I don't intend to spam every single article on the Mass Effect/FOX News story with this, but I did put it in one other as well as on other blogs, and I don't want the core of it forgotten. After all, there have been, as Dennis said, plenty individuals who struck back by slamming Amazon with negative comments regarding Ms. Lawrence's book, emailed FOX, Ms. Lawrence, even the author of the earlier article at TownHall, and cheered EA on, I thought it important to show another way of speaking up as well. So my apologizes if this annoys you... ahem... "darling". :O
Do you know what? I’ve just had one of the most significant epiphanies I have EVER had. So strong is it that I’m going to copy this post (originating at Gamepolitics.com under the article about EA’s response to the FOX News story about the game “Mass Effect”) and I’m going to post it to several other blogs. Moreover, I’m going to email this post to several individuals, including Dennis at GP, Hal Halpin at the ECA, and even Mr. Brown at EA. Will anything come of it? Maybe. Maybe not. But I’m going to do it anyway.
Here’s the thing. This FOX News report… it was a GOOD thing. Do you know WHY it was a GOOD thing? Simple: we get to cram it down the throats of a number of high ranking and out spoken individuals, organizations, and government groups who DIDN’T comment, let along CONDEMN the quality of the news report.
We’ve heard time and again from politicans such as Leland Yee (CA) or Senator Burrell (LA), and many others from Utah to NY. Organizations such as the PTC (Parent’s Television Council) or the CSM (Common Sense Media) or even NIMF (National Institute on Media and the Family). We’ve heard from the self-righteous such as John Bruce “Jack” Thompson or the conspiracy theorists such as Lyndon LaRouche.
We’ve heard them all say how the ESRB does not properly research the games they rate. That the ESRB doesn’t properly inform Parents so they can make appropriate choices for their children. We constantly hear how harried Parents are and how they supposedly don’t have the appropriate resources to make wise decisions. We hear condemnation upon condemnation against the gaming industry. We hear condemnation upon condemnation against gamers themselves. We hear condemnation upon condemnation against reviewers and game news sites. We hear the cry of moral superiority over everything that is computer and video games. We hear claims that only the government can make the appropriate decisions for Parents as to what is or is not appropriate, whether it’s in regards to video games or media in general.
But, WHERE ARE THEY NOW??? FOX News knowingly and INTENTIONALLY aired false information. Everyone at FOX News knew it. Proven just by the few statements allowed by Geoff Keighley, Cooper Lawrence had, in effect, openly lied. And other panelists aided in those lies. But where is the condemnation by politicians against FOX News for knowingly and intentionally LYING TO PARENTS who watched that story? Where is the condemnation against FOX News by the organizations and the self-righteous individuals?
They are all silent. Someone claims that video games are responsible for a crime, and the chatter from politicians, organizations, and the self-righteous never ends. FOX News lies to Parents about video games… and you could hear immortal crickets chirping on the moon.
I say this should be the battlecry. Not simply us screaming about and to FOX News and Cooper Lawrence. But us screaming “WHERE ARE -YOU-!” to those politicians, organizations, and self righteous individuals who’ve remained silent so far. I say if they have so much condemnation for us and our interests, then maybe we should have condemnation for their SILENCE.
I say not only should individuals be sending intelligent, respectful CONDEMNATIONS to their politicians, those organizations (and others) mentioned, and the self-righteous individuals mentioned (and others not mentioned), but so should our organizations such as the ECA, the VGVN (who until now has appeared as nothing more than a mouth piece), EA, even the ESA, among others.
I say it’s time we pointed a few spotlights on those who failed to condemn FOX News’ actions.
Do you know what? I've just had one of the most significant epiphanies I have EVER had. So strong is it that I'm going to copy this post (originating at Gamepolitics.com under the article about EA's response to the FOX News story about the game "Mass Effect") and I'm going to post it to several other blogs. Moreover, I'm going to email this post to several individuals, including Dennis at GP, Hal Halpin at the ECA, and even Mr. Brown at EA. Will anything come of it? Maybe. Maybe not. But I'm going to do it anyway.
Here's the thing. This FOX News report... it was a GOOD thing. Do you know WHY it was a GOOD thing? Simple: we get to cram it down the throats of a number of high ranking and out spoken individuals, organizations, and government groups who DIDN'T comment, let along CONDEMN the quality of the news report.
