfless service, so you get points and
expanded opportunities for going through training. Out on mission,
your buddy collapses in front of you. You can attend him, which
earns points for loyalty and honor, or keep running, which scrubs
points. If you do stop, you become a target yourself, which
takes courage, and if you're hit, your health will suffer, so
you need the integrity to inform your actions with sound judgement.
Doing your duty and saving both your lives wins the most points.
Just like in combat. (Davis, 2004: 11)
It seems that pointing out the seven values and giving them constant
attention within as many elements in the game as possible is the
only way to make the Army values an actual part of the game. From
my own observations I would argue that the primary reason for
the vast majority of gamers to become a combat lifesaver (which
would reflect selfless service) or helping a wounded teammate
in the heat of battle (which would reflect integrity) has more
to do with peer-pressure and game conventions than Army values.
The valued actions are to be seen in many other online games.
Most notably Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Games (MMORPGs)
are rich social spaces where actions such as sacrificing', which
a gamer would dub helping, nurturing or role-playing, provide
meaningful play. Through the appropriation of common in-game player
actions the Army emphasises its values. This rationale directly
corresponds with the process of homogenisation.&&
The ideological struggle of the U.S. Army against FPS game culture
and youth popular culture is an extremely uneven '. Because
of its high production values, familiar design, and by virtue
of the game being ' and freely available, the U.S. Army
rapidly created a large fan base of young men who wilfully subjected
themselves to the U.S. Army's ideology. The game's vibrant and
vocal community may discuss the lack of updates or the rampant
cheating, but gamers who openly question Army values are yet to
Antonio Gramsci's concept of hegemony is useful to frame the
notion of America's Army as a realistic game (cf. Raessens,
2005). On the one hand, the developers of America's Army
use their intellectual and moral power as the exclusive authors
of the text to enable a hegemonic status where the game could
be seen as the most realistic shooter available - explicitly marketing
the game as the Official U.S. Army Game'. On the other hand, by
tapping into FPS design conventions the U.S. Army maintains a
discursive consensus where America's Army is seen by
many as '.
When comparing America's Army to, for example, Counter-Strike,
the former can be characterised as a FPS having a very strict
simulation model with rigid in-game rules. The second mode of
participation as discussed by Raessens is the process of reconfiguration',
again in the case of America's Army a severely limited
domain of participation. Players are not encouraged to freely
interact with the gamespace. Instead, players seem to be controlled,
not the world. As a game of emergence', the exploratory nature
of many gamers leads to behaviour never intended by game developers
(Juul, 2002). Exploiting bugs and learning tricks by creatively
repurposing the rules of the game is a relatively innocent act
and is intertwined with modern-day online gameplay. Gamers of
the Battlefield-series, for instance, produce the wildest
stunt movies with tanks and planes crashing through carefully
placed explosive charges.
The developers of America's Army, on the other hand,
try to rule out this kind of exploratory, or ', behaviour.
Every new patch shows constant tweaking of the placement of spawn
points and the weapon layouts of various maps. Some maps became
nearly unplayable after investigative players found ways to precisely
throw grenades or shoot rockets in order to kill players who just
began a new round - emergent behaviour called spawn killing'.
In order to play the game, players have to adhere to the U.S.
Army's Rules of Engagement (ROE) if they want to play the game
with their peers.
to the domain of interpretation, in the domain of reconfiguration
the real' is clearly favoured over the possible'.
Construction: FPS Military Mod Culture
Recent research shows that U.S. teens with access to the internet
generate original content on an unprecedented scale, creating
blogs and webpages, as well as sharing and remixing all sorts
of digital content (Lenhart and Madden, 2005). As content creators,
gamers easily move in and out of participatory communities, which
function inside commodity culture. The profit motive has never
been absent during interactive play, as it always has been present
in mass (media) culture: The fundamental imperative' of new media
remains the same as that which shaped the ' media: profit'
(Kline et al., 2003: 21). Many gamers, or fans, make wallpapers,
distribute game files, host servers and develop game modifications,
all adding value to the game. Even play itself, within the proprietary
spaces of MMORPGs, adds value and becomes profitable to game developers
and publishers (Humphreys, 2006).
