Slashdot Mirror
CA Officials Respond To Lawsuit
Gamasutra is reporting on Yee and Schwarzenegger's response to the lawsuit brought in response to the violent games bill passed recently in California. From the article: "History has proven in cases of child labor and physical assault on children that we can and should pass laws to protect them. I am a strong believer in the First Amendment and in free speech, but when a game allows a player to virtually commit sexual assault and murder, as a society we must do what we can to protect our children, as we do for alcohol, tobacco, and pornography, among other items," We've previously reported on the passing of the bill and the filing of the lawsuit.
And what games allow the player to virtually commit sexual assault??
useless sig advice - Read Nabokov.
Lower your torches please. I don't feel like igniting a flame war about whose responsibility it is to protect 'the children', but I just had to point this out. He says that they have a duty 'as a community' to protect children. (I could go on for days ranting about problems in parenting, that aside) Couldn't they 'as a community' protect thier children without passing laws, if they are indeed acting as a community?
This just proves who's fooling who.
Perfecting Discordia
www.stevenvansickle.com
I most certainly agree that Fox gets away with way too much, and dislike the content that is made available for viewing durring hours when young children are awake. I was merely trying to point out the double standard that video games face.
The government already has laws barring the sale of pornography to minors. Which is what this seems to most closely related.
I fail to see what about GTA would even get it an NC-17 rating. The worst thing you could even see beyond violence would be the hot coffee mod, which shows two blocky cartoon charaters, with clothes on, engaging in consensual sex. You can't even see any sexual organs. Hardly relating to porn. Nothing that you couldn't see in an episode of the OC, except for maybe the cursing. Definately nothing here that you wouldn't see in any R rated movie. The point is, the government doesn't exert any control over who see's what movies, or reads what books, so why should they control who plays what games? They are trying to make the argument, without any evidence, that this kind of content is more damaging in video games. But if that were true, why has youth violent crime been dropping for the last 10 years, while video games sales have skyrocketed? This is issue has almost nothing to do about protecting our youth, and has everything to do with political sensationalism. If they were really concerned with protecting kids from this stuff they would be going after fox as well, but they won't because there is no perceived political gain from doing so. I think that a few years from now, we'll look back on this the way we look at people like Tipper Gore who were trying to protect our youth from the evils of Twisted Sister. What I wonder is, will this cycle keep on repeating itself forever? Will every new form of entertainment undergo this type of censorship by the older generation that is out of touch with the modern world? I sure hope not.
"When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro" -Hunter S. Thompson
So you're saying that *all* advertising for "adult" material should be outlawed in venues that children have access to?
That would mean no commercials for rated R movies/DVDs during "prime time", no pg-13 during the hours that even younger children are watching TV, especially on the weekends. Oh, and don't forget alcohol ads on before 10pm, yes, even during the sunday afternoon football games.
A quick flip thru just about any magazine in the country shows numerous movie advertisements for movies a child shouldn't see and tobacco ads. And these are magazines that any 9yo can pick up at 7-11. Not just gaming mags. And all readily available at the 'checkout counter'.
Let's not forget about the Evening news. Nobody's regulating all the sex, violence, drug use, violent sports, etc. shown to children on all the major network 2-3 times an evening. Are CNN, FOX-news and MSNBC regulated by the vchip? Better call your congressman.
Forget the fact that the Justice Department data shows that Juvenile Violent crimes are at an all time low and have been dropping steadily since the mid 90's. Some kid with emotional and mental problems stole his dad's gun and shot another kid in school someplace in middle-america. Since the news media found an X-box in his bedroom, there *MUST* be some correlation, so let's ban video games.
Idiots
We also have a duty to protect our nation against Communism. And thus it's entirely reasonable to have a law that requires citizens to register, in advance, for each and every piece of Communist literature that comes to them through the mail.
...or at least, that's the argument being put forward. I guess it depends on who you view a great big 18 sticker on the front of every box. Or, more tellingly, how 12 people who've been forced to do jury duty can be made to see it.
Except, as the judge found in that case, such a "protection" creates a "chilling effect" upon free speech and thus is unconstitutional.
A requirement for videogame stores to respect ESRB ratings is one thing. That has no "chilling effect" upon publishers creating new works.
Demanding a 2inch by 2inch bold logo on the front of a game stating it's 18 changes not just parental awareness (which can be covered by ESRB information displays) but serves to villify such titles, embarassing legitimate customers who don't want to be perceived as "bad" for purchasing them.
Similarly, it is reasonable to ask that publicly displayed adult magazines are placed out of children's reach and have either a non-sexual cover or that that cover is hidden. It is unreasonable and has a "chilling effect" to demand that adult magazines have a bright neon slip cover advertising "ANYONE WHO BUYS THIS IS A SEX ADDICT!" One protects children, the other has a chilling effect on the entirely legal sale of the product to those legally allowed to buy it.
The California law's problem is that it oversteps from being truly about protection of children in to "chilling effect" territory.
As was pointed out in the current PC Gamer, during an interview with Ye...
Ye "As a trained psychiatrist, I know how important it is to not expose children to these kinds of things. Many studies support this."
PCG "What about the many studies that show absolutely no correlation can be proved."
Yee "Statistics can be manipulated. I know how important it is. Many studies support this."
PCG "What about the fact that the violent crime rate in teenagers has dropped every single year since the release of the PlayStation and is now at half its peak ten years ago and the lowest it's been since the 70s."
Yee "Statistics can be manipulated. I know how important it is. Many studies support this."
In other words, he's formed his opinion and, whilst quoting statistics that suit him, has absolutely no interest in even exploring the massive weight of evidence to the contrary because statistics can be manipulated.
The amazing thing is he doesn't even seem to be embarassed to feed such a load of clearly self serving bull.