ISSUES

• Violent Video Games
  • Media Bias
  • Sale to Minors
    • Leeland Yee Interview
  • Submitted Material

Media Bias

Manhunt:

The game Manhunt was instantly blamed by the media for a murder, most headlines had Manhunt in them, and most of the articles went on to blame Manhunt for the murder. However, the police said that the video game had nothing to do with the murder at all, they were not even considering it. The sole motivation was robbery to get money to pay off drug debt, and the guy who committed the crime was on drugs at the time!

Xbox

Several people were murdered because a criminal wanted his Xbox and clothing back. For some reason the media thought this should be called the "Xbox Murders". Trying to point the blame on video games. That is a pretty far stretch that the liberal media doesn't mind making, even though 90% of people 11-30 play video games frequently.

Sale of Violent Video Games to Minors

People who want to ban games say:

Video games are harmful to children. Children see what happens in a game then want to imitate it in real life, leading to murder, theft, school shootings, and other bad things. Children learn how to kill and break laws in video games. The ESRB rating system is not strict enough, a government system will have to be created to give better ratings. Stores need to have a separate section for games that are not suitable for children, and if a game is sold to a minor the store will be fined. Parents are too busy with work to censor what their kids play

People who want the freedom to buy games:

Children see worse things on television and on the news every day. Children do not have jobs so they don't have enough money to buy games unless a parent is with them. If a parent decides their child should be able to play the game it is a hassle for them to have to go to the store and pick it up (In the instance of 16 and 17 year olds). The first amendment protects our right to buy any games we want to, and it has been proven in court cases numerous times. People who commit crimes and say it was because of a game are only looking for a scapegoat, and games actually can help vent people's anger. A parent should never be too busy for his or her child. There have been studies that prove video games increase problem solving skills and hand-eye coordination. Surgeons that play video games have higher success in real operations. If children can not buy games from stores they will still get it, just like alcohol. Laws like this would hurt sales of games and force games to change, which the core audience (most people who play games are over 20) would not like. Putting banns on games decreases sales and increases piracy like in Germany.

Submitted Material

In response to the Joint Statement for November 23, 2004 Press Conference on Violent Video Games found here.

Your recent press release regarding violent video games contained a
list of "WORST VIOLENT VIDEO GAMES." I would like to point out that
not only are several of the games on this list not yet released but
several were released in 2002 and even as far back as 2001.

You also state in the release that "Video games have emerged as a
popular form of entertainment, with 70% of children living in a home
with at least one video game player, and 33% with one in their
bedrooms." yet you conveniently neglect to mention that 70% of all
gamers are now aged over 18. This false portrayal of the gaming public
is not only disappointing but frustrating to adult gamers. You will
find most gamers over 18 would openly encourage parents to be aware of
the games their child is playing and of the content of those games. As
with many moral issues in society this has to come back to the parent.
Rather than focusing on the industry in an effort to create pressure
which will then make it difficult for adults to access the
entertainment they wish to enjoy why not create a campaign to educate
the parents? At the end of the day the only person who is going to
have real control over what a child plays is a parent or guardian.

You also state in the release: "A study by Dr. Kimberly Thompson of
the Harvard School of Public Health concluded that "physicians and
parents should be aware that popular Teen-rated video games (ages 13
and older) may be a source of exposure to a wide range of unexpected
content" including games that involve intentional violence, such as
rewarding or requiring players to kill." I have to object as this is
simply not true. Video games are rated in a similar fashion to movies
but indeed have more labels regarding the specific content. If you
read the ESRB label for the game 'Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas' for
example you will find the following:

Blood and Gore
Intense Violence
Strong Language
Strong Sexual Content
Use of Drugs

This is a very good description of the contents of the game which are
not suitable for a child under 18. If a parent were to take the time
to read the ESRB label then they would easily be able to determine
whether the game was suitable for their child. I don't believe I have
ever played a game which contained content that was not described on
the label

Why should parents urge retailers to stop selling violent games? The
United States of America is a free country. By attempting to restrict
what people can or cannot consume you are restricting the base freedom
granted to us by the constitution.

You state "We encourage parents to exercise their power as consumers
and hold retailers accountable for the way that violent video games
are marketed and sold." Why not instead encourage the parents to hold
themselves accountable for what their child plays? The industry and
retailers already are accountable by way of the rating- if a game is
rated M it is not intended for a young audience. It's a matter of
culpability. The Grand Theft Auto series are made for adults- Rockstar
the series creator have always made that clear. If a child goes to a
store and gets their parent to buy one of these games who is culpable?
The store, the games company, or the parent who bought their child the
game? The answer is self evident. Another sentence from the release
"They can find out what their internet service providers are doing to
prevent children from purchasing or playing violent video games
online." Once again it comes back to responsibility. For years the
federal government has run campaigns encouraging parents to monitor
their child's online activity. Whose responsibility is it to ensure the
child uses the internet in a safe manner? The ISP or the parent? Once
again the responsibility is the parents. The mere idea of an internet
provider monitoring the purchasing habits of children is both
ludicrous and a violation of privacy.

In regard to the FTC's "Mystery Shopper Survey" you state: "The report
concluded: "Retailers must make a real commitment to keeping video
games with graphic violence or strong sexual content out of the hands
of children." And we add to that conclusion teenagers as well." So as
an 18 or 19 year old I can get married, vote, die for my country in a
violent war, and yet I should not be allowed to play a game because
the red pixels on the screen look like blood?

Again I quote you: "Years of research have shown that viewing
entertainment violence can lead to increases in aggressive attitudes,
values and behavior, particularly in children. Research on violent
interactive media indicates that it has a strong and more lasting
effect on violent behavior." Not only is there no references provided
here but you neglect to mention research done that indicates violent
games may be used as a release from tension that might otherwise turn
to violence in real life. I will return the favor and not give you a
source.

And finally I leave you with a challenge "One factor contributing to
violence is entertainment media products such as violent video games."
I challenge you to provide one iota of measurable proof that this
statement is even remotely correct. I believe this statement to be a
falsehood in every way.

This letter will be posted on several gaming forums and freedom of speech sites.
We await your response.

Sincerely (Name Obscured)

Questions, suggestions, comments? forums

This site is best viewed with Opera or Firefox web browsers.