Sneak King

CONTENT WARNING – Contains descriptions and imagery of racist and militarist propaganda, as well as extreme language.

Propaganda, defined as “information, ideas, or rumors deliberately spread widely to help or harm a person, group, movement, institution, nation, etc.”, is not limited to the old stereotypes of shouty short films and red posters anymore. As media technology advances, so do the ways in which people attempt to disseminate ideas and influence beliefs on a large scale. Also, the spread of computers and the internet gives previously ignored groups a reliable avenue to create and circulate their message.

So how are video games used for propaganda? Here are three examples from different backgrounds:

Sneak King (2006, Xbox and Xbox 360) is a promotional game that was sold through Burger King restaurants. The objective is to control the Burger King mascot and complete challenges to stealthily give Burger King meals to hungry workers. You might not think this is “propaganda” in the traditional sense but it is designed around the sole purpose of altering people’s behaviour (i.e. to buy at Burger King) so it does fit the definition.

Ethnic Cleansing (2002, PC) is an independent game made by the now-defunct White Supremacist record label Resistance to express their Neo-Nazi views. The aim of the game is to kill the “subhumans” (blacks and Hispanics) who have taken over the city and overthrow the Jewish world domination conspiracy. The game features thematically similar speeches, music, posters and videos. At one point the soundtrack declares that “White revolution is the only solution” and there are the lyrics “gotta love this land of ours and fight to keep it White, never gonna give it up ‘cause we know we’re in the right”.

Lastly, America’s Army is a multiplatform series of games created by the U.S. government to help recruit the latest generation of game-loving youth into the army. The games and their spin-offs provide a realistic “virtual soldiering” experience by featuring the guns, vehicles, systems and core values actually used by the U.S. Army.

What are the implications of these propaganda games?

Firstly, we can think about the persuasion tactics common to all of the examples. They explicitly mark the protagonist of the game as their view of the “good guy” (Burger King, White Supremacist and U.S. soldier). The way to get from the start to the end is directly tied into achieving the ideal state of the world in their ideology (mass marketing Burger King meals, killing non-White races and serving in the military). All obstacles and tools along the way are marked according to the obstacles and aids in their ideology (e.g. Jews as obstacles in Ethnic Cleansing and guns as aids in America’s Army).

Can we apply this analysis to non-propaganda games? Since nearly all games have these elements (protagonists, a set method to achieve the goal, and obstacles and aids along the way), since developers must have some beliefs, and since they must appeal to the players, I would say that all games reflect an underlying ideology to some degree. For example, in the first-person shooter Battlefield 4 the developers have decided that the protagonist is an American sergeant and military violence is valued as the “correct” way to solve the problem. Sounds like America’s Army, right? The purpose of making the game might be different, but the values inherent in the game’s design are exactly the same. Just because the attitude and message isn’t official doesn’t mean it’s not there.

Secondly, we can think about whether the propaganda was effective. After playing or watching the above games, did you feel like buying Burger King, participating in a race revolution or joining the U.S. military? I didn’t. Propaganda games are not exempt from oppositional readings, where the audience interprets the text in a way the creator hadn’t intended. Instead of seeing Ethnic Cleansing as a righteous quest to restore justice to the world’s racial makeup, I saw it as a warning for how delusional and violent extremism can get. The game by itself wasn’t enough to convince me, since I was free to interpret it according to my personal beliefs. Ultimately, this implies that games with messages and representations designed to go against hegemonic social structures might not in themselves be an effective way to alter attitudes.

Sources: