Game Critic Lieberman Got Campaign $$$ from Industry Donors

December 26, 2006 -
The recent announcement that longtime video game industry critics Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-CT) and Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) were supporting an ad campaign to promote awareness of the ESRB rating system was viewed as a surprising coup for the game biz.

However, an article in this morning's Hartford Courant raises questions about campaign donations Lieberman received from donors with ties to the video game industry. The four-term senator won a return to the Senate in November as an independent following a pitched election battle with anti-war challenger Ned Lamont.

Citing data from the Center for Responsive Politics, the Courant's Washington, D.C. Bureau Chief, David Lightman, reports that Lieberman's campaign received $73,000 in game-related donations, including funds from Linda McMahon, CEO of WWE Entertainment, a Stamford, CT-based corporation. Numerous teen-rated professional wrestling games bearing the WWE license have been published in recent years.

Said Massie Ritsch of the Center for Responsive Politics:
If you're going to portray yourself as a champion against sex and violence on TV and in video games, it certainly doesn't look like you're completely serious if one of your big contributors makes its money from sex and violence.

According to the Courant report, Lieberman has a history of defending donations from the entertainment sector. The newspaper account says that in 2000, when Lieberman was unsuccessfully running for vice president on the Al Gore ticket, he attacked the industry at a congressional hearing but praised it at a high-priced fundraising event a short time later.

Other 2006 campaign contributors included Xbox 360 manufacturer Microsoft. Of the campaign contributions, Lieberman said:
(The money) obviously doesn't affect my behavior, and the system allows for anyone who wants to see what I get to view all the donations.

Comments

@Zippy

And I stand by my earlier statement: If that's your idea of inappropriate sexual content for your kids, throw out all your TVs now because you get that level of sex in a good chunk of commercials and almost every prime-time show on the big networks.

Calling a contribution from WWE one from the "video game industry" is ridiculous, but I don't believe that's what was said. The writer commented that WWE"makes its money from sex and violence" and that's arguably true, although -I'd- argue that if what you see during WWE matches counts as "sex" you might as well throw out all your TVs right now for the sake of your children since there's not a single prime-time show that doesn't have that much T&A at least a few times a season, and that's not counting the various commercials that equal or top the WWE.

As for principles, did anyone here think Liebermann had any? Anyone?

....Anyone? Didn't think so.

I'll also add that if he can really be bought for 73,000.... then the rest of the people on that list *vastly* overpaid.

I really can't say I'm surprised by this. Throughout his entire career, Lieberman has shown himself to be a consummate career politician. At the end of the day, the only thing he really cares about is staying in office. I can't really understand why the people of Connecticut keep re-electing this guy, because really, they should know better. The only way he'll ever leave is if he dies in office, and even then, I heave the feeling he'll be clutching onto his desk with a death grip, and they'll have to pry him off of it with a crowbar. :p

I'm sorry, but you've got to be kidding me. Talk about trying to create controversy out of nothing.

Take a look at the link and see for yourself. According to the site (which I note the Courant article did not link, merely mentioned.) in support of the 2006 election, Lieberman raised $20,213,419. Over. Twenty. Million. Dollars. The amount of the contributions from the "video game industry".... $73,000. No wonder his first response to their accusations was to laugh himself silly and "joke 'I really don't get anything [contributions] from that industry.'

And the contribution from WWE that the article makes so much about, devoting more than half of their space to discussing? $2,000. Wow, I'm sure he's really going to fall all over himself doing things for someone that contributed almost one hundredth of one percent of his campaign money. Actually I find this even more ridiculous, since all of the WWE games I am aware of are rated Teen. And with the exception of the usually unseen and overhyped Bully, I don't think I've ever heard of anyone going after any Teen rated game as inappropriate or in need of legislation. Where is the supposed conflict of interest that should have made him aware of this miniscule donation in order to refuse it?

@ Black Manta
He got in because a little over half of the voters here are stupid. But then, looking at many of our elected officials, I'd say that over half of voters in the nation are stupid.

@Gamerdad

If it has anything to do with the report card, it has a lot more to do with the fact that they aren't supported by anyone except for Jack Thompson if they go with anti-ESRB rhetoric at this point. It is a smart political choice, but only because their constructed boogey man became less scary.

Another move for them would have been to hate on both the ESRB and NIMF, a move parents would get behind because NIMF demanded they be responsible and visit sites like Gamerdad or even *gasp* read the ratings!

A politician bought off? You don't say! Gosh almighty, that never happens.

Politicians, especially those who make a career out of it, need cash to remain in power. Hollywood and the RIAA are major contributers to politicians across the country. Video games, being in some sense a new Hollywood, are merely a new industry to shake down.

"A lovely little industry you have here. It would be a shame if we had to regulate it out of business."

Hes a poli hes getter crackers....... er .........money from everyone.

I'm normally more cynical than this but I don't think he's been "influenced" at all!