We've heard time and again from politicans such as Leland Yee (CA) or Senator Burrell (LA), and many others from Utah to NY. Organizations such as the PTC (Parent's Television Council) or the CSM (Common Sense Media) or even NIMF (National Institute on Media and the Family). We've heard from the self-righteous such as John Bruce "Jack" Thompson or the conspiracy theorists such as Lyndon LaRouche.
We've heard them all say how the ESRB does not properly research the games they rate. That the ESRB doesn't properly inform Parents so they can make appropriate choices for their children. We constantly hear how harried Parents are and how they supposedly don't have the appropriate resources to make wise decisions. We hear condemnation upon condemnation against the gaming industry. We hear condemnation upon condemnation against gamers themselves. We hear condemnation upon condemnation against reviewers and game news sites. We hear the cry of moral superiority over everything that is computer and video games. We hear claims that only the government can make the appropriate decisions for Parents as to what is or is not appropriate, whether it's in regards to video games or media in general.
But, WHERE ARE THEY NOW??? FOX News knowingly and INTENTIONALLY aired false information. Everyone at FOX News knew it. Proven just by the few statements allowed by Geoff Keighley, Cooper Lawrence had, in effect, openly lied. And other panelists aided in those lies. But where is the condemnation by politicians against FOX News for knowingly and intentionally LYING TO PARENTS who watched that story? Where is the condemnation against FOX News by the organizations and the self-righteous individuals?
They are all silent. Someone claims that video games are responsible for a crime, and the chatter from politicians, organizations, and the self-righteous never ends. FOX News lies to Parents about video games... and you could hear immortal crickets chirping on the moon.
I say this should be the battlecry. Not simply us screaming about and to FOX News and Cooper Lawrence. But us screaming "WHERE ARE -YOU-!" to those politicians, organizations, and self righteous individuals who've remained silent so far. I say if they have so much condemnation for us and our interests, then maybe we should have condemnation for their SILENCE.
I say not only should individuals be sending intelligent, respectful CONDEMNATIONS to their politicians, those organizations (and others) mentioned, and the self-righteous individuals mentioned (and others not mentioned), but so should our organizations such as the ECA, the VGVN (who until now has appeared as nothing more than a mouth piece), EA, even the ESA, among others.
I say it's time we pointed a few spotlights on those who failed to condemn FOX News' actions.
Sheppy, What's moronic about requiring those holier-than-thou authority figures (such as politicians) to be held to the same high "moral" standards that they expect everyone else to be held to? If they are going to hold office, then they should be required to tell the Truth, The Whole Truth, and Nothing But The Truth, as one would in a court of law.
I, myself, have suggested that before any politician can speak in a hearing on a bill or create a bill or sponsor a bill, they must pass a questionaire of 100 or so questions regarding the issue the bill governs. Failure to receive a passing grade requires the politician to be denied the ability to have any authority of creation or formal speaking (as opposed to providing personal opinions in interviews, for example) regarding said bill on grounds of "Ignorance and/or Incompetence of Issue".
As to the article, there have been many other events where one would think massacre chasers and agenda seekers/users alike would have used the "video games are to blame" chant. I believe I mentioned to Dennis a year or two ago in an email about the shooting of a police officer local to where I live by a young man (in his twenties). At the time, Dennis said the guy was probably too old. Yet, these days, that "max age" seems to have grown somewhat.
Sometimes, even events that occur at or near a school seem to also receive little attention from the "game blame" crowd.
Maybe they're throwing darts at maps and then checking for recent events to blame and the lesser reported cases are being overlooked when the dart doesn't hit near those cities.
Hmmmm.... 2384, introduction of old console and PC titles on the Holodeck: Black & White Various Tycoon series Neverwinter Nights Life & Death Worlds of Warcraft Star Trek Bridge Commander
Endless titles enjoyed by the ancestors, now brought to vivid life in your own persoanl Holodeck.
(You'll notice I didn't mention AO titles, but that doesn't mean I wasn't thinking about them. :) )
Pah! Now if Pogo ( www.pogo.com ) let you spend, say, 1 million tokens to pre-order a PS3, Xbox 360, and/or a Wii, then that'd be something to look forward to (not to mention miss a LOT of sleep playing on Pogo).
