Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Games Government Entertainment Politics

Games Industry Accused of 'Buying Political Clout' 101

Posted by Zonk from the because-nobody-else-does-it dept.
A parent's group is lambasting the Electronic Software Association for announcing its intention to curry political favour in Washington DC. The games industry, for most of its life a much-maligned business sector, has just begun to work towards changing its image with US lawmakers. The Parents Television Council views this as attempting to 'buy influence in Congress', and views the ESA's plans harshly: "'The videogame industry continues to fight meaningful accountability for selling inappropriate material to children. The industry has been exposed repeatedly for its reprehensible behavior and now they are looking for ways to buy friends in the government,' said PTC President Tim Winter. 'Let me be clear of our intentions: Any public servant who cashes a check from the videogame industry will be exposed by the PTC as taking a stand against families, and his or her actions will be communicated to constituents in his or her congressional district.'" I wonder how they feel about lobbying by conservative 'pro-family' groups?
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Games Industry Accused of 'Buying Political Clout' More

Games Industry Accused of 'Buying Political Clout'

Comments Filter:

  • Welcom to the club (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Boronx ( 228853 ) <evonreis@mohr-en ... m minus math_god> on Tuesday January 22, 2008 @04:36PM (#22144366) Homepage Journal
    I wonder how they feel about lobbying by conservative 'pro-family' groups?

    Or every other business sector that has felt the weight of legislative attention.

    • Re:Welcome to the club (Score:5, Insightful)

      by KillerCow ( 213458 ) on Tuesday January 22, 2008 @06:23PM (#22146230)

      The Parents Television Council views this as attempting to 'buy influence in Congress'


      As apposed to what they do...

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by armada ( 553343 )
      "A parent's group is lambasting the Electronic Software Association for announcing its intention to curry political favour in Washington DC" they are 100% correct. Their point?

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by sjlumme ( 719239 )
      Another one bites the dust! You can try to run a business just making things that people want and taking their money for it, but at some point somebody with power will smell your money and want a cut, if not of the money itself then at least of the influence that comes with it. David Boaz wrote a wonderful little editorial [cato.org] when Google set up a lobbying office, and he provocatively called it "Parasite Economy Latches onto New Host." A little shrill, maybe, but not really all that bad an analogy. And it is

  • Oh bullshit. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by SatanicPuppy ( 611928 ) * <Satanicpuppy.gmail@com> on Tuesday January 22, 2008 @04:38PM (#22144404) Journal
    What, so it's only a bad thing when the gaming industry does it, and not when every other lobby in the universe does it?

    Screw it. They tried to do it the right way, using reason, and compromise, and common sense, and it didn't work. So now, screw it, they're going to play the game, and it turns out that gaming is a fricking huge industry, and they can blow a ton of money on legislation that is favorable to them.

    So now all the "Think of the Children" politicos are going to have to decide whether they want to keep pretending that they actually care, or whether they want money. Pretty much a no brainer.

    • Re: (Score:1, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Thank god we can always rely on politicians being drawn towards money more than anything else.

      • Re:Oh bullshit. (Score:4, Insightful)

        by OldeTimeGeek ( 725417 ) on Tuesday January 22, 2008 @05:22PM (#22145268)
        As little as people may like it, the only way that the games industry can get a "positive" message in edgewise is through paid lobbyists. As it is, the only message that most politicians are likely to hear is "games are evil" because the groups that are pushing that message are very well organized.

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Lilith's Heart-shape ( 1224784 )

        An honest politician is one who stays bought. Frankly, it's about time the games industry started using its money to bribe the Congresscritters. The Uptight Christians Brigade [cc.org] has been doing it for years, and getting in the way of everybody who just wants to kick back and enjoy the only life any of us are going to get.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Fozzyuw ( 950608 )

      So now, screw it, they're going to play the game, and it turns out that gaming is a fricking huge industry, and they can blow a ton of money on legislation that is favorable to them.

      Well, given that the PTV say's this on their website [parentstv.org]...