Raessens' third domain deals with construction'. This mode of
participation encompasses the addition of new game elements to
existing proprietary commercial titles. The construction mode
is integrated into many games such as The Sims, Unreal
Tournament 2003 and Neverwinter Nights, but is again
severely limited in the case of America's Army. Commercial
game developers actively encourage and take advantage of the modding
ethos of sharing resources and knowledge. Such value-adding practices
are beneficiary to the game industry and are an enrichment of
game culture. Developing mods for FPSs has become a worthy, institutionalised
practice (K&cklich, 2005, Nieborg, 2005a). Still, modding
practices are seldom fully bottom-up and heterogeneous as they
are delineated by various legal, economic and technological boundaries.
America's Army's strict policy against modding is surprising
when one takes a look at the way gaming is implemented in military
training. Since a significant part of the game industry that develops
FPS games is also part of the military-entertainment complex,
the U.S. military is prone to take advantage of this collaborative
game culture. Military contractors for their part are eager to
take advantage of user-created content. Custom versions of Microsoft
Flight Simulator are widely used for defence pilot training
by the U.S. Navy and the U.S. Air Force at Naval Reserve Officer
Training Courses (Macedonia and Rosenbloom 2001). Similarly, the
research of two U.S. Navy lieutenants (Debrine and Morrow, 2000)
shows the active involvement of the U.S. military in the implementation
and appropriation of FPS game technology and mod culture.
Debrine and Morrow describe how the commercial online FPS Quake
III Arena could be used within a military setting for the
exploration of 3D architecture and for use as a primitive team
trainer. Their analysis emphasises the low costs of modding a
FPS. Those who are in some way affiliated with the various military
communities all seem to agree: a player-driven culture of continuous,
relentless, distributed innovation is the industry's greatest
asset, far more valuable than the technology-driven popular games'
(Herz and Macedonia, 2002). At first sight, mods and the military
seem to form a perfect relationship.
Knives and pistols
The various socio-economic and technological advantages for
the U.S. military of interacting with FPS mod culture may seem
clear. However, as far as modding is concerned, America's
Army could well be the exception to the rule. The first Official
Army Game does not allow any changes to its software whatsoever.
The Army is not secretive about its intentions. An online FAQ
makes this clear: Will the editing tools be made available?'.
The answer is: No. The Army is not planning on releasing any editing
or modding tools for America's Army. However, the U.S.
Army is planning on supporting America's Army over the
next few years with additional content and features.'
Recently there has been talk about an official
map editor, but when and in what way it will be implemented has
yet to be seen. There are two reasons why full-scale modding is
not allowed. First, and discussed hereafter, America&s
Army is carefully constructed to portray the U.S. Army in
a particular way, and the game's educational, marketing and propaganda
dimensions will most certainly be lost on modders. Second, it
would open up the game to cheaters, (culture) jammers, artists,
academics and disgruntled gamers.
The ongoing discussion of adding knives and pistols to America&s
Army is an example of the game&s homogeneous emphasis
on the real' versus the players& bottom-up need for processes
of heterogenisation by opening up a wider range of possibilities.
The discussion started on the day the game hit the net and has
never reached its conclusion. Knives as weapons are standard in
many popular tactical FPS games and many gamers regard a knife-kill
as a sign of so called l33t-skills' (elite skills) - because the
ability to manoeuvre one's character behind another player character
in order to stab him in the back is seen as the sign of superior
playing skills. The Army's reluctance to include knives is based
on the rationale that in the U.S. Army, knives are used as tools,
not weapons'. The inclusion of pistols suffered a similar fate.
In a forum, discussion developers expressed their fear of gamers
duelling, which was seen as unrealistic soldiering, and their
concerns about: Messaging issues (we don't want to simulate activity
that can easily be duplicated on an American street)'.
With the introduction in the game of Special Forces
soldiers the Army suddenly-and much to the surprise of the community-added
the M9 pistol to one of the maps. When, during the release of
a follow-up patch, soldiers other than the sniper on the SF Hospital
map unintentionally received pistols as well, the developers were
troubled by gamers using pistols as their primary weapon. From
a military standpoint, the need to express Army values and authentic
Army missions and gameplay prohibits civilians from coming up
with realistic scenarios or additional material. The addition
of a simple female soldier skin would undermine one of the main
pillars of the Army Game Project-educating male gamers about a
possible career in the U.S. Army. The specific military occupational
specialties' (MOS) currently playable in the game, such as U.S.
Army Special Forces, are not open to women. The explicit educational
goals, part of the recruiting role of the project thus severely
limits involvement in the game's development.
