Copyright © 2005 Chicago Tribune. Distributed by Knight Ridder/Tribune Information Services. April 14, 2005. All rights reserved. Reprinted by permission. http://discoverer.prod.sirs.com/discoweb/disco/do/article?urn=urn%3Asirs%3AUS%3BARTICLE%3BART%3B0000215096
They are saying that kids may get influenced by video games and may not be aware of the consequences.
Most real-life games ban brutal behavior. But some video games are all about aggression. Fighting in video games wins points. But real-life brawls, in sports contests or on the playground, can have serious consequences.
Now some grown-ups are worried vicious video games could inspire real-life smack downs. Gov. Rod Blagojevich wants Illinois to be the first state to ban the sale of violent games like "Mortal Kombat" or "Grand Theft Auto" to kids under 18.
They say that the ratings on games may not be so accurate.
The ban would mean a big block for some gamers. At least 60 percent of popular video games have violent themes. And almost 60 percent of fourth-grade girls and 73 percent of fourth-grade guys say most of their favorite games have violence, reports the National Institute on Media and the Family.
And just because a game is rated "E" for everyone doesn't mean it is void of violence. Harvard University researchers say a game is considered violent when the characters try to hurt or kill each other.
Sports games like football might seem aggressive, but the researchers say tackling is part of normal play. But just like in real sports, the researchers call excessive contact--like high sticking--violent.
All that aggression can change the way a kid sees the world, says Barbara Wilson, a speech communication professor at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. "People who spend more time with media violence get less upset with violence in the real world," Wilson says.
Playing a video game doesn't mean a kid will charge outside and slug the first person he or she comes across. But a kid who plays a lot of violent games could consider aggression as a good way to solve problems, Wilson says.
Though there are no studies citing a definite link between violence and video games, research shows playing violent video games can have a negative effect on people with aggressive personalities.
But for most kids, too much game time is more likely to cause other problems. Staring at the screen means less time for homework, sports or music lessons.
Gaming is like a part-time job for some kids. Eighth grade boys average 23 hours of video games a week. Girls the same age play about 12 hours a week, according to a survey by Michigan State University.
Serious game time is big for kids at Laura P.'s school. "I'd say almost every kid I know has a PlayStation, Xbox or one of those systems and plays it two hours a day," says Laura, 12.
Two hours of game play a day would cut into Laura's viola practice time. She went six months without touching a video game and says it was no loss. "I don't see the point in trying to beat all these levels," she says. "I just think there are better things to do with your time than play video games."
Joe S. had to find those better things to do after his mom tossed the family's game system. "It was too hectic around the house with all my little brothers and sisters playing it," says Joe, 12. "It was getting to be too much, like no control."
Once the games were gone, Joe says he became "more organized" and read more books. He still plays sports video games at his friends' houses, but says his house is OK without a system. No game system means no temptation.
Beth W., 12, says she has control over her temptation. "If I'm in school, I play half an hour at the most because I have a lot of homework. On breaks, I play just an hour," she says.
Tuesday, January 23, 2007
Artifact 7
Special Permission granted by WEEKLY READER ®, published by Weekly Reader Corporation. Copyright © 2004, by Weekly Reader Corporation. All Rights Reserved. http://discoverer.prod.sirs.com/discoweb/disco/do/article?urn=urn%3Asirs%3AUS%3BARTICLE%3BART%3B0000187116
Two kids murdered a person and wounded another. And blamed it on a violent video game.
One day last summer, two teen boys in Tennessee wanted to have some fun. The step-brothers carried rifles to a wooded hillside near Interstate 40 and took shots at passing cars. Their tally: one motorist dead, one wounded.
The boys, ages 16 and 13, later told police they had been inspired by their favorite video game, the notoriously violent Grand Theft Auto. In the game, the player steps into the shoes of a savage killer who randomly slaughters criminals, cops, and innocent bystanders with reckless abandon. The graphics depict the blood-soaked violence in glorious, state-of-the-art realism.