As to Julia Boseman, her lesbian status is of absolutely no interest in the voting arena as far as I'm concerned.
I am glad that she brought the lottery to NC. There are still pockets of controversy that pop up in regards to it, but I think in the end it's a good decision.
But I am rather displeased with her association with John Bruce and their attempt to violate my Parental Rights by creating such legislation, even if it didn't make it to be voted on.
Here ads talk about the money she's had put towards protecting our children. Yet such a legislation would put unnecessary financial burden on NC.
If it passed and a lawsuit ensued and they failed in court, NC would loose money paying the legal fees to the Game Industry.
If the bill passed, one way or the other, funds would have to be available to enforce the law. Not much use in creating a law if you don't enforce it.
Some have, in the past, likened video game legislation and enforcement to the laws regarding tobacco and alcohol. Let's ignore the difference between one being a chemical substance and the other not and focus on the factor of the law as an "age limit" law.
The money spent making certain that retailers do not sell tobacco/alcohol to minors might seem oh so feel good.
Problem: If a minor wants these things, how do they get them?
(1) Fake ID. Doesn't always work, but on occassion, it does. (2) Have a very "open minded" parent buy the items for the minor. So much for the age limit law. (3) Steal from parent's stash. So much for the age limit law. (4) Have an older friend/relative (sibling for example) buy it for them. So much for the age limit law.
There are others I'm sure. But the point is, all the money spent on enforcement might make it SEEM like a success. But when you look closer, minors are still getting and using such products.
Would the effects be the same if retailers merely set their own age limit policy and followed them versus the state spending the money and personnel time to verify that age limits are maintained? I really don't see a drastic difference in the number of minors obtaining such products. And without such laws, NC would have more money in its coffers and more personnel could be devoted to other tasks of importance. Should the laws be dropped now? Bit late. It probably would save money, but I think people have gotten used to it by now. So, it would be better simply not to waste the money/manpower on the video game legislation since it's not in place yet. After all, the same problems with "age limiting" exist for the proposed video game legislation.
Some might argue about pornography. The problem with that word is that a great many individuals have, or at least tried to, expand just what is or is not pornographic. Even if you're just talking about "adult media" (such as Playboy/Playgirl, Hustler, and adult videos), there are a few parents who may actually think their teenage children may be mature enough for such material. Again, their opinion may differ from mine but that doesn't absolutely make them "bad" parents.
But it's also true that there are many individuals who have tried to get certain works of art (from paintings to books) labeled as "pornography" simply because they believe their ideals are superior to everyone else's and that such items are, therefore, inappropriate for EVERYONE.
While such material may have been seen as "cut and dry" issues, these days, it isn't always so clear. And the prospect of an individual, organization, and/or government body attempting to dictate what is or is not appropriate for other people's children is still a very large concern.
The problem I've seen with such legislation is from a parent's point of view. The fact is, such legislation is designed to violate Parental Rights. It's designed to dictate what is or is not appropriate for any particular individual's child.
The end result of such legislation is never more prevelant than in the case now before the court in Florida regarding the yet-to-be-released video game Bully. How so? After all, the case isn't brought due to video game legislation.
HOWEVER, such cases are, in effect, how enforcement would be dealt if such legislation WERE in place.
If there is a violation of the legislation, then a case very similar to this, whether a jury trial or not, would be brought into existance to determine if the game involved in the violation was, in fact, "inappropriate". But who is making that decision in the specifc case? The parent of the child who knows the child better than any individual on the planet? No. A jury and/or a judge who are unfamiliar with the child who attempts to buy any particular game.
It's the same as the case in Florida right now. A judge is being required to pass judgment on a specific game to determine if this game is or is not appropriate for, at the least, every child in Florida, regardless of whether any specific parent disagrees with that opinion. In effect, the judge is saying that any parent who disagrees with his opinion is therefore a bad parent. The same is true the legislations being drafted. Basically, it is, in effect, creating a dictatorship over every parent by saying they, themselves, do not have the right to make decisions for their own children.
The fact is, just because one parent doesn't make the same decision that another parent makes, doesn't mean that one is a "good" parent while the other must be "bad" by default. Each parent makes decisions that they believe is right for their OWN child.
