By Not Sure
I’m not a parent and I am, numerically speaking, an adult, so I reflexively stand in opposition to any initiative that looks to slap a big honkin label on the package of nearly all video games due to violent content. Now, this isn’t some diatribe about how violent games are completely benign; I agree with studies that say exposure to these games can desensitize kids and others to violence — in a world where we are already desensitized to so much, we really should be careful to avoid deepening the gash with the press of yet another dull blade. No, this isn’t that — this is a “diatribe” against government intervention for the sake of government intervention and pandering to family groups.
Before I go on with my opinion, let’s go over the facts: Congressmen Joe Baca (D-Cal) and Frank Wolf (R-VA) are proposing a bill, H.R. 4204 aka The Violence in Video Games Labeling Act. If passed, this legislation would require video game publishers to put a warning label on all games with a rating above the Early Childhood rating, so basically, nearly all games.
According to the Bill, the label would have to be “placed in a clear and conspicuous location on the packaging of the applicable video game.” This is what the label would read:
“WARNING: Exposure to violent video games has been linked to aggressive behavior.”
“Just as we warn smokers of the health consequences of tobacco, we should warn parents “” and children “” about the growing scientific evidence demonstrating a relationship between violent video games and violent behavior,” Wolf said. “As a parent and grandparent, I think it is important people know everything they can about the extremely violent nature of some of these games.”
Apparently, Rep. Wolf is oblivious to the fact that while all cigarettes are dangerous, not all video games are dangerous.
Now, I won’t go into detail on some of the past laughable stabs at subtle censorship that were born inside that large, old, white building that houses all of those large, old, white men who seem to fancy themselves experts on all things — but SOPA is a prime example. Plainly put, Congress tried to kill a gnat with an A-bomb. This isn’t that, and it isn’t nearly as severe or damaging, but it could hamper innovation and re-shape the landscape of gaming and that, in and of itself, is reckless.
Why does this matter to anyone who isn’t a gamer? Well, as our present economic situation shows us, the world economy is interlinked and the gaming industry is a positive force that provides employment for thousands, and when people have jobs they support their local economies, which helps keep others employed, and so on and so fourth. Of course outsourcing is a problem, but taking a slice out of software sales would only make matters worse.
How could these labels negatively effect the bottom line for companies like Rockstar, Electronic Arts, and others? The power of generalization. As I said before, we’re talking about a label warning people about violent content on the majority of games, everything from E to MA, effectively painting Epic Mickey with the same brush as Grand Theft Auto. How does that serve as anything but a deterrent to parents when searching to buy a game? How does that push developers to focus development dollars on games that were effectively made and marketed, appropriately to the 13 and up crowd?
Let’s remember also, that there is already a ratings board for games that actually differentiates between content that is appropriate for kids, teens, and adults. The Entertainment Software Rating Board, or the ESRB has been around since the mid 1990s and is the equivalent to the film industry’s occasionally suspect, but generally effective MPAA.
Here’s a link to a poll that shows that 85% of parents say that they are aware of the ESRB rating; 98% of those people also say that the ESRB rating is either very or somewhat helpful.
Now, 85% awareness is good but not great, but I’d say work to increase awareness of the ESRB if you are truly concerned with the effect of violent games on kids and not just the votes of their parents. Let people continue to use it as a guide for what is appropriate for their kids. A label isn’t going to stop an apathetic parent from buying their kid a questionable game, but we can’t all suffer for their sins. Don’t effectively kill the ESRB, harm a productive industry, and make decisions for people. Freedom stands in a large block, not little bits that can be re-arranged on a whim by those in power. This plan by Baca and Wolf is just another ill-fitting solution, more Washington “We care” BS that will do more harm than good if it passes.
If you want to read up on the ESRB and how ratings are assigned click here.
[Source: GamePolitics via CinemaBlend]
Wonder if these video game ratings would have the same affect as the “Parental Advisory” label does for some music albums. I have my doubts about the effectiveness of such labels in deterring purchases for inappropriate audiences because every once in a while, I see an article pop up on the Internet describing how an album has seen an increase in sales and desirability as a result of being labeled “explicit”. I suspect those who want to play violent video games will find a way to do so whether or not their parent or government approves, much like the underage kid who wants to drink alcohol or smoke cigarettes will find a way to obtain alcohol or cigarettes. Someone who wants to purchase a handgun for illicit purposes will do so without going through a licensed gun shop and submitting to a federal background check, three day waiting period, etc. All these rules, warnings and fail safes do is make things more difficult for the person who’s going to abide by the rules to begin with and in such cases, I suspect that parent, being responsible as they are, would already have done his or her due diligence and won’t be buying such games for their kid anyway. Personally, I feel that the ESRB is already far more effective than any forced regulation could be and am against additional labels for the sake of additional labels.
Comment by PAUL — March 23, 2012 @ 9:46 am