| SEMINARS | ARTICLES | DISCUSSION LEADERS | TAILORED PROGRAMS | ABOUT API | HOME |
|
Have You Moved?
Join our mailing list!
Coming to API
Discussion Leaders
Lorie Hearn
Founder and Executive Director, Watchdog Institute Appearing at: Beyond the Newsroom (Pomona, CA) 09/13/2010 - 09/14/2010 Seminar Schedule
Find Seminars
Early-bird Deadlines Register soon for early-bird savings: |
A more mature approach to video-game violence
By February 20, 2005 9:24 AM
Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich devoted a portion of his Feb. 3 State of the State speech to the state of youth entertainment, specifically violent video games. The governor is not amused, and he is committed to making his state the first to criminalize the distribution of such videos to minors. Gov. Blagojevich has proposed a law to make the sale of explicitly violent or sexual games to under-18 consumers a Class A misdemeanor, carrying a punishment of up to a year in prison or a $5,000 fine. He also wants to require video retailers to label games for content and post signs in their stores explaining the rating system for the games. In addition, the governor named a task force of educators, medical experts and parents to advise him on the potential harmful effects of suspect videos on minors. Last December, he urged the Chicago Transit Authority to cancel a contract for advertising a mature-rated video game on city buses. Blagojevich is not alone in the campaign against violence in videos. Political leaders and community activists across the nation and across a wide political spectrum are targeting violent video games as a menace to children and a precursor to real crime. Earlier this month, District of Columbia Mayor Anthony Williams announced that he was backing a bill targeting the sale of violent games. In Maryland, a bill sponsored by Delegate Justin Ross would impose a fine and jail time for vendors who sold or rented violent video games to minors. Similar legislation is before the Georgia Legislature. In 2004 alone, according to Clay Calvert of the Pennsylvania Center for the First Amendment at Penn State, more than 20 states and local jurisdictions launched efforts to regulate the sale of video games. Even federal legislation pops up from time to time in Congress, but none has gotten very far. It is quite clear that politicians and some community groups do not like these games. But millions of kids – and their parents – do like them. And while some contain blood-curdling violence, others are visually stunning, technologically advanced and creatively sophisticated. Sales of video games last year totaled $7.3 billion, just $2 billion less than movie box-office receipts. Those who want to regulate the distribution of video games face some major hurdles, aside from the popularity and appeal of the games. First is the Constitution. Courts have made it clear that video games are forms of expression deserving the same First Amendment protection as television, movies or books. Further, they have rejected the argument that there is a causal relationship between video violence and real violence. In 2001, the Supreme Court let stand a ruling by the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that struck down an Indianapolis ordinance regulating access to video games. In 2003, the 8th Circuit also ruled that such a law was unconstitutional, noting that "the government cannot silence protected speech by wrapping itself in the cloak of parental authority. " In addition to the constitutional barrier to these kinds of laws, there are some inconvenient realities. The video-game industry voluntarily set up a rating system to guide parents and young consumers. Vendors are supposed to require proof of age before selling M-rated games to anyone under 17. Some of the largest retailers don't even carry adult-only games. And, according to an industry survey, the average age of a video-game player is 30 and the average age of a buyer is 36. When the buyer is a minor, parents are involved in the purchase 83% of the time. Rather than attempting to dictate taste and behavior through law, politicians and activists might focus more of their energy on public-awareness campaigns, the independent rating system, and encouraging vendors to "card " more unaccompanied minors. That would be a much better way to go, not only because it's First Amendment-friendly but also because it works. Those who push for laws based on exaggerated science and a low opinion of the moral and emotional fiber of young people and their parents' judgment should think through the logic of their efforts. If we can harness the law to punish any form of expression based on the assertion that it might cause bad acts, or disfavored attitudes, then what is left but a dismayingly homogenized and narrow range of expression, reflecting only the dominant passions and prejudices of the moment? When dealing with expression that some of us don't like, it is all too tempting to exploit fear and ignorance. It is all too easy to propose laws to ban it. It is not easy, however, to decide who has the maturity to distinguish fantasy violence from that appearing on the nightly news or in any number of professional sports. Those decisions shouldn't be left to a legislator, a jury, a merchant or a police officer. They should be left to a parent. Email this article
|
||
Comments
You know, all of these people keep suing these businesses because the people say that video games have corrupted their child's life but where have the parents been to regulate what their children see/do in their lives. It's not the video game manufactures fault that causes kids to kill people, it's the parents fault for not being more involved in their child's lives along with substituting the TV/computer for what the parent should be doing. It's easy to sit back and point fingers, but when your child's life is on the line there should be no excuse other than that the parent was not more involved in their lives of their children. I say this not as a parent but an adult that grew up in the dawn of the video game age and my parents made it clear to me the difference between what happens in a game and what happens in real-life. It closely relates to how children should interpret movies and music as well.