The boys pleaded guilty in juvenile court to reckless homicide, assault, and endangerment. They are in state custody.
The victims' families, meanwhile, filed a $246 million lawsuit against the companies involved with the game. The lawsuit against Rockstar Games, Take-Two Interactive Software, Sony Computer Entertainment America Inc., and Wal-Mart is pending.
The Grand Theft Auto series and several other equally gory games are wildly popular. Though adults purchase or rent the majority of those games, there's nothing to stop a child from plunking down his or her money for the bloodiest of them. The video game industry voluntarily rates its products--E (everyone), T (teen), and M (mature)--but no regulations exist to enforce those guidelines at the retail level.
Should there be? After the Tennessee incident and others like it, some people are calling for regulations that would restrict children's access to violent video games. Opponents, however, say such regulations would be misguided, ineffective, and an assault on free speech.
With various bills pending in Florida, California, and Washington state, the debate is heating up.
Protect Kids, Protect Society
"There is a great deal of precedent for restricting dangerous things like alcohol and tobacco to minors," says Washington state Rep. Mary Lou Dickerson, who sponsored such a bill in her state.
Growing scientific evidence links violent video games to violent behavior, say those who favor such laws. One study, for instance, shows that video game violence increases heart rate, arousal, and anger and therefore the likelihood of violent behavior.
The interactive nature of the games--in which the player "becomes" the killer, murdering human targets again and again--makes video games even more potentially dangerous than movies or TV shows that depict violence.
Kids are more likely to blur the distinction between fantasy and reality. A group of California teens went on a killing spree which they claimed was inspired by the game Grand Theft Auto III. Afterward, one of the young murder suspects boasted to police, "We play the game by day; we live the game by night."
Let Parents Decide
Kids have always played shoot-'em-up games--it's just that the technology has changed, say those who oppose laws restricting kids' access to video games.
Such bans would be a form of censorship; it's not the government's business to decide what kids shouldn't see, hear, or play, critics say. Those are decisions for parents to make. In fact, parents are the ones who buy or rent most of the video games that kids play--including the most violent titles.
"We don't ever get complaints from parents that the rating system is broken," says Bo Andersen, president of the Video Software Dealers Association. "What you have is government trying to step in and take control of what is a parental responsibility."
Douglas Lowenstein, president of the Entertainment Software Association, agrees. "There is no law that man has devised," he says, "that can mandate responsible parenting."
Two kids murdered a person and wounded another. And blamed it on a violent video game.
One day last summer, two teen boys in Tennessee wanted to have some fun. The step-brothers carried rifles to a wooded hillside near Interstate 40 and took shots at passing cars. Their tally: one motorist dead, one wounded.
The boys, ages 16 and 13, later told police they had been inspired by their favorite video game, the notoriously violent Grand Theft Auto. In the game, the player steps into the shoes of a savage killer who randomly slaughters criminals, cops, and innocent bystanders with reckless abandon. The graphics depict the blood-soaked violence in glorious, state-of-the-art realism.
The boys pleaded guilty in juvenile court to reckless homicide, assault, and endangerment. They are in state custody.
The victims' families, meanwhile, filed a $246 million lawsuit against the companies involved with the game. The lawsuit against Rockstar Games, Take-Two Interactive Software, Sony Computer Entertainment America Inc., and Wal-Mart is pending.
The Grand Theft Auto series and several other equally gory games are wildly popular. Though adults purchase or rent the majority of those games, there's nothing to stop a child from plunking down his or her money for the bloodiest of them. The video game industry voluntarily rates its products--E (everyone), T (teen), and M (mature)--but no regulations exist to enforce those guidelines at the retail level.
Should there be? After the Tennessee incident and others like it, some people are calling for regulations that would restrict children's access to violent video games. Opponents, however, say such regulations would be misguided, ineffective, and an assault on free speech.
With various bills pending in Florida, California, and Washington state, the debate is heating up.
Protect Kids, Protect Society
"There is a great deal of precedent for restricting dangerous things like alcohol and tobacco to minors," says Washington state Rep. Mary Lou Dickerson, who sponsored such a bill in her state.
Growing scientific evidence links violent video games to violent behavior, say those who favor such laws. One study, for instance, shows that video game violence increases heart rate, arousal, and anger and therefore the likelihood of violent behavior.
The interactive nature of the games--in which the player "becomes" the killer, murdering human targets again and again--makes video games even more potentially dangerous than movies or TV shows that depict violence.
Kids are more likely to blur the distinction between fantasy and reality. A group of California teens went on a killing spree which they claimed was inspired by the game Grand Theft Auto III. Afterward, one of the young murder suspects boasted to police, "We play the game by day; we live the game by night."
Let Parents Decide
Kids have always played shoot-'em-up games--it's just that the technology has changed, say those who oppose laws restricting kids' access to video games.
Such bans would be a form of censorship; it's not the government's business to decide what kids shouldn't see, hear, or play, critics say. Those are decisions for parents to make. In fact, parents are the ones who buy or rent most of the video games that kids play--including the most violent titles.
"We don't ever get complaints from parents that the rating system is broken," says Bo Andersen, president of the Video Software Dealers Association. "What you have is government trying to step in and take control of what is a parental responsibility."
Douglas Lowenstein, president of the Entertainment Software Association, agrees. "There is no law that man has devised," he says, "that can mandate responsible parenting."
Artifact 6
Special permission granted by WEEKLY READER (R), published by Weekly Reader Corporation. Copyright (c) 1999, by Weekly Reader Corporation. All rights reserved. http://discoverer.prod.sirs.com/discoweb/disco/do/article?urn=urn%3Asirs%3AUS%3BARTICLE%3BART%3B0000094209
FAILING GRADES
Last month, the National Institute on Media and the Family released a "report card" on the video game industry. The group praised game makers for putting ratings on nearly all their products. (Ratings include "E" for everyone, "T" for teen players 13 and older, and "M" for MATURE, or older, players age 17 or older.) But the institute, along with U.S. Senators Joseph Lieberman (D-Conn.) and Herbert Kohl (D-Wis.), blasted the industry for marketing (trying to sell) violent video games to young people.
Some games are really "kill-for-fun murder simulations," said Dr. David Walsh, president of the institute. "Unfortunately, these games are very popular with children and teenagers."
Lieberman said that too many game makers place ads for rated-M games in places where young people are most likely to see them (such as in magazines for game players). Action figures based on game characters also make the games more popular among kids, Lieberman said.
'DON'T BLAME US'
Game makers deny trying to sell violent video games to young people. George Harrison, an executive at Nintendo of America, told WEEKLY READER that even if game makers had such a plan, it would be difficult to put in place. "For example," he said, "TV stations won't accept a game advertisement if it's not appropriate for the audience."
Many game makers say that keeping violent games away from kids is up to parents. "Parents have to monitor [watch out for] things they don't want in their homes," Harrison said.
Research shows that adults buy 90 percent of video games. But most adults know little or nothing about the games kids play. In fact, a recent poll found that fewer than 5 percent of parents had heard of the rated-M game Duke Nukem. But 80 percent of junior high students said they were familiar with the game.
They say that video games are too much like real life war. And how that affects kids.
FAKE VIOLENCE, REAL DAMAGE?
Many game makers also disagree with those who say that violent video and computer games are bad for kids.
"I grew up in the 1950s, when we all ran around in the woods and pretended we were fighting World War II," Harrison said. "Today, those games have moved from the woods into the family room."
There's little research that shows how violent video games affect kids. But many experts believe that the games teach young people to ignore the horrors of real-life violence. "These games and their awful ads blur the lines between right and wrong," Lieberman said. "They are not harmless fun, as some suggest."
BATTLE FOR A SOLUTION
Most agree that some video games simply are not for young people. But kids across the country continue playing the games even as grown-ups battle over solutions to the problem.
FAILING GRADES
Last month, the National Institute on Media and the Family released a "report card" on the video game industry. The group praised game makers for putting ratings on nearly all their products. (Ratings include "E" for everyone, "T" for teen players 13 and older, and "M" for MATURE, or older, players age 17 or older.) But the institute, along with U.S. Senators Joseph Lieberman (D-Conn.) and Herbert Kohl (D-Wis.), blasted the industry for marketing (trying to sell) violent video games to young people.
Some games are really "kill-for-fun murder simulations," said Dr. David Walsh, president of the institute. "Unfortunately, these games are very popular with children and teenagers."
Lieberman said that too many game makers place ads for rated-M games in places where young people are most likely to see them (such as in magazines for game players). Action figures based on game characters also make the games more popular among kids, Lieberman said.
'DON'T BLAME US'
Game makers deny trying to sell violent video games to young people. George Harrison, an executive at Nintendo of America, told WEEKLY READER that even if game makers had such a plan, it would be difficult to put in place. "For example," he said, "TV stations won't accept a game advertisement if it's not appropriate for the audience."
Many game makers say that keeping violent games away from kids is up to parents. "Parents have to monitor [watch out for] things they don't want in their homes," Harrison said.
Research shows that adults buy 90 percent of video games. But most adults know little or nothing about the games kids play. In fact, a recent poll found that fewer than 5 percent of parents had heard of the rated-M game Duke Nukem. But 80 percent of junior high students said they were familiar with the game.
They say that video games are too much like real life war. And how that affects kids.
FAKE VIOLENCE, REAL DAMAGE?
Many game makers also disagree with those who say that violent video and computer games are bad for kids.
"I grew up in the 1950s, when we all ran around in the woods and pretended we were fighting World War II," Harrison said. "Today, those games have moved from the woods into the family room."
There's little research that shows how violent video games affect kids. But many experts believe that the games teach young people to ignore the horrors of real-life violence. "These games and their awful ads blur the lines between right and wrong," Lieberman said. "They are not harmless fun, as some suggest."
BATTLE FOR A SOLUTION
Most agree that some video games simply are not for young people. But kids across the country continue playing the games even as grown-ups battle over solutions to the problem.
Artifact 5
Special permission granted by CURRENT EVENTS (R), published byWeekly Reader Corporation. Copyright (c) 1994 by Weekly ReaderCorporation. All Rights Reserved. http://discoverer.prod.sirs.com/discoweb/disco/do/article?urn=urn%3Asirs%3AUS%3BARTICLE%3BART%3B0000025021
Senators Lieberman and Kohl think that children shouldnt be exposed to violent video games. And that video games are "no mark of a civilized society."
TOO MUCH VIOLENCE
Senators Lieberman and Kohl heard from a number of witnesses who testified that many popular video games are far too violent for children. The violence of Mortal Kombat and Night Trap, the senators were told, teaches kids to be insensitive to human suffering.
Violent video games, said California attorney general Dan Lungren, not only teach kids "to demean and destroy" but also "have a desensitizing impact on young, impressionable minds."
After hearing testimony and seeing demonstrations of the most violent video games, Senator Lieberman declared: "These games are no mark of a civilized society."
Lieberman and Kohl told video game companies to voluntarily cut back on violence in video games. If you don't, Lieberman told the companies, the government will step in and do it for you.
Both major video-game companies, Sega and Nintendo, came under criticism. But the senators had some good words for Nintendo, which limits the amount of violence it allows in video games.
Sega officials defended Night Trap and Mortal Kombat as games intended for older teens and adults, not children. Sega also announced that it had established a rating system for video games similar to movie ratings: PG for children under 13; MA-13 for players 13 and over; and MA-17 for players aged 17 and over.
MISLEADING COMMERCIAL
Senator Lieberman also criticized Sega in particular for one of its TV commercials. He said that the commercial promoted violence and targeted kids under 13. The TV commercial shows a boy gaining the respect of his friends after winning Mortal Kombat. At the end of the commercial, the boy angrily knocks over a tray of cookies given to him by friends now frightened by the boy's fighting ability. The boy roars, "I said I wanted chocolate chip!"
Bill White, vice president of Sega of America, said that Sega had aired the commercial before it established a rating system, and that the commercial was taken off the air.
REALISTIC VIOLENCE
Video-game players have been zapping aliens and wiping out bad guys for more than 20 years. So why have critics only now mounted a serious attack on video-game violence?
There are two reasons, say critics. The first reason is that today more violence seems to sell more products. Both Sega and Nintendo, for example, make versions of Mortal Kombat, but Sega's much more violent version widely outsells Nintendo's tamer version. Sega's Mortal Kombat was, in fact, the best-selling video game in 1993--selling more than 4 million copies.
The other reason critics are upset is that video-game violence is becoming more realistic. In early video games, such as Pac-Man and Space Invaders, players wiped out crude cartoon images. But today's video games feature real-looking people. In Night Trap, the characters are played by real actors. In Mortal Kombat, the fighters are realistic animated drawings. Instead of just wiping out a cartoon image, today's video gamers try to kill realistic-looking characters--and that, say critics, tends to teach children that human life is cheap.
VIDEO-GAME DEFENDERS
Of course, not everyone thinks that video-game violence is harmful. Many people argue that the concern over video-game violence, like the concern over TV violence (CE 4) is much overblown. These people point to the fact that no studies firmly prove that people who play violent video games tend to become more violent in real life.
Some players look upon video-game critics as (in the words of one player) "know-nothing, interfering boobies."
"They're spoilsports," says Tom Jennings, a video-game player. "There are always some people who will say that something new and exciting is wrong and dangerous--no matter what it is."
Other players agree that some games should not be used by children. They say that most video games are harmless fun and not as violent as Mortal Kombat.
"There are some games you want kids to stay away from," says LeeAnne McDermott, editor of a video game magazine. "But there are a lot more games you can feel good about kids playing."
None of this, however, persuades critics such as Senator Lieberman. He has asked the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to investigate how video-game companies try to sell their products to kids. And he and Senator Kohl plan to hold a second series of hearings on video-game violence next month.
Senators Lieberman and Kohl think that children shouldnt be exposed to violent video games. And that video games are "no mark of a civilized society."
TOO MUCH VIOLENCE
Senators Lieberman and Kohl heard from a number of witnesses who testified that many popular video games are far too violent for children. The violence of Mortal Kombat and Night Trap, the senators were told, teaches kids to be insensitive to human suffering.
Violent video games, said California attorney general Dan Lungren, not only teach kids "to demean and destroy" but also "have a desensitizing impact on young, impressionable minds."
After hearing testimony and seeing demonstrations of the most violent video games, Senator Lieberman declared: "These games are no mark of a civilized society."
Lieberman and Kohl told video game companies to voluntarily cut back on violence in video games. If you don't, Lieberman told the companies, the government will step in and do it for you.
Both major video-game companies, Sega and Nintendo, came under criticism. But the senators had some good words for Nintendo, which limits the amount of violence it allows in video games.
Sega officials defended Night Trap and Mortal Kombat as games intended for older teens and adults, not children. Sega also announced that it had established a rating system for video games similar to movie ratings: PG for children under 13; MA-13 for players 13 and over; and MA-17 for players aged 17 and over.
MISLEADING COMMERCIAL
Senator Lieberman also criticized Sega in particular for one of its TV commercials. He said that the commercial promoted violence and targeted kids under 13. The TV commercial shows a boy gaining the respect of his friends after winning Mortal Kombat. At the end of the commercial, the boy angrily knocks over a tray of cookies given to him by friends now frightened by the boy's fighting ability. The boy roars, "I said I wanted chocolate chip!"
Bill White, vice president of Sega of America, said that Sega had aired the commercial before it established a rating system, and that the commercial was taken off the air.
REALISTIC VIOLENCE
Video-game players have been zapping aliens and wiping out bad guys for more than 20 years. So why have critics only now mounted a serious attack on video-game violence?
There are two reasons, say critics. The first reason is that today more violence seems to sell more products. Both Sega and Nintendo, for example, make versions of Mortal Kombat, but Sega's much more violent version widely outsells Nintendo's tamer version. Sega's Mortal Kombat was, in fact, the best-selling video game in 1993--selling more than 4 million copies.
The other reason critics are upset is that video-game violence is becoming more realistic. In early video games, such as Pac-Man and Space Invaders, players wiped out crude cartoon images. But today's video games feature real-looking people. In Night Trap, the characters are played by real actors. In Mortal Kombat, the fighters are realistic animated drawings. Instead of just wiping out a cartoon image, today's video gamers try to kill realistic-looking characters--and that, say critics, tends to teach children that human life is cheap.
VIDEO-GAME DEFENDERS
Of course, not everyone thinks that video-game violence is harmful. Many people argue that the concern over video-game violence, like the concern over TV violence (CE 4) is much overblown. These people point to the fact that no studies firmly prove that people who play violent video games tend to become more violent in real life.
Some players look upon video-game critics as (in the words of one player) "know-nothing, interfering boobies."
"They're spoilsports," says Tom Jennings, a video-game player. "There are always some people who will say that something new and exciting is wrong and dangerous--no matter what it is."
Other players agree that some games should not be used by children. They say that most video games are harmless fun and not as violent as Mortal Kombat.
"There are some games you want kids to stay away from," says LeeAnne McDermott, editor of a video game magazine. "But there are a lot more games you can feel good about kids playing."
None of this, however, persuades critics such as Senator Lieberman. He has asked the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to investigate how video-game companies try to sell their products to kids. And he and Senator Kohl plan to hold a second series of hearings on video-game violence next month.
Thursday, January 11, 2007
Artifact 4
Irwin, Mary Jane. "Rated V for violence: legislation against video games is ramping up.(GAMING + CULTURE)." PC Magazine 25.4 (March 7, 2006): 152(2). Student Resource Center - Gold. Thomson Gale. Centennial High School (MD). 11 Jan. 2007 http://find.galegroup.com/ips/infomark.do?&contentSet=IAC-Documents&type=retrieve&tabID=T003&prodId=IPS&docId=A143203533&source=gale&srcprod=SRCG&userGroupName=elli29753&version=1.0
How parents feel about video games. They think that its the reason why kids are killing, getting the ideas in their heads.
The former runt of the entertainment industry has grown into a multibillion-dollar giant. But the fight to have video games regarded as acceptable entertainment is continually threatened. "Video games cause reclusiveness," parents taunt. And politicians chant, "Video games are why kids are learning how to kill."
How parents feel about video games. They think that its the reason why kids are killing, getting the ideas in their heads.
The former runt of the entertainment industry has grown into a multibillion-dollar giant. But the fight to have video games regarded as acceptable entertainment is continually threatened. "Video games cause reclusiveness," parents taunt. And politicians chant, "Video games are why kids are learning how to kill."
The Connecticut Senator made a bill to stop minors from even purchasing violent games. So if you sold a violent game to a minor it would be a crime. If they are caught then they would be fined $1,000. They also require the companies to put an explicit-content label on the game.
Criticism of violence and explicit content in games is on the rise. In 2002, Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman introduced a bill, the Protect Children from Video Game Sex and Violence Act, that would have made the sale of violent video games to children under the age of 18 a federal crime. And as recorded by the Child-Responsible Media Campaign, more than 28 states have attempted to restrict the sale of violent video games to minors. Hot Coffee sparked a very public denouncement by New York senator Hillary Clinton, who claimed that Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas is stealing the innocence of children. In the aftermath of all this press, Illinois governor Rod Blagojevich signed the Safe Games Illinois Act; it fines retailers up to $1,000 for selling sexually explicit or violent video games to minors. The act also requires explicit-content warnings.
