Flash Games as Political Commentary 216
Clive Thompson writes "All over the net, there are little shockwave games inspired by political events -- from the WTO-style New York Defender to War on Terrorism to even Downing Street Fighter (where British politicians beat each other senseless, Street-Fighter-Style). Sure, like most Shockwave-generated stuff, they may suck as games. But that's missing the point. What's happening here is nothing less than the emergence of the online video game as a form of social comment -- something you dash off in a couple of hours to make a sardonic political point about something. It's a new notepad for communication. Or at least, that's what I argued in this piece in Slate today. In addition to the craven self-promotion of sending it in to Slashdot, I'm interested in hearing what everyone thinks of this issue. After all, courts have recently been arguing that video games cannot be protected speech; these games make it patently obvious that this view is insane." The columnist missed a better example of the genre - the EFF's game of digital restrictions management.
Watch those links (Score:5, Informative)
It is no more infantile than ... (Score:3, Informative)
No.
It is no more infantile than scratching crude pictures on paper mocking politicians or political events.
We call those political cartoons, and they are a venerated way of making exactly the same kinds of sardonic, and sometime crass, criticisms of public policies and public politicians. The flash games described here are exactly the same thing, printed in a new medium (the interactive internet as opposed to the passive, one-way old media).
Games and programming in general are obviously speech deserving of "at least the same protections as the print media" to paraphrase the supreme court's opinion in their ruling which overturned the SCA. Things like this are invaluable in driving that point home in terms even non-tech savvy, but non-whored-out-to-the-media-cartels judges can understand. In other words, it won't sway Kaplan, but it will likely sway the supreme court, and it is there opinions which count.
Mark Fiore (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Just because cartoon is protected speech... (Score:2, Informative)
I should have added the adjective "obscene". Case in point though, for example a cartoon depicting a naked man prostrate on hands and knees with a dog going at him wildly from behind and a caption "MAN'S BEST FRIEND" *could* fall under this catagory.
Note, I say, "could". The problem of course is that it's a very fuzzy criteria and can be argued either way. A lot of wheter somthing is premited under freespeech falls under state and local goverment jurisdiction.
What could be gotten away with in one location, might not in another.
Luckily we hardly ever have to deal with such cases because of editors. (And the pulp books that do contain the offensive imagary aren't readily accessable by those who would take offense at them... even if they were, the worse that could really happen is for the offensive material to be removed from the store it could be purchased in.)
Anyrate, since we're talking about banned cartoons heres a good link for you: (not dealing with the US mind you.)
http://www.oneworld.org/index_oc/Cartoon/c