You may say what about the ESRB (or any rating system) and a store who makes policy to sell based on the rating system.
I've always felt the rating systems were "flash cards". They weren't designed to pass judgment on a product. Merely inform people as to content. Even the age ranges are recommendations based on the general content, not on the specific game. If this content descriptor and that one are attributed to the game, it falls under this age rating, while the addition of this content descriptor may make it this other rating. Same for movies and TV. It isn't a sign of judgment, but merely an information resource. And there are many other resources to obtain information from. Stores that have policies that follow the ratings are merely recognizing that some, not all, but some parents may buy games for their children based on the information and the retailer shows parents respect by letting the parent make their own decision as to what is or is not appropriate for their child. Again, not a judgment, just an adherance to possible parental decisions.
It's the same with parental controls (like the V chip). The TV doesn't ask "how old is your child?" and if you put in one age, it says "Oh, ok, these ratings are inappropriate for your child" and blocks the shows. Parental Control allows the PARENT to pick and choose based on ratings/content as to what the individual parent believes is or is not appropriate for their own child.
So I continue to maintain that such legislation is merely designed to violate Parental Rights and dictate to parents what is or is not appropriate for their own children.
Oh, and John Bruce, from your comment number 75: "It doesn't even ask for $600 million, so McCauley can't even get that fact straight."
Here are a fraction of the number of folks who refer to the suit being for $600 million. The search was on Google News, Advanced Search, Exact Phrase "$600 million", With All the Words "Cody". This is just a tiny fraction of what resulted:
Oh, and, gee, look. The TV network that owns 60 Minutes. Wonder why I would think a network that owned 60 minutes would be important to you, huh? Hmmm.....
Kim Kardashian Cast in Wax for Madame Tussauds
Jun 29th 2010 9:50PM (PopEater)...
Wait.
...
Was that my outside voice? - Harper, Andromeda series.
The Political Game: Stand up and be counted
Jan 25th 2008 12:57PM (Joystiq)------------------------------------------------------
Do you know what? I’ve just had one of the most significant epiphanies I have EVER had. So strong is it that I’m going to copy this post (originating at Gamepolitics.com under the article about EA’s response to the FOX News story about the game “Mass Effect”) and I’m going to post it to several other blogs. Moreover, I’m going to email this post to several individuals, including Dennis at GP, Hal Halpin at the ECA, and even Mr. Brown at EA. Will anything come of it? Maybe. Maybe not. But I’m going to do it anyway.
Here’s the thing. This FOX News report… it was a GOOD thing. Do you know WHY it was a GOOD thing? Simple: we get to cram it down the throats of a number of high ranking and out spoken individuals, organizations, and government groups who DIDN’T comment, let along CONDEMN the quality of the news report.
We’ve heard time and again from politicans such as Leland Yee (CA) or Senator Burrell (LA), and many others from Utah to NY. Organizations such as the PTC (Parent’s Television Council) or the CSM (Common Sense Media) or even NIMF (National Institute on Media and the Family). We’ve heard from the self-righteous such as John Bruce “Jack” Thompson or the conspiracy theorists such as Lyndon LaRouche.
We’ve heard them all say how the ESRB does not properly research the games they rate. That the ESRB doesn’t properly inform Parents so they can make appropriate choices for their children. We constantly hear how harried Parents are and how they supposedly don’t have the appropriate resources to make wise decisions. We hear condemnation upon condemnation against the gaming industry. We hear condemnation upon condemnation against gamers themselves. We hear condemnation upon condemnation against reviewers and game news sites. We hear the cry of moral superiority over everything that is computer and video games. We hear claims that only the government can make the appropriate decisions for Parents as to what is or is not appropriate, whether it’s in regards to video games or media in general.
But, WHERE ARE THEY NOW??? FOX News knowingly and INTENTIONALLY aired false information. Everyone at FOX News knew it. Proven just by the few statements allowed by Geoff Keighley, Cooper Lawrence had, in effect, openly lied. And other panelists aided in those lies. But where is the condemnation by politicians against FOX News for knowingly and intentionally LYING TO PARENTS who watched that story? Where is the condemnation against FOX News by the organizations and the self-righteous individuals?