No Velvet Army
Most mods are meant as pure entertainment and are made with
no other goal in mind than to give gamers a fun experience: Fan
culture is dialogic rather than disruptive, affective more than
ideological, and collaborative rather than confrontational' (Jenkins,
). Yet, the U.S. Army brand is, through America's
Army, under constant attack because of the bottom-up practices
of a mixed group of (culture) jammers. Besides concerns about
sending the wrong message' and concern for the authentic portrayal
of the Army, the game's propaganda dimension attracts continuous
attention. The U.S. Army as a way of life and America's Army
as a branded experience are high-profile targets for those who
oppose the U.S. Army message or see in America's Army
a reflection of U.S. foreign policy.
In an age where the decision to join the military is influenced
by advertising in various media, the importance of America's
Army as a marketing and recruiting tool is substantial. From
this perspective, the collective power of a vocal group of disgruntled
gamers may, considering the target demographic, be more damaging
to Army recruiting efforts than a far more serious matter such
as the Abu Ghraib scandal. Where a broadcast message, such as
a television ad, may result in a reading of the commercial text
opposite to its intended meaning, the interactive character of
games and the fluid character of gaming communities open up a
window of opportunity for culture jammers, anti-war/corporative
activists, pacifists, artists, academics and bored teenagers.
Both commercial games and mods can be confrontational and disruptive
in various ways. Intended as training modules, ideological messages
or (offensive) entertainment, mods can serve as spoofs or satire
(e.g., the Castle Smurfenstein-mod for Castle Wolfenstein),
critique (e.g., Escape from Woomera for Half-Life)
or art. An example of a controversial art game is the Unreal
Tournament 2003 mod 911Survivor, which simulates
the attack on the Twin Towers. The mod's only objective is to
get the avatar out of the burning building and by doing so jumping
to ones death.
on their part seem eager to use contemporary combat themes and
conflicts. They do not hesitate to name their online characters
Osama' or KillBushjr' and just as well create Islamic', Al-Qaeda'
or Chechen' avatar skins. There are numerous Half-Life
or Counter-Strike maps set in peculiar places such as
a McDonalds or a Wal-Mart, scenarios the Army developers want
to avoid at all costs.
The Quake 3 modification Political Arena combines
many of these aspects. The satirical mod features leading U.S.
politicians such as George W. Bush with his main weapon being
lethal injection. The game's objective is to steal the presidency
with the help of the Supreme Court by picking up a U.S. Flag.
Army Game Project's worst nightmare however may well be an America's
Army equivalent of Velvet Strike. Artist Anne-Marie
Schleiner (2005) developed this Counter-Strike mod, or
to be more precise a set of in-game graffito's and intervention
recipes', which in the end proved rather unsuccessfully. The recipes
were meant to disrupt gameplay in order to point towards the masculine
and militaristic character of the game. Even so, despite the ban
on any America's Army game modification, the game's community
resembles that of many other participatory game communities.
The Appropriation of Game Culture
Over the years, the Army Game Project managed to gather a large
group of devoted fans around America's Army. The game
provides access for anyone with an Internet connection and a decent
PC to one of the most fetishised aspects of contemporary war-the
adrenaline rush of man-to-man combat. The Army taps into existing
social networks, building up trust and peer-to-peer communication.
The U.S. Army is able to institutionalise a pool of semi-organised
and enthusiastic gamers, using their collective intelligence'
to produce all sorts of fruitful interactions (cf. Jenkins, 2002).
The Army harnesses the collaborative nature of online game communities,
and of course the America's Army game community above
all, in order to facilitate the spreading of the Army's symbolic
capital. This explains the contradiction of banning or frustrating
user-created game mods while, on the other hand, institutionalising
a militarised fan community. A closer look at the products and
services that fans provide, such as videos, wallpapers and the
organisation of LAN-parties, demonstrates how the Army facilitates,
endorses, and appropriates an increasingly militarised game culture.
Many games have their respective fan communities creating short
clips with in-game material. The MMORPGs Star Wars Galaxies
and World of Warcraft have their dance videos, Halo
inspired the humorous Red vs Blue and the Battlefield
series has its wild stunt movies. The production of video clips
is a common practice within the America's Army community.
Clip developers seem to take a particular liking in showing their
skills on the virtual battlefield and displaying their knowledge
of the intricate game mechanics. In itself, this does not set
America's Army fan videos apart from other FPS fan material.
