ASA won't do anything about Change4Life ad

Zing!

Eh, they'll be dead soon anyhoo...

They seem totally weird to me. The ASA banned an iPhone commercial because they show off a bunch of features in 30 seconds, but at the same time is totally fine with "video games will kill you."

But there is more of a tendancy for kids to play video games for hours and hours at a time, day after day, than it is for a kid to read, or even watch tv for that amount of time. I get that just watching TV is just as bad, or technically reading as well. But the truth is that of those three, video games is definitely the most attractive to kids, and the one they are likely to spend more time on.

And again, while there is a strong attraction to video games by kids, it's not the video game industries problem, it's the parents ultimate responsibility. KNow what your kids are doing, and make the changes and rules you need to make to balance your kids out if they are currently playing too much.

Definitely. Governments should not be involved in parenting.

it's hard to lighten up when the ad essentially says " video games will make you die"

I don't think anyone would disagree with the message (i.e. don't be a slob). The problem is that the imagary used implies that gaming=being a slob. It may not actually say that, but it has a strong psycological message.

If things like this are allowed to pass it's only a matter of time before another Jack Thompson jumps on the band wagon and tries to get the "games as porn" litigation (or something like it) passed.

Video games are no different then any other passive form of entertainment. You don't see movies or books getting singled out in ads that "technically" claim participating in such an activity will result in your death.

Like the article pointed out, why not put a book in the child's hands? Reading a book is just as sedentary as playing a game, but no one would consider discouraging it...unless maybe it was a comic book, since those are evil.

I agree with Josh. If it doesn't apply to you, why do you care?

The FACT is that video games have indirectly caused a decline in more physical activities among kids like sports and such. Instead, they opt to play Halo 3 with their XBL "friends" instead, immersing themselves in the virtual playground that video games provide. But all the blame lies on the parents, not on the gaming industry

As a gamer, I realize that while it may reinforce a stereotype about gamers and gaming, I don't find this "offensive" simply because I know it isn't true.
However, as a parent, I do think that the ad will hopefully make parents pay more attention to their children, particularly how much are the playing, and what is their activity like. If as a parent, I am just letting my sons play Halo 3 daily for 1-2 hours after school, and for 8+ hours on weekends, while I just go along my own day and hobbies, then it's my fault, not the gaming industry that my kid ends up being anti-social, fat, lazy and unathletic. Parents don't realize how much they shape their kids outlook on life, habits, values, etc.

I do think it would go over better if they clarify their message a bit, direct it towards parents, and reinforce the fact that it's not about video games, but rather making sure as a parent you are offering your kids other experiences, as well as encouraging physical activities as sports. And the most obvious but very often overlooked advice is simply spend time with your child and actually have a meaningful relationship with them. I can't wait to game with my sons when they're old enough, but for now, I have to offer them age appropriate experiences and activities... taking them to a park... play catch... kick a ball around, etc. And when they are older, be sure they continue to balance their time. Moderation is the key.

And the book argument is just silly. It's 2009, so they are using the most popular entertainment medium for kids and teens of today as an example. 20 yrs ago, it was TV. It's keeping up with the times, nothing else.

I agree with Josh. If it doesn't apply to you, why do you care?

It stigmatizes game playing. That effects everyone playing games.
Your attitude reminds me of a saying that goes something like, "When they came to get my neighbors, I stayed silent. When they came to get me, there was no one left to speak for me."

I totally agree with Josh.
If the kid was reading a book or just watching TV, you wouldn't get TV or book sites starting an uproar about it, but there is something about gamers that causes an instant knee jerk reaction as soon as anyone slightly criticises gaming.

the problem is these kids that dont see a PROBLEM with the ad. Your consent just ads to the problem: painting video games as deadly

again, why not put a book in the kid's hand?

why not take out the controller, just have the kid watching tv?

TV has been around longer, and contributed FAR MORE to the moral decline of society in general and to the overall tendency toward apathy that many kids show these days

but yeah...go ahead, hate on video games; easy target.

Again, I think DEEZ and a few others up there have it right, at least my intent right. The point is that if we just ignore these things, no one will pop up for the free publicity. It makes gamers sound insecure and petty when they rally up in favor of their favorite passtime, as if some ad is going to cause the government to make playing games illegal.

