|
After 9/11, flight attendants won a long-fought battle to be
recognized as safety workers. The results have been helpful from a labor
perspective, but they haven't done much for overall passenger safety.
As Drew
Whitelegg describes in his book Working the
Skies,
airlines don't draw any more attention to matters of safety than they
absolutely must, lest they turn off rather than attract customers.
In some cases, like Southwest Airlines' famous safety rap,
individual flight attendants have taken it upon themselves to liven up the
cabin, to make the announcements more fun (and probably to make their jobs more
tolerable).
More recently, the airlines have adopted a similar approach as an
official corporate strategy. For example, my hometown airline Delta introduced
a new safety video
last year, featuring a shapely strawberry blonde flight attendant as its
narrator.
The video included numerous cuts to close-crops of her face,
accentuating her high cheekbones and full lips. At one point, she playfully
wags a finger in front of the camera, rejoining: "Smoking is not allowed on any Delta flight."
Her name is Katherine Lee, and she is an actual flight attendant
who works at Delta corporate in Atlanta.
But the Internet dubbed her "Deltalina" thanks to her resemblance to
sexpot actress Angelina Jolie.
The YouTube video of her security schtick has
been viewed over 1.3 million times. She appeared on television talk shows and
on CNN. Wired.com called her Delta's Sexy
Safety Starlet.
In a weird historical inversion, this very much is your father's Pan Am.
In a similar, yet weirder maneuver, Air New Zealand recently
began running an in-flight safety video with its cabin crew, both male and
female, totally naked, but emblazoned with
body-paint uniforms.
Careful framing and cuts insure the video is totally PG (there is a blurry
booty shot at the end), but the intention is clear: reinvigorate attention by
giving passengers something they want to look at.
Lift the Metal Flap to
Release
And these videos certainly have made passengers pay more
attention, even if they have also perpetuated a retrograde picture of the air
hostess as sex object. In the words of the
Delta manager
who produced the Deltalina video, they "make sure [our customers] know
what to do in the event of an emergency... adding bits of humor and unexpected
twists to something pretty standard."
Yet, in making the safety briefing
more interesting, efforts like those of Delta and Air New Zealand actually reduce its ability to communicate safety
information, if that was even possible.
Flight attendants tell us that "There may be 50 ways to
leave your lover but there are only eight ways to leave this airplane" as
a way to get our attention. Airlines produce and air safety videos with
bombshells and nudists because they want to try to raise our interest above the
level a printed pamphlet, illustrated card, filmed demonstration, or live
display can accomplish.
The pique works; we hear and see them (Rapper Steward is funny,
Katherine Lee is beautiful). But what we attend to is not the material being
delivered, but the manner by which it is delivered. I have flown hundreds of
thousands of miles on Delta since Deltalina made her debut, but I still have no
idea where to find my life vest ("Life vests are either between your
seats, under your seats, or in a compartment under your armrest"). Never mind
the eight steps required to don one properly.
The result is a kind of safety theater. Airlines perform the
appearance of safety in order to comply with federal and international
regulations while imposing the lowest cognitive and emotional burden possible
on the passenger.
To Your Muster Stations
If you've ever been on an ocean cruise, you've been required to
do what's called a "muster drill." Even though ships sink even more
rarely than planes crash, international law requires the crew to conduct an
actual drill, not just a demo (with or without body paint), in which passengers
must don their lifejackets and report to their assigned lifeboat station within
a certain amount of time.
The lessons learned from this practice are banal, but startling.
It's easy to put on a life vest, once you have done it once. It's easy to find
the right lifeboat station, once you know where to look. It's easy to find the
fastest route to that station, once you have tread it. But the first time, all
of these tasks are confusing.
Likewise, it's easy to fasten and unfasten your airplane
seatbelt, because you have done it so many times. Thankfully, I've never had to
put on one of those yellow oxygen masks that may fall "in the unlikely
event that cabin pressure changes." But if they did, despite myself, I bet
I wouldn't know exactly what to do -- never mind finding the exit doors that
have inflatable rafts instead of slides, or divining the proper way to unlatch
and extract an exit door.
|
Now, tell me that won't be a fun game to play, learning how trashing luggage will increase costs for the company.
As someone who learned math through Math Blaster, I definitely see what you're saying. But I don't think it's a matter of going back to the "good ol' days". According to wikipedia, the Blaster series are still very much alive and kicking.
The problem is that they're geared towards kids. Maybe it's just me, but I feel like there are a good deal of educational games for young children, but once you hit high school and up, educational games suddenly become extinct. Why is that?
I think what Mark's suggesting is that there were other games during the MathBlaster era that were more along the lines of the sort that I'm suggesting. I have vague memories of them too, but I can't put my finger on it. Time to go search the archives.
Ian, yeah I was saying a game about customer service has benefits. Not a new idea, but your article about airlines and the case with United breaking the guitar made me think of it.
Players who dally to pick up their luggage, or who head for the wrong exit, end up dragged to a watery grave.
I'm not sure this would have precisely the desired effect, but nevertheless I wish someone would make it. Isn't there a PyWeek and Ludum Dare coming up next month?
Let's face it, a lot of human beings are panicky, stupid, and have little emotional discipline. If you're the kind of person who actually wants to survive a plane crash, I guarantee you've read the safety card dozens of times, and gone through your exit check. Most people are not wired that way, and in a plane crash they're just gonna have to die. You'd be well advised to worry about keeping your own wits, help anyone you can to escape, and be prepared to punch the lights out of that obstreperous jerk who's just climbing over everyone to save his own hide.
[Great, the May 2011 edition of "Serious Game News" listed this as a featured article, but it was written almost 2 years ago. Oh well.]
I asked myself if BrainAge was a drill game but concluded that it's not, because the drills are just anonymous content to noodle. No reason it has to be that way.
@Ludum Ludo
You put your finger on an issue with games like this: we tend to think people don't want to be reminded of the possibility of bad things happening. But the muster drill is a good counterpoint to this argument. It is actually a comforting process, precisely because one acts it out.
I'm leading a new class in the Fall...using Second Life as the platform...(I hear the gamers groaning...but I'm using SL because the Edu folks have become more comfortable there and I see it as an opportunity to help them take another step). The course focuses on helping educators understand the basic elements of game design...what makes a good game a good game...and then apply some of those concepts to instructional re-design of their traditional learning materials. The result may or may not be a "game"...but it certainly ought to be more engaging and interesting...like what you describe in the post. We're currently focusing on things like meaningful decision-making, the use of failure (getting fragged in Algebra), and embedded and authentic assessment...to name a few directions.
I'd love to hear from anyone who might want to provide their personal thoughts about what makes a "good game", and what educators/trainers might need to know to recreate some of the more traditional learning activities into what you think would be more engaging. I've been talking with several game developers, game program instructors...and others from my own background in game development....but am interested in hearing from anyone else out that who wants to add to the mix.
If you're interested...drop me a note....
Thanks for the time!
John