Yet, the great majority of clips additionally feature the U.S.
Army slogan and logo, as well as the America's Army's
values and its patriotic theme. Interestingly enough, official
America's Army promotional material includes two videoclips
marketing America's Army: Special Forces (2.0) which
bear an odd resemblance to user-created videoclips.
The promotional clips use in-game material,
intersecting it with real world military footage. And, consistent
with fan conventions, there is the unavoidable heavy metal soundtrack
and the equally unavoidable use of U.S. Army slogans and America's
Army brand material.
In addition to videoclips, gamers also produce more narrative-driven
clips consisting of gameplay sequences. Further, America's
Army movies draw heavily on the representation of war itself.
These mini-productions are longer than the two minute videoclips
and are dedicated to telling specific war stories, such as rescuing
a hostage or eliminating a terrorist leader. Because of the lack
of characters and intrigue in FPS games, gameplay movies tend
to focus on spectacle, lavish cinematography and the integration
of music and particular gameplay sequences. Plotlines are displayed
by silent-movie conventions such as the inclusion of full screen
intertitles and focus on protagonist&s hand gestures. Dominant
modes of television show rewriting, such as character dislocation,
genre shifting and refocalisation are absent in gameplay videoclips
(Jenkins, ). Not so surprisingly, ' videoclips
are non-existent in the America's Army community. Subversive
elements and critique towards the game are absent in many videoclips
and gameplay movies. Gamers are very limited in their efforts
to recontextualise material from the game since ' only
encompasses 30 plus maps and no civilian characters (except from
some nurses), hindering non-military scenarios. As a result, user-created
material appropriates and internalises an Army discourse, Army
values and symbolism, further delimiting a heterogeneous participatory
media culture.
Mock swear-ins
Besides user-created content, the actions of players themselves
can be appropriated as well and put to use by the military apparatus.
An element of contemporary game culture that is incorporated and
explicitly stimulated by the Army is clan culture and tournament
play. The (manufactured) need for team play and the militaristic
structure of FPS games motivates aficionados to get organised
to both survive and win. Many clans follow the same philosophy,
structure and training principles as the U.S. Army (cf. Li, 2004).
Clans, similar to sports teams, differ in size, nationality and
involvement. On the popular community website AAOTracker more
than 9000 America's Army clans are listed with over 80.000
In a paper for the annual Interservice/Industry Training, Simulation
and Education Conference (I/ITSEC), four members of different
military communities explored the various methodologies to incorporate
in what they call cyber gaming culture':
Just as the creation of Air Shows in the 20th century led to
both successful civilian airport shows and military air base events,
the future of large scale and small LAN party gaming competition
can include both events with a civilian focus and those with a
military orientation (Maguire et al., 2002).
The authors argue that there are many benefits to be reaped from
military sponsored location based' game competitions as well as
online gaming tournaments. It seems that the argument by the authors
has been fully acknowledged by today's military. Clans are prominently
featured on the official America's Army homepage, the
place to be for dedicated players. The official forum counts over
200.000 members and an impressive 2.2 million posts. Two community
driven tournament initiatives, TeamWarfare League (TWL) and the
Cyberathlete Amateur League (CAL), are openly endorsed and their
results are included on the homepage. Two years after its introduction
the game itself has been geared towards tournament play by adding
several admin functions and tools for clan play.
And in order to fully benefit from the recruiting potential of
America&s Army, the U.S. Army urges Army recruiters
to stage their own America&s Army-related recruiting
events. To support this, there is a special website where recruiters
can order their recruitment kit, which includes posters, free
T-shirts, extensive set-up plans and a video explaining how to
stage the event (tip: let gamers do a mock swear-in before starting
the tournament!).
players who cannot attend these events have their own mock swear-ins.
The loading screen of the game shows the Soldier&s Creed,
which opens with:
I am an American Soldier.
I am a Warrior and a member of a team. I serve the people of the
United States and live the Army Values.