They are all silent. Someone claims that video games are responsible for a crime, and the chatter from politicians, organizations, and the self-righteous never ends. FOX News lies to Parents about video games… and you could hear immortal crickets chirping on the moon.
I say this should be the battlecry. Not simply us screaming about and to FOX News and Cooper Lawrence. But us screaming “WHERE ARE -YOU-!” to those politicians, organizations, and self righteous individuals who’ve remained silent so far. I say if they have so much condemnation for us and our interests, then maybe we should have condemnation for their SILENCE.
I say not only should individuals be sending intelligent, respectful CONDEMNATIONS to their politicians, those organizations (and others) mentioned, and the self-righteous individuals mentioned (and others not mentioned), but so should our organizations such as the ECA, the VGVN (who until now has appeared as nothing more than a mouth piece), EA, even the ESA, among others.
I say it’s time we pointed a few spotlights on those who failed to condemn FOX News’ actions.
Nightwng2000
EA to Fox News: 'correct the record' on Mass Effect
Jan 24th 2008 10:58PM (Joystiq)Here's the thing. This FOX News report... it was a GOOD thing. Do you know WHY it was a GOOD thing? Simple: we get to cram it down the throats of a number of high ranking and out spoken individuals, organizations, and government groups who DIDN'T comment, let along CONDEMN the quality of the news report.
We've heard time and again from politicans such as Leland Yee (CA) or Senator Burrell (LA), and many others from Utah to NY. Organizations such as the PTC (Parent's Television Council) or the CSM (Common Sense Media) or even NIMF (National Institute on Media and the Family). We've heard from the self-righteous such as John Bruce "Jack" Thompson or the conspiracy theorists such as Lyndon LaRouche.
We've heard them all say how the ESRB does not properly research the games they rate. That the ESRB doesn't properly inform Parents so they can make appropriate choices for their children. We constantly hear how harried Parents are and how they supposedly don't have the appropriate resources to make wise decisions. We hear condemnation upon condemnation against the gaming industry. We hear condemnation upon condemnation against gamers themselves. We hear condemnation upon condemnation against reviewers and game news sites. We hear the cry of moral superiority over everything that is computer and video games. We hear claims that only the government can make the appropriate decisions for Parents as to what is or is not appropriate, whether it's in regards to video games or media in general.
But, WHERE ARE THEY NOW??? FOX News knowingly and INTENTIONALLY aired false information. Everyone at FOX News knew it. Proven just by the few statements allowed by Geoff Keighley, Cooper Lawrence had, in effect, openly lied. And other panelists aided in those lies. But where is the condemnation by politicians against FOX News for knowingly and intentionally LYING TO PARENTS who watched that story? Where is the condemnation against FOX News by the organizations and the self-righteous individuals?
They are all silent. Someone claims that video games are responsible for a crime, and the chatter from politicians, organizations, and the self-righteous never ends. FOX News lies to Parents about video games... and you could hear immortal crickets chirping on the moon.
I say this should be the battlecry. Not simply us screaming about and to FOX News and Cooper Lawrence. But us screaming "WHERE ARE -YOU-!" to those politicians, organizations, and self righteous individuals who've remained silent so far. I say if they have so much condemnation for us and our interests, then maybe we should have condemnation for their SILENCE.
I say not only should individuals be sending intelligent, respectful CONDEMNATIONS to their politicians, those organizations (and others) mentioned, and the self-righteous individuals mentioned (and others not mentioned), but so should our organizations such as the ECA, the VGVN (who until now has appeared as nothing more than a mouth piece), EA, even the ESA, among others.
I say it's time we pointed a few spotlights on those who failed to condemn FOX News' actions.
Nightwng2000
M-rated Manhunt 2 coming on Halloween
Aug 24th 2007 11:57AM (Joystiq)Personally, I have no problem with there being two difference versions. It isn't a unique idea to release two versions
It's a shame the AO version can't be done on consoles, but hey, that was the console makers' choice.
Nightwng2000
NW2K Software
The Political Game: How old is too old for game blame?
May 25th 2007 12:36PM (Joystiq)What's moronic about requiring those holier-than-thou authority figures (such as politicians) to be held to the same high "moral" standards that they expect everyone else to be held to? If they are going to hold office, then they should be required to tell the Truth, The Whole Truth, and Nothing But The Truth, as one would in a court of law.
