
Meanwhile, in the
Asbury Park (NJ) Press, Paul K. McMasters of the
First Amendment Center in Arlington, Virginia pens an op-ed decrying the U.S. Senate's recent passage of the
CAMRA Act, which calls for a $90 million study of the effects of media on children. McMasters writes:
"In the 15th century, the printing press was a technological advance revolutionizing the ability of those who published books to inform, provoke and entertain. Those suspected of using this 'new media' to promote heresy or insurrection were threatened with the rack or worse."
"How little things have changed. These days, those suspected of wielding new media to inflict psychic injuries among the young and weak of mind also are threatened — with expert studies that seek to prove harm by putting reason on the rack."
"Those who believe that certain media are a menace in any hands but their own obsess over the potential negatives and dismiss the demonstrated positives of electronic media. They show impatience with common sense, disrespect for parental responsibility and an unrequited infatuation with 'studies' when courts fail to support their attempts to regulate."
"We should not be surprised that yet another round of research on the potential harm caused by electronic media is being ordered by legislation passed by the U.S. Senate... the drive to tame new media never loses momentum or new targets."
"As much as political leaders, advocates, researchers and some parents would like to hope otherwise, sure proof of the cause-and-effect relationship between media content and bad behavior among adults or children remains elusive."
"But the assumption is pervasive, especially when an event occurs that shocks our conscience and sends us in a desperate search for causes and answers. For example, when a 25-year-old Montreal man used a semiautomatic rifle to turn a junior college campus into a killing field, many minds raced to the conclusion that video games made him do it..."
"Being against violence or indecency for our kids is low-hanging political fruit for politicians. They can't help themselves when they exploit our understandable concerns..."
"To argue that violence in media causes actual violence, or that indecency in media causes harmful sexual adventurism, is to argue that the cleansing of movies, TV, radio, video games, comic books, the Internet and even books will remove crime, perversion and other unpleasantness from our midst."
Comments
Maybe that's why he's not in politics?
Lies get you power, and then you use that power to spread more lies. When someone challanges those lies, you slander and defame them as best you can.
Want proof, look at the democrats right now, using anything, even when it's an outright lie, to attack there republican oppenents. Why? Cause they want there power back. Yet they offer no better solutions, will not support the troops, call them murders and killers, then backpedal claiming they mispoke.
Fuck them, fuck the Mainstream media, and fuck the "Moral Crusaders". They can blow me for all I care, I've had enough of this crap.
I still say, and will continue to advocate, that the ESA bring hard, heavy handed legal action against these Jack holes till they ether stop lying, or are bankrupt. Cause i bet you money, they will run out of money before the industry ever does.
yickes you got one foul mouth..altho when one gets tired of being complacent one tends to be simple when they speak :3
The Mainstream media is a mindless viewer whore not caring how they gain viewers
The Politicians are mindless vote whores doign the same...gotta love it....
Altho on the up side if this study is done right it could greatly help shut morons up..but then they never listen to facts..and this has a 50/50 chance of being misdone......blahg
Does anyone honestly believe that Hillary Clinton, Joe Lieberman, and other anti-gaming crusaders would stop just because the CDC contradicted them? Hardly. It's called fishing for evidence where there isn't any. If they don't get their way this time, they'll just order another $90 M study, and then another, until one eventually proves their point and they can go "A-HA! See? We were right!" Yes, it's childish... but you're talking about politicians.
Given that Lieberman wants to cling to power, and Clinton isn't going away, the option of just removing them in their respective races does not seem likely. To me, what it REALLY boils down to is an industry that refuses government control. I can see Lieberman in a trenchcoat telling the ESA, "Fine little industry you've got here. It would be a shame if we passed laws against it. But you can change that, you know," as he extends his hand for the briefcase of money. After all... you don't see them crusading against Hollywood or the music industry anymore, even as Hollywood releases "Unrated" DVDs and foul-mouthed rap continues to ascend in popularity.
CIA: "It's highly unlikely that Saddam Huissien has any weapons of mass destruction at this time."
GW: "So what ya mean is there's a very strong chance that he's got WMDs? Great!"
CIA: "No, there's virtually no reason to believe he has wmds!"
GW:"cool, so there's virtually no reason why invading Iraq would be a bad idea."
Anyways, same thing happened when the White House said an intelligence report supported their insistance that because of the war in Iraq we were safer then ever. Then, when GW declassified the report (probably because he was scared the New York Times would get it eventually) and anyone with third grade reading skillz could tell that the report said terrorism is now a growing problem in large part because of the massive failure in Iraq that has created such ill will towards America in Iraq that Al Quida's recruitment numbers are higher than ever.
My point is, no matter what the report says, it will say what politicians want it to say. I would like to think that at least since GW looks fondly back on his generation's Rock & Roll he might veto any federal anti-game measure. Especially since No Child Left Behind has helped so many Pedophiles find victims. (No Child allowed recruiters to get kid's home address and phone number to help them recruit. Last year, 80 recruiters from the various armed services have been disciplined for improper conduct, rape, etc.)
I know I've said this before, but I don't believe the ESA and the industry can "sue people for spreading lies" as you put it. We're not talking about a tabloid saying somebody slept with so-and-so here. We're talking about peoples' opinions on the subject. And while we all know there's no direct causal link between violence and violent media, saying or implying that there is isn't illegal or an offense anyone could sue over. It's infuriating yes, but not illegal.
If CAMRA doesn't find a direct causal link, I'm willing to bet everything that whatever the results may be, and whatever the executive summary may say that Clinton and Lieberman will somehow twist the facts to their advantage. Then we will cry foul and the whole thing will come full circle.
Games companies are not exactly destitute, if the US sanctions restrictions on games, they will pack their bags and move overseas. It wouldn't be the first industry to do so.
Regardless of the outcome, the threat of lawsuit would be enough to stop the lies. It's no sure thing, as it's a hard case to make, but it can work, and will often force major change. Hell, the PTC hasn't had any real impact on the world since the WWF sued there asses. They sure learned not to lie after that. I'll tell you what.
Post new comment