Most of the parents are involed in exposing their kids to the violence because they buy the games for them. They don't know or understand what the ratings mean.
According to the National Institute on Media and the Family, video games are in dire need of ratings enforcement. Although the Entertainment Software Alliance (ESA) maintains on its Web site that parents are involved in 83 percent of all game rentals and purchases, NIMF found that only 40 percent of parents understand what ESRB ratings mean, and only 53 percent use them as buying guides.
Coinciding with NIMF's findings was the announcement of Clinton and Lieberman's proposed Family Entertainment Protection Act, which would have the federal government regulate game ratings. "It would ensure that children can't buy games the video-game industry itself has determined inappropriate for them," says a statement from Clinton.
They think that a violent video game, Grand Theft Auto, caused this guy to shoot two police officers.
Meanwhile, there is an Alabama civil suit that charges video-game makers and sellers with abetting the murder of two police officers and a police dispatcher in Fayette, Alabama, in 2003. 20-year-old Devin Moore, convicted of the triple homicide, was sentenced to death in October--after Fayette County Circuit Judge James Moore disallowed the cornerstone of his defense, which claimed that Devin Moore's addiction to Grand Theft Auto inspired the killings. Despite the court's decision, victims' families are suing Sony, Take-Two and Rockstar Games (the game's publisher and developer), the retailers GameStop and Wal-Mart, and Devin Moore, claiming that each had a role in the deaths.
They are trying to find out if there is a connection between violent video games and violent behavior. They are also being careful with how they rate the video games.
In a recent interview on video-game violence, Silicon Knights President Denis Dyack declared that "the industry has already started being careful about how things are done. It always wants to create responsible content." Meanwhile, nobody has conclusively determined if there is a link between violent video games and violent behavior.
Trying times await the video-game industry. Desperate to mature and be taken seriously, it overlooked the pains of growth. The issues of ESRB legitimacy and the potential federal regulation proposed by the Family Entertainment Protection Act loom large. The outcome of the current litigation and pending legislation will dictate, at least short-term, the future of explicit gaming content. And the video-game industry's reaction and evolution will determine whether it can finally ignore the names that its opposition labels it with.
1. If they do find out that violent video games are linked to violent behavior, will they discontinue the production of all violent video games?
2. Is there a way to educate parents about video game ratings?
3. Do you think parents, etc, would be more comfortable with violent video games if all states followed the Protect Children from Video Game Sex and Violence Act?
Wednesday, January 3, 2007
Artifact 3
Carroll, Jill. "Like Pong, it's back and forth on vid-violence link." Hollywood Reporter 360.32 (Nov 24, 1999): 5. Student Resource Center - Gold. Thomson Gale. Centennial High School (MD). 20 Dec. 2006 .
Doug Lowenstein (the president of the Interative Digital Software Assn.) believes that there is no connection what so ever between video games and violence.
Lieberman, industry rep argue the issue WASHINGTON -- While announcing an annual report card on video games Tuesday, an industry representative disputed a lawmaker's claim that video games cause violence. "We believe the academic research in no way establishes a causal link between violent games and aggressive behavior," said Doug Lowenstein, president of the Interactive Digital Software Assn.
Lowenstein says that other media has the same affect on people as games do, just exposure to violence in general.
Lowenstein pointed out that juvenile crime rates have declined during recent years amid growing sales of video games. But Sen. Joe Lieberman, D-Conn., a critic of media violence, said that while crime rates are dropping, recent "explosions of violence" show that part of the population can be influenced by exposure to violence.
They are saying that the ratings on the games are so they can prevent children from buying games that are too mature for that age group.