      World of Warcraft is incredibly fun to play [...] there is a fair amount of violence-some of it bloody, references to alcohol, and occasionally a subtle sexual innuendo.

      They don't sound so bad. (ah, the power of the ellipsis. hehe =P )

      In all seriousness, does the PTV sup

  • Duh. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Hatta ( 162192 ) on Tuesday January 22, 2008 @04:39PM (#22144424) Journal
    Everyone buys political clout, that's how the system works. Lobbying = legalized bribery. So I wonder, how much has the Parent's Television Council donated to various congresspeople?

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by orclevegam ( 940336 )

      So I wonder, how much has the Parent's Television Council donated to various congresspeople?
      The technical term for them is congresscritters. If you call them people, others might get the wrong idea and expect things like morals out of them.

      • Re:Duh. (Score:4, Funny)

        by geminidomino ( 614729 ) * on Tuesday January 22, 2008 @09:32PM (#22148352) Journal
        I dunno... "congresscritters" sounds sort of cute and fuzzy, and reminds me of this show [wikipedia.org].

        Just call them what they really are, a term that leaves no room for misunderstanding the nature of the evil that they spread across the earth. "Mostly lawyers."

        • If we're going to call the scum infesting Congress (and other legislative bodies around the world) what they are, then "mostly lawyers" doesn't quite cover it. Let's use words like "racketeers", "gangsters", "criminals", "thugs", "extortionists", "looters", "thieves", "cowards", "robbers", and "assholes".

          Mod me down for the following if you like: the only good politician is a dead politician.

          • If we're going to call the scum infesting Congress (and other legislative bodies around the world) what they are, then "mostly lawyers" doesn't quite cover it. Let's use words like "racketeers", "gangsters", "criminals", "thugs", "extortionists", "looters", "thieves", "cowards", "robbers", and "assholes".

            How are all those words not summed up in "lawyers?"
            • I've met a couple of decent lawyers. I've yet to see a politician who thinks that 'decency' is anything but a rhetorical sledgehammer to be brandished every time somebody gets pissy over how much sex or violence is shown on TV.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by mcvos ( 645701 )

      Everyone buys political clout, that's how the system works. Lobbying = legalized bribery.
      That doesn't make it right, though. It makes it wrong. Apparently up til now the gaming industry was one of the few groups ethical enough not to give in to this corruption, but now they're giving in. And politicians and parent groups are to blame for this corruption of our game industry!
  • The PTC has every right to be upset. An industry they're bullying has decided it's had enough and is fighting back. Once the gaming industry gets political PTC will have to find somebody else to pick on.

  • Arseholes, basically (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Malevolent Tester ( 1201209 ) * on Tuesday January 22, 2008 @04:46PM (#22144542) Journal
    'The videogame industry continues to fight meaningful accountability for selling inappropriate material to children.

    Can people stop using the word conservative to describe these groups? One of the cornerstones of conservatism is the belief in personal responsibility, and that includes taking responsibility as a parent, not sitting back and blaming the entertainment industry like some junkie approportioning the blame for his actions onto society.
    If you can't be bothered to make the effort to learn what your children are doing, and enforce whatever rules you consider appropriate for your house, then you have no business complaining. A console/TV/computer is not a surrogate parent, and the games industry is not to blame if you've given your children a TV and Xbox360 in their room to shut them up.
    • Sadly, these organizations tend to ally themselves with the "conservative" party in the United States. They also tend to self-designate as "conservative."

      And frankly, I've seen "conservatives" take the principle of "personal responsibility" to the point of blaming people rear-ended in car accidents for having made the decision to get out on the highway. Personal responsibility is a great way to convince people that the victims of your conduct don't deserve to be compensated. /rant

      --AC
      • 1. when driving you should be monitoring what is going on behind you as well as in front. That is, when your stopped waiting for something you should have left yourself an escape route, whether it is a side walk, or yard, and watch all around your car. If you should happen to see a car coming behind you its trivial to then move into your safe area. Why this is so difficult for 99% of the population to understand is beyond me. It has saved me from being involved in several accidents, just like not tailg
        • I'll agree that you should be aware of what's going on all around your car as opposed to only what's in front, but I think you're trivializing the problem.