Posted by: James S | February 23, 2005 3:40 PM
Please blame the parents not the video games. The kids act out violence based on video games are just plain crazy. Anyone that cant tell the difference between reality and fiction needs some help and I leave that up to the parents to decide keep and eye on your children please.
Posted by: Cameron | February 24, 2005 6:46 AM
-_-...ay...to make this short...please, blame the parents. They are the ones (majority of the time) that buy these games for their children..Seriousely...I mean why is it that in other countries with these 'violent video games' theres barely any violence,....but here in america...okay i'll stop there...this'll just get contriversial
-_-...
Posted by: Jenny | April 11, 2005 8:47 AM
Yes I believe that the parents are at fault for buying these video games and not pointing out the difference between reality and non-reality but the blame is not being put on the parents: it is being put on the people who make video games. As the wife of a student going into the video game industry it on bothers me that people blame the game creators. If the parents are not going to tell the children right from wrong maybe their should be a warning or something that tells children, and who ever else plays these games, that what they are playing is simply a game and that this is not reality this in turn may help children who get "confused" that this is just a game. If this doesn't help children differ from reality and non-reality than it is not the gaming industries fault it is then the parents and they are the ones that should be punished not the game makers. Passing laws saying you have to be a certain age to play this game is fine but don't punish the people that make the violent games because they are not the ones handing out copies to children under age for certain games. Put this response ability back into the hands of the public and the adults handing out these games.
Posted by: Jamie | May 4, 2005 11:12 AM
I think the law for selling video games is the dumdest thing that i have ever heard of. It is not the video game that makes a person violent, it is what kind of surroundings that that person is in and the behavior of the parents that can influence a child's behavior. I am sure that every mentally healthy person in the world knows that if you shot a person in a video game and they get back up that if they were to do it in real life that the person that they shot will not get up. But a law to watch over who buys what video game is useless.
Posted by: Patrick | May 10, 2005 1:08 PM
In my opinion, neither parents nor video games shoud be blamed for youth violence. It's modern day society and peer pressure that cause the problems. As youths reach puberty, they are most likely to turn to serious violent behaviour, and this cannot be blamed on the films they watch or the games they play. The behaviour is triggered by people they interact with when outside of parental control. Young people generally learn how to act by people their age, if a child tries smoking or drinking for instance, it is almost always caused by people around them doing the same and encouraging them to give it a try, the same applies for violent behaviour.
Youths often form groups that hang around together. Although these groups usually get along, there will always be some groups that don't. This can lead to violence between the groups.
Please don't blame parents, who usually do the best they can teaching kids the difference between right and wrong. Try to ignore violence in computer games, most children do so too. Kids will naturally show mischievous behaviour, it was like that before computers and television existed and will continue to be like that, however bad it may be.
Posted by: Thomas Roederer | May 17, 2005 9:57 AM
Violent video games are not to blame for violent actions. It is the parents who are to blame. Surely, there are some kids to whom violent video games should be restricted, but that is the right and responsibility of the parent, not the government.
Posted by: JoJo McQueen | June 13, 2005 4:40 PM
In my own opinion, violent games truly have no correlation to a person's aggressive behaviour unless they already have psychological problems. I find that I play games to either vent anger in an acceptable way, not to build up more aggressive behaviour. In my group of friends virtually all of us play these types of games even since we were smaller and non of us commit violent acts of any sort, MOST normal people can differentiate games from reality, people know there are consequences for bad things since they learned things like this since they were young children. People have committed horrible crimes much before video games were introduced, so lets not make media our new scapegoat.
Posted by: Lindsay | November 2, 2005 12:07 PM
I believe that yes... it is the fault of parents because it's the parents who buy the video games. If they can't see the big M for Mature on the video game, and they decide to buy it, it's nobody's fault, but their own. Seriously, have some responsibility...
Posted by: Shelby | April 24, 2006 1:26 PM
I believe that it is the parents' and the manufacturers' fault we have so many problems with Video games. It's the manufacturers' fault because they put out games that are harmful to teenagers. It's the parents' fault for buying the game. Since the game is bought, more are produced. The only way to stop this cycle is to stop buying these games.
Posted by: Gabriel | November 9, 2006 1:00 PM
one factor that people seem to over look is the child. without proper instuction on a video game a child may not be able to tell reality from fantasy. so what we may have here is a three part problem, the fact that manufacturers are producing such games, the parents buying them for their kids, and the parents not explaining to their children that video game are not reality and what is done in some of them is completely unacceptable. for a parent to assume the child can determine the difference is a big fault, which can lead to the cooruption of the child. make sure the kiddos know its just a game.
Posted by: alex | April 16, 2007 6:20 PM