The report card, compiled by the National Institute on Media and the Family, gave an "A" to the industry for the number of games with ratings and a "C" to retailers for enforcing the ratings. Internet game sites flunked for not having warnings or ratings. Lieberman noted that retailers need do more to enforce ratings aimed at preventing children from buying certain video games. But Lowenstein said that would greatly burden retailers, especially during the holiday season, when checkout lines are long. Plus, he added, there is nothing illegal about video games. There's nothing illegal about alcohol either, Lieberman responded, but it is still a controlled substance, and alcohol retailers aren't going out of business because they have to check IDs.
Lowenstein is trying to inform parents about the different ratings and what they mean. He says that he would try find support to order the industry of games better, if the violence in them gets worse.
Lowenstein touted the video game rating system introduced in 1994 by the Entertainment Software Rating Board, a video game industry regulatory board. The problem does not lie in changing video games, Lowenstein said, but educating parents about the ratings system to make sure video games intended for adults aren't given to children. Lieberman said he is not pursuing legislation to regulate the industry, but he might support an effort to do so if violence in games worsens.
About 97% of computer game buyers are adults. Adults also comprise 90% of video games purchasers, according to the IDSA. Most of those playing video games are also adults, about 70%. About 26% of all computer and video games are violent or objectionable enough to be rated as only appropriate for adults, according to the IDSA. The National Institute on Media and the Family estimates that this holiday season, revenue from the sale and rental of electronic games will exceed that of the film industry. Jill Carroll is a reporter for States News Service.
Questions:
1. What would happen without the video game ratings?
2. How will Lowenstein inform parents about the video game ratings?
Doug Lowenstein (the president of the Interative Digital Software Assn.) believes that there is no connection what so ever between video games and violence.
Lieberman, industry rep argue the issue WASHINGTON -- While announcing an annual report card on video games Tuesday, an industry representative disputed a lawmaker's claim that video games cause violence. "We believe the academic research in no way establishes a causal link between violent games and aggressive behavior," said Doug Lowenstein, president of the Interactive Digital Software Assn.
Lowenstein says that other media has the same affect on people as games do, just exposure to violence in general.
Lowenstein pointed out that juvenile crime rates have declined during recent years amid growing sales of video games. But Sen. Joe Lieberman, D-Conn., a critic of media violence, said that while crime rates are dropping, recent "explosions of violence" show that part of the population can be influenced by exposure to violence.
They are saying that the ratings on the games are so they can prevent children from buying games that are too mature for that age group.
The report card, compiled by the National Institute on Media and the Family, gave an "A" to the industry for the number of games with ratings and a "C" to retailers for enforcing the ratings. Internet game sites flunked for not having warnings or ratings. Lieberman noted that retailers need do more to enforce ratings aimed at preventing children from buying certain video games. But Lowenstein said that would greatly burden retailers, especially during the holiday season, when checkout lines are long. Plus, he added, there is nothing illegal about video games. There's nothing illegal about alcohol either, Lieberman responded, but it is still a controlled substance, and alcohol retailers aren't going out of business because they have to check IDs.
Lowenstein is trying to inform parents about the different ratings and what they mean. He says that he would try find support to order the industry of games better, if the violence in them gets worse.
Lowenstein touted the video game rating system introduced in 1994 by the Entertainment Software Rating Board, a video game industry regulatory board. The problem does not lie in changing video games, Lowenstein said, but educating parents about the ratings system to make sure video games intended for adults aren't given to children. Lieberman said he is not pursuing legislation to regulate the industry, but he might support an effort to do so if violence in games worsens.
About 97% of computer game buyers are adults. Adults also comprise 90% of video games purchasers, according to the IDSA. Most of those playing video games are also adults, about 70%. About 26% of all computer and video games are violent or objectionable enough to be rated as only appropriate for adults, according to the IDSA. The National Institute on Media and the Family estimates that this holiday season, revenue from the sale and rental of electronic games will exceed that of the film industry. Jill Carroll is a reporter for States News Service.
Questions:
1. What would happen without the video game ratings?
2. How will Lowenstein inform parents about the video game ratings?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)