Clinton joins GTA 'Hot Coffee' debacle
by Ross Miller 
{ Jul 14th 2005 at 3:45PM }
Hillary Clinton is asking for the government to yet again join in the fight against video games. Speaking this
morning, Clinton has demanded that the Federal Trade Commission join the ESRB and Australian OFLC in investigating the
source of GTA's controversial mod. Furthermore, Clinton is also presenting a law that would charge $5,000 for
selling M and AO-rated games to minors. Fair enough, but what about further implications beyond that? How will this
affect the ESRB's standing? Regardless of who actually authored the sex scene, this whole scandal is bringing another
mess on the video game industry as a whole. Hopefully, this this uproar will just subside soon enough.
On a lighter note, there is no such thing as bad publicity; I wonder how all this furor has helped sales of Grand
Theft Auto. Will the next game even need to advertise?
[via GameSpot]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Eli Gottlieb @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM
This is fucking stupid, and I want Hillary and Thompson to sit down and play GTA:SA with each other for a good 100 hours. The government has no business attaching rating systems to games or movies. So why did they? They enforced ratings more strictly and required them on new media because it was the 1990s and they didn't have 9/11 to politically exploit yet, so they took up social issues that would only sit badly with a specific minority THAT CAN'T VOTE. Yes, that's right, TEENAGERS.
This video game crap is just an effort to score some political points with no negative consequences because the only offended parties are legally forbidden from having any political power or clout. What's the real solution to these endless political crusades, then? To do the unthinkable and (gasp!) lower the voting age to a point where teenagers had enough clout that they couldn't simply be used as scapegoats or "protected" from every little non-existant social problem. Yes, that's right, if you check the statistics you'll find that there is NO outbreak of youth violence and that said youth violence has been on the decline since the 70s and 80s. If correlation equals causation, it would seem video games have made kids more peaceful.
You can't classify every kid's reaction to violent or sexual video games and movies as a group. People are individuals, and kids are people. Ergo, kids are individuals and no government has a right to legislate upon them as if they were a predictable mass.
In conclusion: Lower the voting age. It is the only real solution to these endless political tricks.
Pamela Tatz @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM
In agreement with Eli Gottlieb.
Lower the voting age.
GaffaUK @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM
The average game player is 30 years old so it follows there should be games aimed at them. Giving these games an Adult Only rating is a kiss of death because many stores like Walmart will not stock such apparent outcasts. This is the videogame equivalent of making many R-rated movies into a now defunct X-rated or the NC-17-rated movie. Imagine if you weren’t allowed to see the Godfather, Pulp Fiction, Psycho, Goodfellas, The Silence of the Lambs, Se7en, L?, A Clockwork Orange, or Schlinder’s List because they were effectively banned as they were deemed too violent and there was possibility kids might get their hands on them?
Steve Galgas @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM
When will society start treating video games like they do movies? Haven't we already established that adults play these things, and that not all video games are for kids? It's already slapped with an M rating, which would be the equivalent to "R", and the whole Hot Coffee thing isn't any worse than what you'd see in an R movie.
Ryuukuro @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM
That's it. Rockstar and these other companies who think it's so cool to make these things have got to be stopped before they ruin gaming for everyone. If what happened to the comics industry happens to gaming in America you can expect to be playing nothing but Mario games for the next thirty years. Not good Mario games, mind you, but Mario Teaches Colors. I'm sure we all want to play Mario Teaches Colors, don't we?
strider_mt2k @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM
How about "Mario teaches us how to be responsible for ourselves"
or
"Mario needs the government to be involved in this like a mushroom-shaped hole in the head"
or
"Mario gives it all up and moves to Miami like Luigi told him he should have done back when the rates were so low before and he had found that nice place..."
Joe @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM
it would be super if parents actually used the rating system, grew a set, and told their kids NO when they asked for a M rated game
Arch-360 @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM
i hate her face and people like her who try to be popular again by doing something for "the good of the nation". crap is what i say. all she cares about is here wallet and popularity.
nod @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM
This practice of "ratings" on films, cds, and games is woefully outdated, or at the very least needs a major overhaul to be truly effective. We (Americans) are still somehow (unbelievably) held hostage by our Puritan heritage, with all of it's skewed logic... like sex is bad, but gratuitious violence is a-ok.
