The US Supreme Court has effectively ended a push by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger to ban violent video game sales to minors. Responsible parenting is important and limiting children’s exposure to age appropriate media is a wise move but there is obviously a certain level of irony attached to this bill. The person who starred in one of the most violent character franchises of the last century and who revolutionized the action hero, is now pushing for limitations on media violence. Perhaps there’s a touch of the cynic about me but if this wasn’t a prime example of political rhetoric and a play for the the emotive vote, then all the main characters in Terminator 2 went on to live wholesome and fulfilling lives post-production.
For the record, District Judge Ronald Whyte stated that “the evidence does not establish that video games, because of their interactive nature or otherwise, are any more harmful than violent television, movies, internet sites or other speech-related exposures.”. Whether or not this is fact has not actually been established either way. Besides, I just wanted to focus on the Arnie bit…
Once again Australian authorities are at loggerheads regarding classification of a new video game. Put simply, like many games before it, first person shooter ‘Left 4 Dead 2’ is being refused classification by the Australian Office of Film and Literature Classification Board due to its violent content. For those not aware, Australia does not have an R18+ rating for video games, so any game which does not fall within the parameters of an MA15+ within the eyes of the OFLC is subsequently not given a rating. This then ensures that the game is completely banned in Australia, as anything without a rating cannot be sold or distributed within the country. As a result, any game with high levels of sexuality, violence or drug use has to be doctored for resale (as in the case of GTA III) or, as in the case of the zombie fest being discussed here, just does not reach the market at all. As with all pertinent issues, there are two sides to the argument and as with anything concerning the media violence debate, it’s contentious.
According to a number of news sources, South Australian Attorney-General Michael Atkinson is the only authority figure holding out on the introduction of an R18+ rating, which would require unanimous approval of all of Australia’s attorney-generals. He does, however have much support from various lobby groups such as Young Media Australia and a variety of religious and parent’s groups. In his opinion, interactivity results in believability and a greater chance of the individual displaying second hand aggression. However, Victorian Attorney-General Rob Hulls disagrees vehemently with Michael Atkinson’s stance and believes that Australia is behind the rest of the world due to this contentious regulation.
the way in which the OFLC decides levels of violent and sexual content is also an issue and consists of board members merely playing the game or employing members of the public to do the same and then asking them questions about how they feel. These methods are quite out-dated and perhaps need to be reviewed, particularly in the case of interactive media. While a number of studies have been conducted into Australia’s video game ratings and our ratings system, it seems the decision on classification rests with a lone Attorney-General. Perhaps he just doesn’t like zombies…
The FBI have recently released their annual Uniform Crime Report for 2008 and it’s causing quite a lot of contentious debate; evidenced by the fact that it was released only days ago and Google already boasts over 517 articles on the findings. The good news is that, in America, violent crime has apparently decreased by 1.9% in comparison to the 2007 estimate. Of course definitions of violent crime, how much of it is reported etc. needs to be taken into account. They have released a very handsome chart on the topic, which can be seen below.
FBI Uniform Crime rates 2008
There are many articles which have sprung up about these findings since, results being met with everything from naked elation to guarded suspicion – and in the more bizarre reports, both. However, one of the more interesting to the author of this blog comes from games review site Kokatu”, in which they also chart US game sales from the last four years and draw a direct comparison. Their more practical but equally attractive chart can be seen here, with the purple line representing game sales and the green line violent crime arrests:
While the numbers are too large to reflect exact figures, there is a definite rise in game sales while the crime rate lowers. The authors of Kokatu” and a few other sites that have taken their lead are well aware that this is not conclusive evidence for the lack of correlation between gaming and crime but feel it’s a start. Perhaps it is.
‘Gamer’, the latest project of Mark Neveldine and Brian Taylor, is apparently intended to address the topic of desensitisation to violence. The plot of the film involves prisoners being controlled via brain implants by ‘gamers’ in a hedonistic frenzy of blood lust, with one innocent man defying the odds. Think ‘The Running Man’ but more graphic and this time without the free will bit.
Despite the obvious discrepency between intention and execution, the reason for this post is not a review (I have yet to see the film) but a prediction that this film will be fodder for pro-censorship lobbyists and people concerned about the children everywhere. This not to say I condemn their views but am simply anticipating that this film may be the lighter fluid that this particular inferno does not necessarily need. Here’s hoping everyone plays nicely.
‘Gamer’ was released in the US on September 4th, I have yet to find a release date for Australia. Whether or not it actually gets released here has yet to be seen but that’s a whole other post…
Explosive Media 