As others mentioned, if it was a book, or a television, no one would notice, because no one would be making a huge freaking deal out of it. By rallying the troops and sounding the alarm, you are not only giving power to the stereotype of the tweakable, immature, short-attention span gamer, but you are drawing attention exactly to where you want it to be the LEAST.

How many of you would have seen this ad if it hadn't been on Joystiq? less than one percent I'm sure. Now we've all seen it, and while it may be a bit of a stretch, if we raise enough anger over it, it will be on the local news and thousands more will see it.

No one suggests gaming kills your kids, most parents of kids that age are or were gamers themselves so that can't be the point.

The POINT of the ad is that kids need to find something to do with their time besides sit around a TV.

Do any of you disagree with THAT point?

Of course Josh, there is nothing wrong with an ad that advises to do things in moderation. However, the image of the ad is a kid playing game, and big text saying "Risk an early DEATH, just do nothing." If it was a kid reading a book, everyone wouldn't pay attention to the ad because what parent is going to tell their kid not to read so much? The ad is making video games seem far more negative than more passive pastimes.

sorry you got downvoted Josh... I agree with you too.

The ad is making a valid point, ISN'T PARTICULARLY SINGLING OUT VIDEO GAMES, and i don't get what all the fuss is about.

Well, ok, i know gamers feel put upon by all the scapegoating, but they do seem to have totally overreacted in this case... not helped by Joystiq's tabloid scaremongering approach to reporting the story.

That's that I was thinking, too. Gaming isn't the only activity that doesn't require moving, and it usually works the brain more than most. But only games are considered the lazy thing to do. When I was a kid and was playing a game, I was told to read a book instead, but how is that any different?

Our European market still benefits your American industry greatly. Our problems are still your problems.

just a matter of time before these trends jump the pond and people like jack thompson are empowered and given authority

Because it's trying to reincorce the stereotype that videogames are unhealthy and are only enjoyed by those with no social lives. Like others have said, there's no reason to single out videogames here, over other forms of entertainment.

Staying in your house for days on end watching tv or reading books is going to have exactly the same impact. The only difference being, that videogames are a current hot topic, and showing your opposisition towards them is going to get you attention. i.e. Jack Thompson.

It's not that it's just video games.

It's the fact that you can't shake the stigma that this seers into the minds of people that don't game or don't understand the value in games or the depth that some studios go to in developing an experience that is just as credible as cinema or any other form of expressionism.

That's what the problem is.

For some people it may seem like bad luck of the draw for games, but for others it is a naive oversight by those involved to create impact by subliminally demonizing a legitimate trade.

Perhaps that is what you got out of the ad, and that's fine. I don't think they were trying relate video games as being the boogeyman of lazy things to do. I think they are just relating with the times. Now a days kids do play alot more video games and what I got form the ad is, "Hey parents, get your kids involed and active to keep them healthy!" See, I was not offended by the ad, and I'm sure alot of other people were not offended. I also have a Wii, 360 and a PS3 and could stand to loose a few pounds, the ad still does not offend me. My point is what I already said, people need to lighten up and stop making mountains over mole hills. You do make a good point about the flak that video games get, and people need to lighten up on that to. It's a hobby, it fun, and for the most part not hurting anyone!

Do you really think they would have even *considered* placing a book in the boy's hands? Really?

I don't know what everyone is getting so offended about either.... oversensitive souls...

Oh what. Joystiq ):

That was meant to be a reply to Infamous1.

Yeah, I really don't have a problem with this ad. If they had a kid sitting dumb-faced watching TV or sitting around listening to an iPod, it would have the same effect, and I'd hardly take it as an assault on those things in and of themselves (and in fact, I remember similar PSA campaigns in the '80s regarding television).

I love my consoles, but I'll happily admit that if I did nothing but sit around my living room playing them, I'd be on-track for some poor health issues. There's nothing offensive in acknowledging that.

I upvoted just to counter a downvote because it is an interesting discussion. I would ask him next time you have the chance is what kinds of games are more or less taxing? Is a text based PC game or a reading-heavy game like an RPG still below the level of a book or do certain genres have this impact? I would also ask if subtitled foreign language films are on the same level as primary language films.

I find myself agreeing with the sentiment, although it seems you were specifically saying something contrary to what I was saying.. odd that. Upvote.

No, I quite like "e-titties".

It would be a great company name if someone didn't already have it.