I tell you, I love living in New York, but sometimes, the government here does things that make me scratch my head and want to scream. Generally, it’s a pretty progressive state -- but the reactionaries that serve in the state’s governing bodies, the State Assembly and the State Senate, can infuriate people with their recalcitrant ways. One such anti-videogames lobbyist is Republican New York State Senator Andrew Lanza.
Last year, Lanza introduced a bill in the Senate that had the intent of cracking down on videogame violence. It aimed to do that by establishing an Advisory Council on Interactive Media and Youth Violence, as well as a Parent-Teacher Anti-Violence Awareness Program, and by requiring all games sold in New York (at retail or over the Internet) to carry an ESRB rating label. For more on that bill, check out David Houghton’s detailed analysis of its pros and cons. The bill was passed astonishingly quickly -- in four days -- but it never became law due to political battles between then-Governor Eliot Spitzer and Republican Senators.
I’ll give Lanza some credit here; he seems to be undaunted by failure, as he sponsored a nearly identical bill in the State Senate this year. The bill was first proposed in the State Assembly by Democratic Assemblyman Joseph Lenton of Brooklyn. This bill has the added requirement that all videogame consoles have regulatory controls. It passed unanimously on June 23rd in the Assembly, and it was up for a vote in the State Senate yesterday. Thanks to Lanza’s defense of the legislation, it passed 61-1.
Now, the bill will go directly to Governor David Paterson. If he signs it, the bill will become law on September 1, 2010 -- though the games industry will surely file a federal lawsuit on the grounds that the bill is unconstitutional. Hit the jump for my own analysis of this unfortunate situation.
[Via GamePolitics -- thanks, power-glove!]
[Update: The article originally discussed unrated games and movies, which are exempt from the bill. Changes have been made to reflect this. --SS]
Unfortunately, the bill is already on its way to Governor Paterson. Before it was passed in the State Senate, the Video Game Voters Network (an organization sponsored by the Entertainment Software Association, the parent organization of the ESRB) exhorted New York residents to send letters to their state legislators, telling the politicians to vote against the bill. I guess no one was listening, since there was only one dissenting vote.
My main problems with this bill are: it’s essentially pointless and redundant, and it unfairly singles out the videogame industry. Let’s dissect it:
Advisory Council on Interactive Media and Youth Violence
The bill provides for the creation of a 16-member government council to do the following: study the potential effects of violent videogames, examine the ESRB ratings system and its effectiveness, and potentially establish a Parent-Teacher Violence Awareness Program to “identify and appropriately assist students who may have a propensity toward violence.”
Why is such a council necessary? After all, a Federal Trade Commission (FTC) study found that 80% of the time, retailers didn’t sell M-rated games to kids under the age of 17. That’s much better than the rate at which movie theaters were able to prevent under-17s from seeing R-rated movies without an of-age companion (65%). And as for stores selling DVDs of R-rated films, forget it: they did it just under half the time (53% prevention). So obviously, the rating system is doing its job -- and as such, if you’re going to target the self-regulating private organization, why not go after the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) for its film rating system as well?
Required parental controls on videogame consoles
All of the “big three” consoles of this generation already have parental controls. In fact, there’s a great USA Today article from December 2006 that explains how to set them up on the PlayStation 3, PlayStation Portable, Xbox 360, and Nintendo Wii (ironically enough, the DS doesn’t have any such system, except for its web browser). The bill actually only covers non-portable videogame consoles (“such terms shall not include a personal computer, nor shall they include a handheld device in which such entire device, including the viewing screen, is designed to be held in one’s hand”), so the PSP and DS are exempt anyway.
And no offense, but if you have kids and you either (A) can’t figure out the controls, or (B) can’t be bothered to do so, well, you need to do a better job of being a parent. It’s not Sony’s, Microsoft’s, or Nintendo’s fault that soccer moms claim to have better things to do than making sure that their children don’t have access to violent videogames. Thus, it also shouldn’t be something that the New York State legislature has to reinforce by law.
Required display of rating for videogames and films
The final section of the bill is rather curious -- it applies to videogames as well as movies, and it enacts requirements for the display of ratings:
No person, partnership or corporation shall sell or rent at retail or attempt to sell or rent at retail a VIDEO GAME OR film unless {the} A VIDEO GAME rating {of} OR the RATING OF THE motion picture from which {it} THE FILM was copied is clearly displayed on the outside of the case, jacket or other cover of the VIDEO GAME OR film.
Yet again, we have a redundant part of the bill. According to the ESRB’s Web site, games with ESRB ratings are required to display ratings information on game packaging and in advertising. If a publisher fails to adequately satisfy these requirements, the ESRB can take action that includes: “the re-labeling of product inventory and unsold product at retail or, potentially, a product recall.” Once again, this has already been taken care of by the self-regulatory ESRB, so the New York State government doesn’t need to meddle in the proceedings.
In its article on last year’s Lanza-introduced bill, GamePolitics noted that such “content-based restrictions” have meant death in the “First Amendment scrap heap” for pretty much every other bill like this. Regardless, the passage of this bill in the State Assembly and Senate has been quite expedient, so lamentably, it looks as if Gov. Paterson will soon sign it into law. We may be in for a long, protracted legal battle, my friends -- let’s hope my fellow New Yorkers come to their senses.
Contest:
12:29 AM on 06.25.2008
| 
SITTIN HERE ON CAPITOL HILL
What a bunch of fuckwads
What should be done instead, is create a website for parents SPECIFICALLY designed to teach them about the rating system, parental locks, etc. This should be a government run site, and should be included in the instruction manuals of video games. Time to wake up and get involved in your kid's life.
Remember: When Duck Hunt is outlawed, only outlaws will have Duck Hunt.
Outlaws always hunt ducks.
From the Law: "This section shall not apply to [...]any film which is a reproduction of a motion picture, concert, musical production or other video event, OR ANY VIDEO GAME, which has not been given a rating, nor shall it apply to any motion picture OR VIDEO GAME which has been altered subsequent to receiving a rating.
I suppose that exempts "unrated" or "Director's Cuts" of movies and games. Also, moar developers should take a stand against the ESRB, perhaps begin their own ratings board, maybe with shared ownership by developers? Hey, it could happen...
Granted, as long as games are rated by the ESRB, this won't affect us...
but I'd still rather not have my rights as a customer put in potential jeopardy for no reason.
G: There are no legal restrictions on the sale or hire of computer games classified G.
PG: There are no legal restrictions on the sale or hire of computer games classified PG. It should be remembered however, that computer games classified PG are not recommended for people under 15 without guidance from a parent or guardian.
M: There are no legal restrictions on the sale or hire of computer games classified M. It should be remembered however, that computer games classified M are not recommended for people under 15 years as these contain content that is recommended for a mature audience.
MA15+: Computer games classified MA15+ can only be sold or hired to people aged 15 years or older, unless they are accompanied by their parent or guardian, or in Queensland by an adult.
There is no R 18+ or X18+ classification category for computer games.
Well, that's good to know.
FREEDOM TO THOSE WHO HUNT DUCKS!
Plus, regulation as defined by progressivism usually pertained to large corporations (especially monopolies), or the government structure itself (i.e., reducing sprawling bureaucracy and eliminating corruption).
Wh...what?
Hopefully they'll stand up and smack this bill down in time.
Sucks for you guys. Well, maybe not, but it sucks to live anywhere near morons like that.
If GTA gets an M, I want a peer review of their rating decision. I feel it's only fair, even if I'm not actually given any power to combat the rating, at least I can see the components of the decision that lead to the rating that it carries.
It was always my biggest fear that they would start with videogame violence debates here in Norway again, like they did back in early 90's, when we had this nasty bitch as our minister of culture.
You can see an example of what you're talking about for movies here: http://www.pbbfc.co.uk/
Re: Samit and everyone else
This is a huge over-reaction. The FTC study was a single study, this guy is proposing a council, which as you pretty much say yourself, will come to the same conclusions, or else be so clearly off the wall that nobody will take it seriously.
The ESRB is a privately set thing. This seems like a publicly established safeguard to me, in case it fell apart (numerous departures from the ESA, anyone?).
There is no 'crackdown' here. Freaking out to a pointless bit of legislation like this makes the entire video game playing community look like a pack of immature jerks. Forget about movies, or using the 'but Jack did it too' argument, M games are not for kids and until video game fans get serious about that we will be beaten, repeatedly, with the same stick.
Luoxaing, there is one thing you are forgetting is that this is paid for by me and my family's tax dollars. I don't want my tax dollars being wasted on something as pointless as this. Do we need to waste money on trying to force home consoles to have parental controls despite the fact that all of the current home have those controls already in place? This is a waste of public money that could have been better spent in other ways.
The same thing applies to video game ratings. I’ve heard of GameStop firing employees who have sold M-rated games to kids under 17. The system works as-is, and the ESRB doesn’t need a 16-member group of New York legislators to vet its decisions or decide if it’s doing its job (because, again, it obviously is).
Again, there’s no reason to single out the video game industry for M-rated games unless you’re going to go after the film industry for R-rated movies. That’s the fundamental issue at hand. In addition, as power-glove pointed out, this is an immense waste of state resources (e.g., legislators’ time and taxpayer dollars) that could surely be better spent attending to other matters.
You and your funny little constitution.
I think most are worrying that this is what their tax dollars are being spent on rather than important issues that will affect change for the good rather than make it a law to do what has been done for more than a decade already.
Just watch, no one's going to enforce it, and a month later everything will just be back to normal.
WTF New York? This shit doesn't make sense to me. Isn't most of this already covered?
Honestly, I think games should use the same rating scale as movies, or revamp both systems. Neither is perfect. Really, an ignorant parent might buy an M-rated game for their little kid, but I've never heard of anyone who would let their 8 year old see an R rated movie without finding out about it, at least.
My comment still holds true. I haven't been in N'ork since 2001, so have they stopped putting that label in the corner since then?
Redundant? Nay! We do this for the children. For the children.
The children the children the children the children. It's for the children. We must protect the children. We must do it all for the children. We must claim every misguided battle we take up is for the children because we hate pedophiles even though we talk about children more than they do. Children.
P.S. Children.
A game named after a felony with pictures of gangsters with shady scowls and chicks in bikinis and subtitles like vice city and parents don't already have enough information on what NOT to buy for their eight year old? nevermind the clear rating symbol in the same place on every box and a whole mess of information about the game's content on the back of the box!
smack! smack! smack!
nevermind the fact that parents might actually be exercising good parenting and making decisions about what their kid gets to do based on their age, maturity level, and disposition, instead of allowing the government to do it for them based on gross generalizations. The video game censorship discussion always ends at 'the parents,' but the assumption is always that the parenting is bad and the parenting needs to shape up so we don't need laws like this. You know, maybe the parenting is happening and that's why the regulations don't appear to be working. Maybe, just maybe, the legislators are the most ignorant people involved here? Oh, wait. Haven't we already determined that?
See what a pot of coffee does for you in the afternoon!