          Firstly, it can be tough to make a judgement call on whether you are going to be hit or not. A lot of people, at least in my state, leave the bulk of the deceleration for a light towards the end. They effectively zoom up behind you and stop (God only knows why, it's not like the light is going to go anywhere, and even if it did the cars waiting at the lig

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by Kharny ( 239931 )
          i got rear ended twice at a red light. There isn't much choice at a red light.
          Any action i can take involves me going forward before i can turn, this puts me into the trafic coming from the left side, which the n would hit me on the driver side.

        • Legally it is partially your fault when you are rear ended for not having moved or even noticed the car was coming.
          Uh, YMMV. Drastically.
        • > Legally it is partially your fault when you are rear ended for
          > not having moved or even noticed the car was coming. ...
          No. Circumstances dictate who is at fault, but in the majority of real-world cases, the person who got rear ended is not at fault (even partially).

          http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071031185200AAPo49L [yahoo.com]
          http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=733166 [google.com]

          I once barely avoided rear-ending a stationary car on a freeway. The two reasons I could were (a) I had started practi

      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        by Quiet_Desperation ( 858215 )
        I've seen "conservatives" take the principle of "personal responsibility" to the point of blaming people rear-ended in car accidents for having made the decision to get out on the highway.

        No, what you've got there is an Objectivist. :-)

    • The founder of this group, L. Brent Bozell III, also founded Media Research Center and the Conservative Communication Center. He's also been on the board of the American Conservative Union. He's also William F. Buckley's nephew.

      These people have clout among "conservative" politicians and describe themselves as "conservative". Personal responsibility is one of those ideas that lip service is paid to as it suits the political agenda at hand, and ignored when it doesn't.

    • I disagree completely. While conservatives are all for personal responsibility, they are also about curtailing personal freedoms to meet their moral standards. Conservatives are pro economic freedom, anti personal freedom. Democrats are pro personal freedom and anti economic freedom, and Libertarians are pro economic freedom and pro personal freedom.

      So conservatives are all about personal responsibility, but only as it applies to their moral standards. That is you are free to take on the responsibility of

      • I notice that you are using "Democrat" as the opposite for "Conservative." I think part of the problem is people assuming/believing that Republicans are real Conservatives.

        • I would agree with another poster that Conservatives used to mean "personal and community responsibility". Which is fine by me if you have a whole town in B.F.Nowhere that wants to create the ideal religious fanatic haven. However, what has happened since Reagan is that the Republicans and "influencial" fundamentalists (Falwell) have decided that "community responsbility" means "the whole USA is our community, therefor everyone needs to think like us, and we'll make it happen using the law and Fox."

          I use C

    • There is a spectrum of conservatives just like there is a spectrum of liberals, even if that spectrum on the conservative side has fewer differing interest groups and not as fragmented as the liberal side in the US. At the extreme ends, there is even some wrap-around. There are people that may be fiscal (conservative/liberal) they may go other way social issues.
    • "One of the cornerstones of conservatism is the belief in personal responsibility, and that includes taking responsibility as a parent, not sitting back and blaming the entertainment industry like some junkie approportioning the blame for his actions onto society."

      Yeah right, these are the same people who accuse others of being "enablers", i.e. the legalization of drugs for instance, and help for addicted users, etc. Just like every other human being conservatives just as hypocritical. "Personal responsib

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Alsee ( 515537 )
      No true Scotsman.

      -

  • New Government Program for Protection of Children (Score:5, Funny)

    by Free_Meson ( 706323 ) on Tuesday January 22, 2008 @04:48PM (#22144596)

    The videogame industry continues to fight meaningful accountability for selling inappropriate material to children. The industry has been exposed repeatedly for its reprehensible behavior and now they are looking for ways to buy friends in the government,' said PTC President Tim Winter. 'Let me be clear of our intentions: Any public servant who cashes a check from the videogame industry will be exposed by the PTC as taking a stand against families, and his or her actions will be communicated to constituents in his or her congressional district.

    I'd like to announce a new program to help screen inappropriate material from children. Tentatively titled the "Federal Universal Child Kinship Oversight and Family Force Act" or F.U.C.K.O.F.F. Act for short. This act empowers the states to appoint guardians over minors based on whatever criteria they find reasonable, though it is expected that minors will be assigned based on a matching of their genetic makeup to that of available guardians. These guardians will be allowed to control the media the minor is exposed to, including but not limited to internet, television, radio, video games, and print media. It is the hope of Congress that this formal delegation will clarify the role of the government in the care of minors.

    Sincerely,

    -Ron Paul
  • I wish I had the money to buy political clout.

  • What about the RIAA (Score:3, Insightful)

    by KevMar ( 471257 ) on Tuesday January 22, 2008 @04:52PM (#22144692) Homepage Journal
    Where is the public out cry against the RIAA?

    The RIAA pulls people in to court instead of generating income. They attack our children and grandparents and threaten to take away our childrens college assistance. Yet the public dont care. Us slashdotters understand it, but the people that should care don't.

    • Where is the public out cry against the RIAA?

      The major record labels have a habit of releasing edited versions without the language (and often without references to recreational drugs). Anyone can pick one of those up at Wal-Mart, where the price label tends to state that the music is edited. But in part because of the overhead per title imposed by the console makers, few video game publishers will bring out both an "edited" T and a "less edited" M rated version of the same title.

  • "Market Forces" (Score:4, Funny)

    by ObsessiveMathsFreak ( 773371 ) <obsessivemathsfreak&eircom,net> on Tuesday January 22, 2008 @04:56PM (#22144760) Homepage Journal
    And why not? That clout is for sale!
  • Because morons like the PTC are forcing them to. The tech industry as a whole was generally pretty happy to keep out of politics. However since it is being forced on them they are now going to play the game like everyone else.

  • Logical Fallacy (Score:5, Insightful)

    by SanityInAnarchy ( 655584 ) <ninja@slaphack.com> on Tuesday January 22, 2008 @05:01PM (#22144846) Journal

    I notice how everyone is suddenly becoming defensive and apologetic. "Everyone else does it too" is not an excuse. You already know this -- it's almost cliche now -- and yet we still find people who will excuse the behavior of any corporation with "Meh. It's a corporation. That's what corporations do."

    But that's not why I'm posting. Actually, I find a sense of gratification -- one could even call it glee -- that for once, I'm on the side of the corporations, who are lobbying for something I want, rather than being the "little guy" screaming at the top of his lungs, wishing desperately that he was relevant.

    And that's not why I'm posting, either. I am posting because of this outright fallacy quoted in the summary:

    Let me be clear of our intentions: Any public servant who cashes a check from the videogame industry will be exposed by the PTC as taking a stand against families, and his or her actions will be communicated to constituents in his or her congressional district.

    Oh, I get it. You're with us, or you're with the terrorists.

    Look, am I the only one who sees more possibilities here? If I was trying to get ahead politically, why wouldn't I cash a check from anyone? It's not as if the money itself is tainted. The MPAA could pay me all they want, and I would still legislate against them, not for them. They can threaten to pull funding -- fine, I'll use the last of their own money to buy some ads, exposing how they essentially tried to bribe/blackmail me into writing legislation for them. A message of "I'm doing the right thing, even if it costs me money" should serve to get me re-elected, right?

    It would be much more relevant to ask what that check was for, and to actually look at what that particular public servant does. People who cash checks from the MPAA do tend to write stuff like the DMCA. Are people cashing checks from the videogame industry any more or less likely to write censorship legislation?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Hatta ( 162192 )
      Actually, I find a sense of gratification -- one could even call it glee -- that for once, I'm on the side of the corporations, who are lobbying for something I want,

      If you think for a second the ESA is any better than the RIAA or the MPAA you're a fool.
      • I don't. It's what they would tend to lobby for.

        In some ways, they'd be no better than the MPAA. In other ways, well, I like violence in my videogames!

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Froobly ( 206960 )
        If you think for a second the ESA is any better than the RIAA or the MPAA you're a fool.

        It's a fair comparison. They're both well-funded, largely amoral organizations that have either wronged us in the past, or intend to wrong us in the future. However, bad as the RIAA is now, I don't want to think what would've come if they hadn't been fighting against the PMRC in the '80s.
        • So wait, in hindsight, we like Tipper and Co. now because the were a distraction to the RIAA?

          What?

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by CSMatt ( 1175471 )

      The MPAA could pay me all they want, and I would still legislate against them, not for them.

      Are you sure? Money talks, you know. If I gave you 2 billion dollars to support legislation for me, would you do it? Or would you listen to "the voters," who got you the job but don't pay you at all (or at least aren't contributing anymore now that you are in office)? Add the lack of knowledge of the consequences of said legislation that almost all politicians suffer from at least at some point in their careers, if not all the time, and it's pretty easy to see why bought-and-paid-for legislation is so

      • If I gave you 2 billion dollars to support legislation for me, would you do it?

        Depends on the legislation.

        Also, if you gave me 2 billion dollars to do something I was going to do anyway, I'd take it. Or if you gave me 2 billion dollars in the hopes that I'd do something for you, but without getting me to actually agree to it, that's your fault. And that's what you get for trying to bribe me.

        Or would you listen to "the voters,"

        I'd listen, yes. Just as I'd listen to you.

        And then I'd vote for what I thoug

  • pro family? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by rucs_hack ( 784150 ) on Tuesday January 22, 2008 @05:17PM (#22145186)
    Is Pro family another word for 'don't do anything that would make baby jesus cry' or something?
    Good grief. I have a family, I'm reasonably sure I'm pro it, and I like games as they are. If somethings too violent I just don't buy it, end of problem. Do I need someone esle to tell me? Nope, I have a brain.

    Remember when Hollywood started to think that any decent film had to have sex scenes in it? I mean the eighties and early nineties. They weren't legislated into stopping it, although there were the same pressure groups doing the rounds. It was a bums on seats problem. People weren't interested, so they didn't pay for the film, so they dropped the sex thing. There's only been one scene with sex scenes in it that I've enjoyed in recent years, and that's 'Free Enterprise'. There wasn't exactly much in that either. Ok Clerks 2 as well, but that was a donkey....um, bad example...

    If people don't buy enough of the violent games, they'll stop making them, its simple business economics. If they keep on buying them, there's obviously a market, and it will be supplied, no matter what die hard 'pro family' bods say.
    • ANd I don't really care about that. I don't like viopent games anyway.

    • "Family" (Score:1, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      "Family" is one of the codewords, yes. The flag that it raises for me, at least, is usually "conservative Christian," although I'll admit that's not always the case. My own anecdotal experience has been that every "family" bookstore, for instance, is basically using a politically friendly (i.e. secular) term for "Jesus." I make the mental substituation that in these contexts "family" is referring to the relationship between God and Jesus.

      There are other codewords, too.
      "Responsibility" usually means "bla
    • There's only been one scene with sex scenes in it that I've enjoyed in recent years, and that's 'Free Enterprise'.

      Great flick, btw... They even got William Shatner to play as imaginary version of himself:

      Imaginary William Shatner: What'd he say?
      Young Robert: You really don't want to know.
      Imaginary William Shatner: I really do want to know!
      Young Robert: He said that Han Solo was cooler than Captain Kirk.
      Imaginary William Shatner: Kick the little fucker's ass!

      That bit of dialogue alone almost makes it worth t

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by jonwil ( 467024 )
      Watch "this film is not yet rated" to see just what Hollywood does to films with sex in them (including independent films where the filmmaker cares more about the art than about the money)

      The only reason congress hasn't intervened to try and stamp out the "bad" stuff in films is because the MPAA and their secret ratings board are doing it for them
    • Ok Clerks 2 as well, but that was a donkey....um, bad example.

      Chicks with dicks that put mine to shame.
      Wait, wrong Clerks.

  • I can't take it anymore (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Quiet_Desperation ( 858215 ) on Tuesday January 22, 2008 @05:28PM (#22145376)
    Is there a real life Galt's Gultch out there? Is there some place where all the self reliant and independent people went? Where all the people who take responsibility for themselves went to live a better life? A place where someone suggesting the formation of a group called the Parents Television Council would be looked at like a mentally ill person?

    Can I come? I gots mad tech skillz. Please? I'll work really hard. Anything to GET ME THE FUCK OUT OF THIS FUCKING CESSPOOL OF NITWITS THE REST OF THE WORLD HAS BECOME!

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Daetrin ( 576516 )
      "A place where someone suggesting the formation of a group called the Parents Television Council would be looked at like a mentally ill person?"

      There's nothing fundamentally wrong with a group called the "Parents Television Council." However in a sane world such a council would focus on encouraging the development of "clean" "harmless" (and more importantly, simple and fun) programming for children and working with amenable companies on the production of the same. They would not be running around telling

    • If you were truly a personally responsible person, you would have founded it already instead of waiting for somebody else to.
  • ... isn't the Parents Television Council [wikipedia.org] the same group that sends in the vast majority of "indecency" complaints to the FCC, far more than any other group combined?

    The hypocrisy of them lambasting the gaming industry for playing political "dirty tricks" is truly disgusting, indeed.

  • Ya know what pisses me off the most? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by 7Prime ( 871679 ) on Tuesday January 22, 2008 @05:42PM (#22145588) Homepage Journal
    The fact that PTC isn't actually what they say they are. They're not a "child friendly" group trying to work with the game industry to get concensus on gaming... they're an anti-video game lobby group who thinks that video games are evil and are out to destroy the industry. They remind me of religious pro-abstinance groups who masquerade as birth-control education.

    I'm personally fairly opposed to video game violence, as I am with TV and cinema... I don't think it's healthy for our culture in general (regardless of age, actually). But I'm also in favor of consensus building, and different interests working together toward the common good. The PTC has shown that they are not trying to build a better game industry, they are trying to tear it apart completely.

    Basically, this gesture says "We can lobby, but they can't, because they're inherently evil". At that point, no reasoning or compromise can be made, we're now in the realm of idiology and theology. Basically, PTC has just declared financial holy war on the game industry.

    I consider myself a pacifist... but in this case, let the war begin.

  • It's totally unfair (Score:4, Funny)

    by Aggrav8d ( 683620 ) on Tuesday January 22, 2008 @05:49PM (#22145724) Homepage
    Gaming experts gaming the system? They have way too much experience, they'll run circles around their competitors! At the very least lobbyists should have to get past some kind of jumping puzzle to reach the senate, only to be told their congressman is in another office.

    • Aggrav8d: Gaming experts gaming the system? They have way too much experience, they'll run circles around their competitors!

      I know. So I'm expecting a bloodbath. (Hey, pass the popcorn, would you? Oh, a large bucket please.)

      Aggrav8d: At the very least lobbyists should have to get past some kind of jumping puzzle to reach the senate, only to be told their congressman is in another office.

      Why not? I mean, that's almost how it works for everyone else now anyway. There's no jumping puzzle per se, but that

  • Can anyone here explain how forcing parents to do more parenting is "anti-family"? I can't see it, myself.
  • I'm going to let you know how my "teen" RPG christmas went. Shadow Hearts 2 & 3, XenoSaga 1-3, Tales of the Abyss, and Disagea 1 & 2. So far I've made it mostly through Disagea 1, beat Tales of the Abyss, beat XenoSaga 1 and at the final dungeon of XenoSaga 2. I got feed up with XS2's annoyingly difficult enemies that I couldn't just level up and get past so I started Shadow Hearts 2 last night.

    I have nearly the entire FF Series and it's rated Teen and I found really nothing in it to object to... I
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by bri2000 ( 931484 )
      Has coverage of "the children" become as schizophrenic in the US as it is in the UK these days? Over here the press seems to alternate between stories about how the paedaphiles are coming for YOUR children and they're coming NOW (in fact, they're proably watching your child's school as you read this) and demanding that children be protected from the possibility of gaining the merest hint of the existence of sex, drugs or other "adult" topics lest it destroy their delicate little minds, on the one hand, and

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by CSMatt ( 1175471 )
      I'm guessing these are either some very tall children or some very short politicians.
  • It must be naive of me to thing that the Parents TELEVISON Council would restrain itself to issues concerning TELEVISION and leave other media alone. I suppose its pointless to try to dissuade the PTC from pestering video game lobbies by patiently explaining to them that television has nothing to do with video games. Its entirely possible to play a video game on a device that's not capable of receiving a television feed and can't be used to play movies (i.e. my black-and-white Game Boy still works fine).
  • A video game industry PAC is good for us now, and overdue for the industry. It means that they will have more clout in fighting censorship efforts. In the future it could be a different story.

    After all, I remember rooting for the recording industry and their PACs back when Tipper Gore was leading the effort to censor music, but later those same organizations lobbied to get the DMCA passed.

    Not everything that is good for the game industry is good for the gamer.
  • There's only one way to deal with nutjobs that are so far removed from reality...Respond with an equally removed from reality response. And how pray tell do we, the tech community, do such a thing? By using technology to our advantage. I'm sure someone else remembers Scott Pakin's famous complaint letter generator:

    http://www.pakin.org/complaint

    And a quick search over the PTC's site reveals the email for "Letters to the Editor":

    editor@parentstv.org

    Now go forth, my tech brethren, and fight crazy with crazy
    • Yummy ! The complaint generator is a cute technological marvel. Here is what I just sent them: Here is my complaint about PTC with regards to your recent attacks against gaming industry.

      May I be cynical for a bit? I hope you don't mind, but with Parents Television Council's latest barrage of snippy politics, I can't resist the urge to make a few cynical comments. It is worth noting at the outset that contrary to my personal preferences, I'm thinking about what's best for all of us. My conclusion is that

  • You are a moron and I don't like you. The video game industry has every right to lobby just as any other group. Video games are no different than movies, television, or any other type of entertainment. Some games are meant for kids, some games are meant for adults. If you or the people you represent are incapable of parenting, please refrain from having children. I am sick and tired of people like you telling me that there is something wrong with my hobby. The real problem is you forcing your morales

  • Any public servant who cashes a check from the videogame industry will be exposed by the PTC as taking a stand against families...

    I think what must irritate them the most is that gaming industry has decided to fight them on their own turf. But at what point did supporting video games mean harming families? It's not as if the two are mutually exclusive. Pro-divorce, anti-family. Pro-kidnapping, anti-family. Pro-child abuse, anti-family. Those correlations make sense.

    I'm a married man with a family and vi

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Synic ( 14430 )
      Yes, this is awfully familiar. I mean, didn't we have this whole ridiculous crapfest with the RIAA and the "Explicit Lyrics" labels on CDs at music stores years ago? And it effectively did little other than to further glamorize those CDs for "rebellious" youth?
  • I'm not sure which acronym I despise more: the PTC with their cries of "We must tell every parent and politician in America how to raise children or our children will surely grow up to be heathen criminals.", or the ESA with their cries of "We must ignore and/or sabotage any and all technology standards or our customers will surely rob us blind."
  • Just thought I'd pass along these links to more info about some of the pending video game legislation in Congress right now::

    H.R.1531 - Video Game Decency Act of 2007 http://www.opencongress.org/bill/110-h1531/show [opencongress.org]
    S.568 - Truth in Video Game Rating Act http://www.opencongress.org/bill/110-s568/show [opencongress.org]
    H.R.2958 Children Protection from Video Game Violence and Sexual Content Act http://www.opencongress.org/bill/110-h2958/show [opencongress.org]

    And you grab an rss feed to monitor congressional activity related to video game

Slashdot Top Deals

Fast, cheap, good: pick two.

Close