From where I sit, Rockstar included assets within their game that go beyond what they're rated for, and she (Clinton) is asking the FTC to look into the facts. No biggie.
If Rockstar did purposely ( and stupidly) include those assets, which seem to be easily "unlockable", then they need to change the rating on the game. Again, no biggie. There may also be fines, etc., but I think that will be determined by how Rockstar handles this issue. If they cooperate, I doubt anything will happen.
nod @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM
I forgot to add that, before Elvis (music), it was books that were being banned, burned, and censored. Before that, it was "thought" and "ideas". Now we're up to video games. Wow... we've come a long way, eh?
Scott @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM
In reply to #3
"Mario teaches 'good touch/bad touch'.
Steven @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM
Take Two Interactive's Stock Price is down almost 4%. Not a good sign!
Sheikh Yerbouti @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM
I may be partisan, but that woman gives me nausea. She's the poster child of political opportunism. She married Bill to get into politics, and now she's jumping on the bandwagon against video games. I'm all for making a developer accountable if they supply the content, but her involvement will likely mean another witchhunt.
Shame on New Yorkers for voting into office!!!
benhc911 @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM
I to am stupified at the sex = bad, violence = good... Maybe if it had been rape it would have been okay (sorry about the low blow but come on) Boobies and such in BMXXX never gave it an AO... I also totally agree on stricter inforcment of ratings, although they should only be guidelines... parents never follow them or stick up to their kids, so something should be done.
Icelawn @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM
I agree with the majority of you. Parents should grow a pair of balls and tell their kids "NO!" Parents don’t even look at the ratings on games at all. When I had worked at a movie store (we rented games too), parents would blindly hand us the cash while they were talking on the cell phone not even realizing that the game that they are getting for their child is rated M. All the while little 8-10 yo Johnny is standing there smiling. After (finally) getting the parents attention and explaining the rating system to them, then they would act concerned. Even worse they would stay in the car and send their child in to get whatever game they want. Then they get pissed off if they have to get off their lazy ass and out of the car so that we can tell them about the game itself. Alot of times WE would be the ones getting chewed out for inconveniencing them. After a while it just becomes a pain in the ass. Co-workers stopped telling the parents and then occasionally we would get a phone call, chewing us out (again) because we had rented the game to their child. Then we have to give them their money back and try to attempt to explain the ratings to the parents again. It was a never-ending battle. I guess I am just venting but I hate this subject. To make a long story short "Parents, pay attention to your kids SHIT and we wont have this problem."
LittleZephyr @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM
I agree with Sen. Clinton on this. The same way I wouldn't want a kid walking into a theatre and seeing R rated movies, I wouldn't want a kid walking into a Best Buy and buying a copy of GTA. Libertarians can whine as much as they want about the gov't handling things, but stupid parents aren't going to stop buying their kids games like GTA.
The ratings system works, now it just needs to be enforced.
Fezmid @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM
#7 - Don't forget Role Playing games (like Dungeon and Dragons) in the late 70s and early 80s were the work of the devil too.
Sad.
Hank Mohaski @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM
I hate to be a defender of Hillary's, but...
I would like to point out to Sheikh Yerbouti that Hillary met Bill Clinton while both were at Yale Law School, with both of them already involved in student politics, not to mention that Hillary interned with a prominent children's law advocate. After graduation, her first job was working for the Children's Welfare Fund in Cambridge. It is wholly unfair and incorrect to say that she married Bill to "get into politics".
As a Senator, she is on the Senate Committee For Health, Education, Labor and Pension, as well as the Subcommittee On Education and Early Childhood Development.
I point these things out because if there is any politician in Washington who has earned the right to voice an opinion about video games and their effects on children, it is certainly Hillary Clinton.
Having said that, I agree with most posters here and everywhere else who thinks it is up to parents to take a more active interest in their children's activities and the kind of media they consume.
I also agree that these ongoing attacks on video games and other popular media is nothing more than a puritanical witchhunt.
boxmyth @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM
See, the problem with Hillary is that she went and gave Jack "Game-Hater" Thompson another reason to open his trap. We needs to all write letters (reasonable, non-profane) to this "lawyer" and let him know that we're game players that play violent and non-violent video games, yet we also have jobs, girlfriends, lives, beliefs, etc...
So take a minute to write to Hillary or Jack or both and let them know how you feel (keep in mind your comments will reflect on gamers everywhere so keep it smart and clean).
Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton
United States Senate
476 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Jack Thompson, Attorney at Law
1172 South Dixie Hwy., Suite 111
Coral Gables, Florida 33146
nod @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM
You guys are spending too much time concentrating on Hillary. If it wasn't her, it would have been someone else. Concentrate on what's important. Hillary is just a distraction from the main issue.
boxmyth @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM
Better yet, drop Mr. Thompson a call or email. He'll thank you for it!
305-666-4366
jackpeace@comcast.net
John Kepler Lewis @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM
From my blog in response to Thompson's nonsense:
Ok, as much as I want to just start raving "idiot, idiot, idiot..." I need to address a few points. The ESA and their related organization, the ESRB, do not make an attempt to control content, quality, distribution or consumption of games. They are merely an advisory board, unlike the MPAA, who have their hands in a multitude of facets of the movie industry. Yes, the ESA is now moving on to the anti-piracy bandwagon, which is perfectly fine, but they understand the industry. They understand the legal and proper uses of a .torrent file, so they don't mess with that aspect. I realize it is quite cliche' to compare the movie and games industry, but it's the closest thing we have to make the argument.
There are awful video games out there that achieve an "M" rating that have a much smaller impact on the general populace and the news media as a whole. The problem arises when a decent selling game which happens to have an M rating hits the streets. The popular culprit for lawmakers to pick on is GTA, as they have here. This game, without the "Hot Coffee" mod/exploit possibly could have earned an Adults-Only rating. From the ESRB's website:
Titles rated AO (Adults Only) have content that should only be played by persons 18 years and older. Titles in this category may include prolonged scenes of intense violence and/or graphic sexual content and nudity.
As apposed to the M rating:
Titles rated M (Mature) have content that may be suitable for persons ages 17 and older. Titles in this category may contain intense violence, blood and gore, sexual content, and/or strong language.
Without the "Hot Coffee" mod/exploit, GTA: San Andreas falls easily into BOTH categories.
The only difference you'll see in these two entries is the "prolonged scenes of intense violence" and the word "nudity" in reference to sexual content. You'll also see that the M rating is given to titles that are for those ages 17+ and the AO is for those that are 18+. I'm not a psychologist, and I know the legal definition (in the U.S.) of an adult is 18, but do we really need these two distinctions if the only difference factor is two words? I realize this is moving towards the standard of having one unified "media rating system" (tv/movie/game/print/internet/etc...) but why must we incorporate the outdated, fairly pointless parts in the new systems?
Why blame the ESA? Take-Two never came out and said "our mission statement is to peddle a pornographic game to little kiddies!" did they? Rockstar/Take-Two has continued to push the envelope of graphic violence and social commentary since GTA3. (See Manhunt, Red Dead Revolver) Their marketing has never targeted anyone but adults though. You won't see an advertisement for GTA: San Andreas on Nickelodeon, but you will see it on Spike TV. You won't see it during the day on Cartoon Network, but you will see it on Adult Swim.
As I write this, it's still undetermined whether or not the mod that sparked this controversy is an actual exploit mini-game that was hidden in the code or an outside modder's attempt to use the in-game models for some dirty, dirty love. There is no way to access this game outside of some (closed-source) coding wizardry, and it was not disclosed to the ESRB or ESA upon their rating of the software. Does Mr. Thompson think it's suddenly Doug Lowenstein's responsibility to scan every line of code in every piece of media that passes through his hands? The MPAA is required to watch every minute of every movie, but this is not a linear piece of media. The estimated GTA:SA content extends into hundreds of hours.