The shift Lieberman and Clinton have made isn't a big a deal as people make out. For one thing, his "Report Card" makes it clear that the ESRB, in Liberman's view, is now doing a good job and that parents are most "at fault" (meaning: they need more info, imo).

Plus the wind just changed. The midterms were a loss for cultural conservatives, which includes Democratic stuff like anti-videogame legislation. The winds changed, dems like Hilary and Lieberman need cultural cover/credibility less now than before, AND the anti-videogame laws are being overturned and Governors are being embarrassed.

My point is, Lieberman and Clinton, in my view, are making a normal and political move away from extreme anti-videogame rhetoric and toward support not because of campaign money... but because it's the smart political choice right now.

Okay, I am still cynical, just not as much as some.

... gotta love it.

Regardless of whether it was caused by $$ or not- I still can't stand how some politicians turn 180 degrees so readily. For Lieberman, Hillary, and the NIMF (still entrenched in politics) to suddenly change their tune so drastically and quickly is alarming. I have more respect for people who actually stick to their convictions...

Politician for sale.... Sold!!

After that Bush Incident, he is still not enough?

Lieberman sir, you can come and kiss my ass now.

Also, I found this listing on craigslist:

1 Joe Lieberman, willing to sell for $73,000 in campaign funds, WHAT A DEAL!

It is NOT OK to contact this poster about unrelated commercial stuffs lol.

Wait a minute : it's WWE, so it's not really a game company (although there are some WWE games).

Brer
never seen the girls of WWE or one of the wrestling knock off shows?
theres wheres the sex is brought in,altho one could argue half necked guys prancing around would count to *rolls eyes*
 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Will Code Avarice's Paranautical Activity make its way back onto Steam?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Andrew EisenWhen I write about these massacres, I don't use the shooter's name or picture. I'm not saying everyone has to play it that way but that's how I prefer to do it.10/25/2014 - 12:44am
Andrew EisenYep, it's why the news media stopped spotlighting numbnuts who run out on the field during sporting events.10/25/2014 - 12:01am
Matthew Wilsonin media research its called the copycat effect. it simply says that if the news covers one mass shooting shooter, it increases the likelihood of another person going on a mass shooting.10/25/2014 - 12:00am
Andrew EisenAgreed. It bugs me that I know the names, faces and personal histories of a bunch of mass shooters but I couldn't tell you the name of or recognize a photo of a single one of their victims.10/24/2014 - 11:51pm
AvalongodAgree with Quiknkold. @Mecha...if that worked we would have figured out how to prevent these long ago.10/24/2014 - 11:32pm
MechaCrashUnfortunately, you have to focus on the perpetrator to figure out the whys so you can try to prevent it from happening again.10/24/2014 - 10:55pm
quiknkoldpoor girl. poor victims. rather focus on them then the shooter. giving too much thought to the monster takes away from the victims.10/24/2014 - 10:15pm
Andrew EisenFor what it's worth, early reports are painting the motive as "he was pissed that a particular girl wouldn't date him."10/24/2014 - 10:12pm
quiknkoldwell then I suck as a man cause I ask for help when necessary :P10/24/2014 - 10:07pm
Technogeek(That said, mostly I was making the smartass evopsych comment because your post seemed like the kind of just-so story that has come to dominate 99% of its usage.)10/24/2014 - 10:04pm
TechnogeekHell, Liam Neeson built his modern career around it. Cultural factors likely play a far greater role than you appear willing to admit.10/24/2014 - 10:03pm
TechnogeekSeriously, though, the idea of "because women are protectors and that's why they never commit school shootings" is, at best, grossly overreductive. There's nothing inherently feminine about being willing to kill in order to protect one's offspring.10/24/2014 - 10:03pm
MechaCrashThe "toxic masculinity" thing refers to how you have to SUCK IT UP AND BE A MAN because seeking help is seen as weakness, which means you suck at manliness, so it builds and builds and builds until something finally snaps.10/24/2014 - 10:01pm
quiknkoldthere, I'm done. And thats what Christmas is all about, Charlie Brown10/24/2014 - 9:54pm
quiknkoldand I am not spouting Evopsych, technogeek. tbh I never heard the phrase till you said it. I'm going off my observations.10/24/2014 - 9:54pm
quiknkoldmoreover, the guy who did this isnt even white. He was native american according to the news report I read. Also that he went for a specific target. That's a much different picture than a certain Sandy Hook guy who will not be named10/24/2014 - 9:53pm
quiknkoldbut I am also certain nobody in their right mind is committing these shootings singing the Machoman song. these are sick individuals who have given up on life10/24/2014 - 9:51pm
Technogeekevopsych lol10/24/2014 - 9:49pm
quiknkoldWhen you suffer from mental illness, youre more likely to go by instinct. yes. I came off as sexist.10/24/2014 - 9:46pm
quiknkoldmore on somthing they are fixated on. Post Partum Depression is an example. This is why a woman is less likely to go off on a rampage.10/24/2014 - 9:44pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician