Debating on debate?

by Shawn Bruckner

I'm not sure how many editorials I have recently seen which have commented on the "complaining" of other editorials. I am sure, however, that it has been too many.

Matt Blackie essentially accused many of those complaining about Square and its recent or past games of being ungrateful. Now, this, I largely do not understand. Do one have to be grateful to the artist for providing art, even if one doesn't like it? Now, what if an individual feels the art (in this case, RPGs) is offensive in some way or perhaps even harmful? Should he or she be grateful?

This is a just an example of the current debate on debate occuring here. I can see where it has started, however. Many editorials here have been often aggressive and adversarial in tone. Many seem to be assuming that others will see things their way simply because they say it is so (by this, I am referring to the frequent one-statement declarations like "FF VII has underdeveloped characters"), rather than trying to convince readers through exploring and arguing the point.

I do have to agree that some of this has descended from true debate and persuasive writing to mere complaining, and I even feel that some editorials should not have been posted here because they simply stated their viewpoint as opposed to explaining it. The articles are definitely argumentative, but argumentative does not mean editorials should be terse and hostile.

But it is a gross overreaction to state that we should not complain. I do hope that future editorial writers will take more care to add elements of persuasiveness to their complaints, but it is not "ungrateful" or "incorrect" in any way to complain, and it is not going to inspire Square or any other company to leave the American market behind because of it. The companies are not the artists; the design teams which are employees of these companies make the games. As long as their investment in our market helps them keep a large number after "Net Income" on the income statement, they'll keep releasing games here. If we continue buying them, they'll keep selling them. Remember, we are the ones allowing game companies to make a profit.

Complaining, therefore, is one of the few options we have to persuade a company to change their ways. And it is for this reason that we should continue to do so. However, it is time to tone down and SLOW down. These general, unexplained complaints stated as fact quite often serve only to irritate, and in some cases, enrage. It is also important to remember what the purpose of an editorial really is, and that is to state your opinion in a way which may actually convince others. Many of these recent editorials are too lacking in tact and respect to reasonably be expected to actually change anyone's mind.

You don't have to be absolutely profound or eloquent to add respect and tact to your editorials. Here are few guidelines which will help:

- The IDEA is "idiotic and moronic," NOT the PERSON. Far too many people are coming out and attacking the person or a group of people. Okay, you may well believe that the person or group IS idiotic and moronic, but you don't have to say so directly.

- EXPLAIN ALL ARGUMENTATIVE POINTS. I can't stress this enough. If people are arguing the point, you saying it without any explanation, support, or examples doesn't make it a fact. For example, I think I have only twice seen editorials actually explaining why the characters in FF VII were underdeveloped, although I'm fairly certain this has been said in AT LEAST ten editorials here. All of the other writers have stated it as mere fact, and being a subjective matter, it just isn't a fact.

- Don't be afraid to add some detail. Some of these editorials are so short they come to their point before they make it. In other words, content should be considered before length. True, an editorial should not be excessively long - it shouldn't drive its point into the ground, but it should cover it adequately.

Yes, following good rules of writing (which the last two of the above guidelines are) adds tact and respect to an editorial. Tactfulness and respect don't guarentee people will listen or not be offended, but it does offer a much better chance that a reader will understand what is being said and can at least respect the viewpoint even if they don't agree.

My answer to this debate on debate is that there is nothing wrong with our debating and complaining, but there is something wrong with the way we have been debating. Debate is best when it serves a constructive purpose, and I feel we are losing that in this editorial section. I am simply asking the any editorial or potential editorial writers to consider this before and while writing these editorials. Maybe then, readers won't feel so edgy (as I feel now) after reading the latest batch of feature editorials.