So where's the liability for them? Mr. Thompson takes pot shots at Take-Two's accounting shortcomings, which is completely out of the realm of the actual issue (which seems to be a Hillary Clinton campaign contribution) of video game maker accountability. Mr. Thompson (or as I like to call him- "Thumper", for no other reason than it makes me laugh) calls Lowenstein a person who demonizes critics who point out criminal fraudulent excesses in his industry yet fails to mention anything other than one non-rating or advising related issue.
Why doesn't Thumper take aim at retailers, for God's sake? God forbid this man take a shot at the overblown retail industry! The ESA does not distribute games. (Does he even realize that?) The ESA cannot prevent a game from being released. The ESA is simply an advisory board trying to help the problems prevalent in the industry. This man just doesn't get it. Lowenstein, though not particularly one of my favorite people, has a perfect understanding of the First Amendment. Maybe not the particular verbiage associated and how it is interpreted, or the result of cases brought to the Supreme Court, but the spirit of the constitution itself.
The ESA and Take-Two are extremely responsible on the level that they are required and expected to be. If Tommy Vercetti showed up killing prostitutes in an E rated game with an exploit that was easily accessible by children, I could see where there would be a problem. In the meantime, Thumper, please get your facts straight. People will do bad things no matter what they're exposed to. It's all a product of their brain chemistry mixed with their environment. Bush is partially right when he says blame the parents. This is NOT the industry's problem, and blaming them to score a political favor with a possible presidential candidate (echhh...) is unforgivable. I really hope this "open-letter" has scarred any chance of credibility on his part.
Anyone who calls the industry fledgling is silly. It's been around for two decades and impacts a large percent of our population. Come on Thumper. Get real.
Comments?
J-Lew
pspimp @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM
Oh for the love of....
Hillary is a witch. seriously. A witch, like you know, the wizard of OZ? I am not talking "bewitched" or Harry potter. She is a satan worshipping witch.
That having been said, for her, a pro abortion, pro gay, hyper liberal satan worshipper to come out against GTA almost makes me want to buy the game just to say a personal FU to her and her rotten husband.
I mean, lets get real, just look at her face. It is like a plate of worms, just aweful.
Such a typical lame assed political statement absolutely cracks me up. Everybody bitches that republicans are the ones clamping down on video games etc, but look at the record, tipper gore, hillary, why? because it is in the news and they can latch on like fecking barnacles to a "hot" issue.
She would back off if there was a Grand theft auto-OVAL OFFICE EXPLOITS edition.
pspimp @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM
Oh, I forgot, here's a good caption for that picture....."DUHHHHHH! Socialize medicine!!!"
beaaaach.
Rare Hare @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM
Hillary Clinton is one of the best politicians i know of, and to come down on her about this is wrong.
all she's wanting is to increase the strictness of the rules in relations with the ratings. leave her alone.
TO BOXMYTH:
thank you for the addresses, i will certainly be dropping them both a line or two expressing my feelings on the matter :).
FEZIG @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM
These parent groups are acting like they bought a Pokemon game that had sex in it!
With or without the Hot Coffee mod, GTA:SA is a game for mature audiences.
I don't understand how gratuitous violence is okay but throw in some sex and people get all crazy about it? Yet those same parents will let their kids watch movies with sexual content and violence.
This is a freedom of speech issue and Rockstar has a right to make these games and adults have a right to buy them for themselves and the option to restrict them from their children like they do with movies, tv show, and magazines.
Blue Balloon @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM
Well.. she encourage all clerks and small store owner to make sure they refuse to sell "M" to minor. It was umm out of control that most small store owner will sell anything for money. Yeah! They don't give shit about kids break their virgin at such a young age.
Josh @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM
Hillary is weighing in on this issue mainly so she can stay in the news on some benign (to the majority of the voting population) topic. I'm sure she knows it won't hurt her politically and that GTA sales will only go up because of the controversy. The GTA marketers are probably rubbing their hands with glee at all the publicity. So overall, I think it's a politically savvy move, and mostly harmless to video game fans. Good for her.