In the included America's Army Game Instructions and Event
Support booklet, recruiters are given numerous suggestions
about how to use the game for recruiting purposes: The game is
a great icebreaker because young men and women love games and
are always happy to talk to anyone about a ' new game' (Army
Game Project, 2003b: 17). LAN-parties in particular are explicitly
designated as: [...] a prime arena for Recruiter activities' (Army
Game Project, 2003b: 19). The booklet gives tips for additional
activities at Army-sponsored LAN-parties. There, recruiters can
provide haircuts by an Army barber' and camouflage face painting',
or decorate the location with camouflage netting, standees and
sandbags'. It becomes clear that the increasing militarisation
of game culture, as an extension of the military-entertainment
complex, has never been so '.
Conclusion
At the height of the Cold War, Terri Toles reflected on U.S.
military recruiting efforts at the time: There is even talk of
recruiting soldiers in arcades, the argument being that video
game expertise may be transferable to the needs of the Army' (1985:
In more recent times, with the ubiquitous access to PCs and consoles,
military recruiting and propaganda entered the domestic sphere.
Within a branded world where the Army is ', where games are
developed by the military and used as training tools, gamers are
eager to play with any military-themed game as long as it is fun.
As a result, war has become increasingly delightful to those who
have never experienced it. The military-industrial complex is
more powerful than ever before. And as weapon systems and U.S.
Army doctrines transform, so does the complex, only to become
more pervasive. As the war on terror drags on and upcoming wars
are presumably already being discussed, America's Army
is not the only medium simulating and representing war. Television
series, newscasts, movies and documentaries all contribute to
an overall view of ', but what no other program,
game or movie can claim is that they are officially developed
by the U.S. Army. The expert knowledge of the Army about its own
organisation gives America's Army an aura of objectivity
needed to sell its product-the values of the U.S. Army.
Raessens reflects on the role of gamers within the cultural industries
and distinguishes between culture participation and participatory
media culture:
Culture participation is a broad concept that refers generally
to the fact that we participate in the surrounding culture,
be that in a passive and consumptive, or a more active and productive
way. I consider participatory culture, the latter, more active
attitude that, as we have seen, makes special demands concerning
the interpretation, the reconfiguration, and the construction
of computer games. ()
From this perspective, the U.S. Army through America's Army
clearly favours culture participation over a participatory media
culture. The military is not unique in aiming for culture participation.
Raessens discusses the cultural practices of gamers interacting
with the cultural industries. The U.S. Army brought into existence
a vibrant military-led game community serving a wide range of
participatory actions by gamers. Yet, only those aspects of game
culture are appropriated which adhere to a mode of participation
which is top-down, homogeneous, and prefers the real over the
possible. Despite the emergent character of online gameplay, the
regulatory and top-down gameplay of America's Army, coupled
with a specific marketing message, make America's Army
a controlled environment with ample options for intervention.
Developing mods as a common fan activity is replaced by the encouragement
and appropriation of clan culture, LAN-parties and content production
such as wallpapers and fan videos.
In the branded world of America's Army players may acquire
various bits of trivial information about the U.S. Army. The knowledge
and information which is picked up by gamers can be directly related
to an external reality. Why do we fight in America's Army?
To defend freedom! How? With my friends from all over the world,
online. Within the one game of America's Army many, if
not all, characteristics of the changing relationship between
the U.S. military and popular culture seem to come together. The
official Army game turned out to be not just some experimental
Army project, but a game which young kids play for hours each
day, sometimes over a period of a year or more.
The dedication and appreciation of gamers shown towards the game
might seem strange for those critical towards the U.S. Army or
violent shooter games. Yet, many gamers see America's Army
as ', and gamers may be unaware of any of the game's
four dimensions or simply not care about them-in the end, it is
a free (gratis) game. The Army brand is widely dispersed around
the globe and the Army Game Project is expected to expand widely
over years to come. New genres and forms of gaming, such as Massively
Multiplayer Online FPS games, are also being explored by the military.
All of this has been possible not despite, but because of, America&s
Army players and fans. They directly contribute, little by
little, to the expansion of the military-entertainment complex
and the militarisation of popular culture.
Acknowledgments
My sincere appreciation goes out this edition's editors and
anonymous reviewers. A 'H to Jet Mok, Shenja van der Graaf
and Ruud Oud for support and feedback.
Author's Biography
David B. Nieborg is a PhD student at the Amsterdam School for
Cultural Analysis (ASCA) and lecturer at the University of Amsterdam.
His publications explore the interaction between commercial game
culture, technology, marketing, and military communities. He writes
on game culture for various Dutch magazines and newspapers. David
is a gamer.
[1] List taken from Wikipedia. .