I, myself, have suggested that before any politician can speak in a hearing on a bill or create a bill or sponsor a bill, they must pass a questionaire of 100 or so questions regarding the issue the bill governs. Failure to receive a passing grade requires the politician to be denied the ability to have any authority of creation or formal speaking (as opposed to providing personal opinions in interviews, for example) regarding said bill on grounds of "Ignorance and/or Incompetence of Issue".
As to the article, there have been many other events where one would think massacre chasers and agenda seekers/users alike would have used the "video games are to blame" chant. I believe I mentioned to Dennis a year or two ago in an email about the shooting of a police officer local to where I live by a young man (in his twenties). At the time, Dennis said the guy was probably too old. Yet, these days, that "max age" seems to have grown somewhat.
Sometimes, even events that occur at or near a school seem to also receive little attention from the "game blame" crowd.
Maybe they're throwing darts at maps and then checking for recent events to blame and the lesser reported cases are being overlooked when the dart doesn't hit near those cities.
Nightwng2000
NW2K Software
A brief history of the console wars in pictures
Oct 20th 2006 12:13PM (Joystiq)Holodeck. Holodeck. Holodeck. :)
Hmmmm....
2384, introduction of old console and PC titles on the Holodeck:
Black & White
Various Tycoon series
Neverwinter Nights
Life & Death
Worlds of Warcraft
Star Trek Bridge Commander
Endless titles enjoyed by the ancestors, now brought to vivid life in your own persoanl Holodeck.
(You'll notice I didn't mention AO titles, but that doesn't mean I wasn't thinking about them. :) )
nightwng2000
NW2K Software
Pre-order a PS3 for just $46,000
Oct 20th 2006 11:13AM (Joystiq):)
nightwng2000
NW2K Software
The Political Game: Do game laws help or hurt candidates?
Oct 13th 2006 1:03PM (Joystiq)I am glad that she brought the lottery to NC. There are still pockets of controversy that pop up in regards to it, but I think in the end it's a good decision.
But I am rather displeased with her association with John Bruce and their attempt to violate my Parental Rights by creating such legislation, even if it didn't make it to be voted on.
Here ads talk about the money she's had put towards protecting our children. Yet such a legislation would put unnecessary financial burden on NC.
If it passed and a lawsuit ensued and they failed in court, NC would loose money paying the legal fees to the Game Industry.
If the bill passed, one way or the other, funds would have to be available to enforce the law. Not much use in creating a law if you don't enforce it.
Some have, in the past, likened video game legislation and enforcement to the laws regarding tobacco and alcohol. Let's ignore the difference between one being a chemical substance and the other not and focus on the factor of the law as an "age limit" law.
The money spent making certain that retailers do not sell tobacco/alcohol to minors might seem oh so feel good.
Problem: If a minor wants these things, how do they get them?
(1) Fake ID. Doesn't always work, but on occassion, it does.
(2) Have a very "open minded" parent buy the items for the minor. So much for the age limit law.
(3) Steal from parent's stash. So much for the age limit law.
(4) Have an older friend/relative (sibling for example) buy it for them. So much for the age limit law.
There are others I'm sure. But the point is, all the money spent on enforcement might make it SEEM like a success. But when you look closer, minors are still getting and using such products.
Would the effects be the same if retailers merely set their own age limit policy and followed them versus the state spending the money and personnel time to verify that age limits are maintained? I really don't see a drastic difference in the number of minors obtaining such products. And without such laws, NC would have more money in its coffers and more personnel could be devoted to other tasks of importance. Should the laws be dropped now? Bit late. It probably would save money, but I think people have gotten used to it by now. So, it would be better simply not to waste the money/manpower on the video game legislation since it's not in place yet. After all, the same problems with "age limiting" exist for the proposed video game legislation.
Some might argue about pornography. The problem with that word is that a great many individuals have, or at least tried to, expand just what is or is not pornographic. Even if you're just talking about "adult media" (such as Playboy/Playgirl, Hustler, and adult videos), there are a few parents who may actually think their teenage children may be mature enough for such material. Again, their opinion may differ from mine but that doesn't absolutely make them "bad" parents.