OtakuCODE @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM
Playing a videogame never hurt anybody. Watching a movie never hurt anybody. Reading a book never hurt anybody. If kids get their hands on ultra-violent games or hard-core porn, absolutely nothing is going to happen to them. They might ask their parents some questions the parents are afraid of, but that's pretty much it. People need to calm the hell down and realize they're freaking out over NOTHING. If little Johnny sees some nipples or sees some pixelpeople shooting other pixelpeople, he's still going to be the same kid.
benhc911 @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM
prolonged violence equals an AO...? then GTA is only M why? And changing it form 17+ to 18+? thats freaking retarded. Grow balls say no, and if you are an employee tell them about the game. Parents, I dont give a rat's ass if you child cries and say but Johnny is 1 year younger than me and he has it, tell them NO. What a screwed up "Christian" world we live in where violence is much preferable to sex, as I said above... is rape okay then? or S&M? does the violence balance out the sex?
Sheikh Yerbouti @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM
Mr. Mohaski
Bill's political ambitions were one of the reasons she was attracted to him. She has said so herself. Why would she run in New York if not Illinois or Arkansas? She may be involved in the child welfare issues, but in this case, as others, it is perversely political.
You called it a witch-hunt too. She is doing far worse than voicing an opinion, she's calling for the FTC to play a role in how games are rated. That's too close to censorship. The RIAA and MPAA never had to do so, and they do it far less effectively than the ESA and ESRB.
It may take a village, but she's excluding parents and faulting an industry governing bodies that have gone above and beyond what is normally expected. In this case I'd look for a better 'opinion'.
Jenn @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM
I am so tired of hearing about what the evil videogames are doing to our children! This game was made for ADULTS!
I work for a major videogame retailer and we have been strictly enforcing the policy of not selling ANY "M" rated games to ANYONE under 17 without a parental consent. And we always explain to the parent what is in the game to give it that Mature rating. Everyone seems to be under the mistaken impression that if parents only knew what thier kids were playing they'd stop them. THAT'S NOT THE CASE! About 85% of parents that bring these games up to the counter for their 8 year old to buy DONT CARE! Some excuses I've heard are: "He's played the other ones already", "well, I dont like it but you know he really wants it", "thats how life is", and my personal favorite, "he's seen worse on the streets".
So you know what? MAKE a law to legally ban us from selling these games to minors! Fine us if we don't comply! We're already being responsible about it, so it changes nothing. And maybe when THAT law is passed these over-zealous lawmakers will have no choice but to focus on the real problem here...THE HUGE MAJORITY OF PARENTS WHO BUY THIER KIDS MATURE RATED GAMES TO SHUT THEM UP!
But you know, then it's the lawmakers who will have to shut up, because its not nearly so politically correct to criticize the voters' parenting skills as it is easy to heap the blame on retailers and video game creators.
Brian Garceau @ Dec 18th 2005 10:08PM
This is just another case of the parents with to much time
on their hands association blaming everyone else for their kids problems but them selves don't they have jobs Hilary says "video games should be treated like alcohol and cigarettes" which sponsor their election campaigns
I'm really not looking forward to the future of video games if they don't stop this witch hunt could you imagine a PCgta game with missions such as mow your neighbors lawn help the old lady with her bags help your friend paint his house i mean would the parents who are complaining take their kids to see a rated R movie its the stores responsibility to make sure they don't sell the M rated games to minors but then the parent buys for them anyway and complain when they have to go to the store and buy it I mean what do they want make up your minds. Hilary only on board to get more attention to her self i guess the whole war on drugs is to old to care about or bringing better founding to schools is not a priority to her i guess but regulating adult video games so kids dint get their hands on them if only we had someway of keeping adult games away from kids some sort of rating system like movies have OH WAIT WE ALREADY HAVE ONE ITS CALLED ESRB RATING SYSTEM I GUESS SHE LIKES REDUNDANCY!!!!! here's my plan have a way to stop stupid parents from having kids