[2] See the official website .
February 2006 version 2.6, also know as America's Army: Special
Forces (Link-Up), was released for Windows PCs.
[4] America's Army Frequently Asked Questions,
[5] An interview with one of the developers
is located at the America&s Army fansite ArmyOps-Tracker:
[6] One could question whether 911Survivor
with no apparent conflict, follows the definition of a game.
[7] The mods homepage is located at .
[9] For example, .
[10]. See .
[11]. Toles refers to: Greene, B. Army sees
a Use for Video Games'. San Francisco Chronicle (1981), 8-21.
References
Army Game Project. America's Army Recruiter Support
Brand Style Guide (US Army, 2003a).
Army Game Project. America's Army Game Instructions
and Event Support (US Army, 2003b).
Chaplin, Heather and Ruby, Aaron. Smartbomb: The Quest for
Art, Entertainment, and Big Bucks in the Videogame Revolution
(Chapel Hill: Algonquin Books, 2005).
Crogan, Patrick. Gametime - History, Narrative, and Temporality
in Combat Flight Simulator 2', in Mark J. P. Wolf and Bernard
Perron (eds.) The Video Game Theory Reader (New York:
Routledge, 2003), 275-301.
Davis, Margaret (ed.). America's Army PC Game Vision
and Realization (San Francisco: US Army and the Moves Institute,
DeBrine, Jeffrey and Morrow, Donald E. Re-Purposing Commercial
Entertainment Software for Military Use', Master Thesis, Naval
Postgraduate School (2000).
Department of Defense. Department of Defense Dictionary of
Military and Associated Terms (Washington DC: Department
of Defense, 2004).
Der Derian, James. War as Game', The Brown Journal of World
Affairs 10.1 (2003): 37-48.
Friedman, Ted. Making sense of software: Computer games and interactive
textuality', in Stephen G. Jones (ed.), CyberSociety: Computer-mediated-communication
and community. (London: Sage Publications, 1995), 73-89.
General Accounting Office. Military Recruiting: Dod Needs
to Establish Objectives and Measures to Better Evaluate Advertising's
Effectiveness (Washington, DC: United States General Accounting
Office, 2003).
Gordon, Michael R., and Trainor, Bernard E. Cobra II: The
Inside Story of the Invasion and Occupation of Iraq.
(New York: Pantheon, 2006).
Graaf van der, Shenja and Nieborg, David B. Together We Brand:
America's Army', in Marinka Copier and Joost Raessens (eds.) Level
Up: Digital Games Research Conference. (Utrecht: Universiteit
Utrecht, 2003), 324-38.
Hall, Karen J. War Games and Imperial Postures: Spectacles of
Combat in U.S. Popular Culture, ', PhD Thesis, Syracuse
University (2003).
Halter, Ed. From Sun Tzu to Xbox: War and Video Games.
(New York: Thunder's Mouth Press, 2006).
Herz, Judith C. and Macedonia, Michael R. Computer Games and
the Military: Two Views', Defense Horizons 11 (2002).
Hiebert, Ray Eldon. 'Public Relations and Propaganda in Framing
the Iraq War: A Preliminary Review.; Public Relations Review
29.3 (2003): 243-55.
Humphreys, Sal. ;You're In Our World Now.;& Ownership and
Access in the Proprietary Community of an MMOG', in Shenja van
der Graaf and Yuichi Washida (eds.) Information Communication
Technologies and Emerging Business Strategies (Hershey, PA:
Idea Publishing Group, 2006): 76-96.
Jenkins, Henry. Textual Poachers: Television Fans and Participatory
Culture (London: Routledge, 1992).
Jenkins, Henry. &Interactive Audiences? The Collective
Intelligence of Media Fans', in Dan Harries (ed.) The New
Media Book (London: BFI, 2002), 157-76.
Jenkins, Henry. Quentin Tarantino's Star Wars?: Digital
Cinema, Media Convergence and Participatory Culture' in David
Thorburn and Henry Jenkins (eds.) Rethinking Media Change:
The Aesthetics of Transition (Cambridge: MIT Press, 2003),
Jowett, Garth S. and O'Donnell, Victoria. Propaganda and
Persuasion (Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, 1986).
Juul, Jesper. The Open and the Closed: Games of Emergence and
Games of Progression' in Frans M&yr& (ed.) Computer
Games and Digital Cultures. (Tampere: Tampere University
Press, 2002), 323-31.