But it's also true that there are many individuals who have tried to get certain works of art (from paintings to books) labeled as "pornography" simply because they believe their ideals are superior to everyone else's and that such items are, therefore, inappropriate for EVERYONE.
While such material may have been seen as "cut and dry" issues, these days, it isn't always so clear. And the prospect of an individual, organization, and/or government body attempting to dictate what is or is not appropriate for other people's children is still a very large concern.
nightwng2000
NW2K Software
The Political Game: Do game laws help or hurt candidates?
Oct 13th 2006 12:34PM (Joystiq)The end result of such legislation is never more prevelant than in the case now before the court in Florida regarding the yet-to-be-released video game Bully. How so? After all, the case isn't brought due to video game legislation.
HOWEVER, such cases are, in effect, how enforcement would be dealt if such legislation WERE in place.
If there is a violation of the legislation, then a case very similar to this, whether a jury trial or not, would be brought into existance to determine if the game involved in the violation was, in fact, "inappropriate". But who is making that decision in the specifc case? The parent of the child who knows the child better than any individual on the planet? No. A jury and/or a judge who are unfamiliar with the child who attempts to buy any particular game.
It's the same as the case in Florida right now. A judge is being required to pass judgment on a specific game to determine if this game is or is not appropriate for, at the least, every child in Florida, regardless of whether any specific parent disagrees with that opinion. In effect, the judge is saying that any parent who disagrees with his opinion is therefore a bad parent. The same is true the legislations being drafted. Basically, it is, in effect, creating a dictatorship over every parent by saying they, themselves, do not have the right to make decisions for their own children.
The fact is, just because one parent doesn't make the same decision that another parent makes, doesn't mean that one is a "good" parent while the other must be "bad" by default. Each parent makes decisions that they believe is right for their OWN child.
You may say what about the ESRB (or any rating system) and a store who makes policy to sell based on the rating system.
I've always felt the rating systems were "flash cards". They weren't designed to pass judgment on a product. Merely inform people as to content. Even the age ranges are recommendations based on the general content, not on the specific game. If this content descriptor and that one are attributed to the game, it falls under this age rating, while the addition of this content descriptor may make it this other rating. Same for movies and TV. It isn't a sign of judgment, but merely an information resource. And there are many other resources to obtain information from. Stores that have policies that follow the ratings are merely recognizing that some, not all, but some parents may buy games for their children based on the information and the retailer shows parents respect by letting the parent make their own decision as to what is or is not appropriate for their child. Again, not a judgment, just an adherance to possible parental decisions.
It's the same with parental controls (like the V chip). The TV doesn't ask "how old is your child?" and if you put in one age, it says "Oh, ok, these ratings are inappropriate for your child" and blocks the shows. Parental Control allows the PARENT to pick and choose based on ratings/content as to what the individual parent believes is or is not appropriate for their own child.
So I continue to maintain that such legislation is merely designed to violate Parental Rights and dictate to parents what is or is not appropriate for their own children.
nightwng2000
NW2K Software
The Political Game: Video games made me do it
Sep 30th 2006 4:42PM (Joystiq)"It doesn't even ask for $600 million, so McCauley can't even get that fact straight."
Here are a fraction of the number of folks who refer to the suit being for $600 million. The search was on Google News, Advanced Search, Exact Phrase "$600 million", With All the Words "Cody". This is just a tiny fraction of what resulted:
http://www.suntimes.com/news/nation/72320,CST-NWS-donaldson26.article
http://www.cantonrep.com/index.php?ID=309981&Category=23
http://news.scotsman.com/scotland.cfm?id=1434952006
http://www.alamogordonews.com/news/ci_4407944
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060926-7838.html
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=34659
http://www.14wfie.com/Global/story.asp?S=5462020&nav=3w6o
http://www.shortnews.com/shownews.cfm?id=57251&CFID=7663950&CFTOKEN=12854440
http://www.nbc17.com/nationalnews/9936707/detail.html
Oh, and, gee, look. The TV network that owns 60 Minutes. Wonder why I would think a network that owned 60 minutes would be important to you, huh? Hmmm.....
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/09/25/ap/national/mainD8KC6QGO0.shtml
Poor, poor John Bruce. Pathetic. Just Pathetic.
nightwng2000
NW2K Software