Kline, Stephen., Dyer-Witheford, Nick and de Peuter, Greig. Digital
Play - the Interaction of Technology, Culture, and Marketing (Montreal:
McGill-Queen's University Press, 2003).
K&cklich, Julian. Precarious Playbour: Modders and the Digital
Games Industry'. Fibreculture Journal 3.5 (2005), .
Lenhart, Amanda and Madden, Mary (2005). Teen Content Creators
and Consumers. Washington D.C., Pew Internet and American
Life Project.
Lenoir, Tim and Lowood, Henry. Theaters of War: The Military-Entertainment
Complex', in Helmar Schramm and Jan Lazardzig (eds.) Ludger
Schwarte Kunstkammer, Laboratorium, B&hne--Sch&uplatze
Des Wissens Im 17. Jahrhundert/Collection, Laboratory, Theater
(Berlin: Walter de Gruyter Publishers, 2003).
Li, Zhan. The Potential of America's Army the Video Game as Civilian-Military
Public Sphere' MA thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Macedonia, Michael. R. and Rosenbloom, Paul. S. Entertainment
Technology and Virtual Environments for Training and Education'
in R. Larson, J. Meyerson and M. Devlin (eds.) The Internet
and the University: 2000 Forum. (Boulder: Educause, 2001),
Maguire, Flack, van Lent, Michael., Prensky, Marc and Tarr, Ron.
Defense Combat Sim Olympics - Methodologies for Incorporating
the Cyber Gaming C I/ITSEC 2002, 2002. CD-ROM.
Marshall, David P. The New Intertextual Commodity', in Dan Harries
(ed.) The New Media Book (London: BFI, 2002), 69-82.
Mead, Walter Russell. Power, Terror, Peace and War - America's
Grand Strategy in a World at Risk. (New York: Alfred A. Knopf,
Morath, Ray., Light, Elana., Gompper, Nick., Harris, Jim and
Zazanis, Michelle. Developing an Army Market Research Index
in Support of Army Recruiting. (Arlington: U.S. Army Research
Institute, 2001), http://www.hqda.army.mil/ari/pdf/rr1766.pdf.
Nieborg, David B. Militaire Game(r)s : Vechten in De Virtuele
Werkelijkheid', Tijdschrift voor Mediageschiedenis 7.2
(2004): 53-76.
---. Am I Mod or Not? - An Analysis of First Person Shooter Modification
Culture', Creative Gamers Seminar - Exploring Participatory
Culture in Gaming. (University of Tampere, 2005a), .
---. Changing the Rules of Engagement - Tapping into the Popular
Culture of America's Army, the Official U.S. Army Computer Game'
MA Thesis, Utrecht University (2005b), .
---. Games and Advertisement - Beyond Billboards and Banners',
in Shenja van der Graaf and Yuichi Washida (eds.) Information
Communication Technologies and Emerging Business Strategies
(Hershey, PA: Idea Publishing Group, 2006): 97-117.&&
Payne, Kenneth. The Media as an Instrument of War', Parameters
35.1 (2005): 81-93.
Raessens, Joost. Computer Games as Participatory Media Culture',
in Joost Reassens and Jeffrey Goldstein (eds.) Handbook of
Computer Game Studies (Cambridge: The MIT Press, 2005), 373-88.
Schleiner, Anne-Marie. Game Reconstruction Workshop: Demolishing
and Evolving Pc Games and Game Culture' in Joost Reassens and
Jeffrey Goldstein (eds.) Handbook of Computer Game Studies
(Cambridge: The MIT Press, 2005), 405-14.
Stockwell, Stephen and Muir, Adam. The Military-Entertainment
Complex: A New Facet of Information Warfare', Fibreculture
Journal 1.1 (2003), http://journal.fibreculture.org/issue1/issue1_stockwellmuir.html.
Taylor, Philip M. War and the Media - Propaganda and Persuasion
in the Gulf War. 2nd ed. (Manchester: Manchester University
Press, 1998).
Toffler, Alvin and Toffler, Heidi. War and Anti-War (Making
Sense of Today's Global Chaos). (New York: Warner Books,
Toles, Terri. Video Games and American Military Ideology', in
Vincent Mosco and Janet Wasko (eds.) The Critical Communications
Review, Vol. III. (Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex, 1985), 207-223.}