Just because one is against offensive video games does not mean that one is in favor of censoring them; hence, there is no inherent hypocracy here.

@Benjee: Temple is part of the University System of PA.

Whatever happened to the freedom of the press ?
And how is it that a ART school of all sakes needs to censor ? (And since this a PRIBATE school, they can. If this is however a public school, then it would be even worse)

so a man for video game sensorship is agenst college censorship because he defines it as an art or soemthing? flip-flop?

Legally, freedom of the press only protects from the government. Being a private institution means they can basically do whatever they please.

Personally, the censoring and firing were completed in poor taste.

I’m dismayed that an institution of higher learning, especially here in San Francisco, would think it is acceptable to exercise prior restraint on a student publication.

*sigh* So it's ok to exercise prior restraint on video games, but not on student publications?

Actually this just highlights the point about the MAJOR problem video games have is the generation gap. Education and engagement is key to solving this problem.

So what happens if a student publication is made in the form of a violent video game? Would Yee be able to (in spin only or otherwise) reconcile his contradictory positions? Or would his brain just shut down as it went into an infinite recursive logical loop?

That's a clever concept for a story! I wished I had read it, first. It has multiple interpretations as a commentary on racism. It makes you think. Isn't that the goal of art? To evoke a response? Maybe they should re-read their own tenets once in awhile. And for the record, it's a STORY, it's NOT REAL. Though, it happens in real life plenty.

Which of these is not like the others:

1) San Francisco 2) Art Academy 3) Higher Education 4) Censorship

To be fair to Senator Yee, - and correct me if I'm wrong - it appears that he believes in censorship for minors, not adults. It's not a position I agree with but I don't consider it hypocritical.

This piece shouldn't have been censored. Regardless of whether it was because it was of the violence, rape or it's game-centric twist, the author has a right to be able to publish what he wishes to express.

Doesn't stop him from being completly uninformed and a puppet of third-rate ventriloquists. Rape in a video game pops it's head up again, and apparently it's something we gamers are exposed to this 'all the time'. This seems to ignore the fact that very few games even include sex in any form (I can only think of Leuisure Suit Larry, Mafia, Farenheit/Indigo Prophecy and GTA:SA off the top of my head, and certainly none of them includes rape), certainly far less than movies at any rate.

And I'm not buying this whole 'racial stereotype' thing, either. In this category we have GTA:SA, 25 to Life, Saints Row and 50 cent. I believe 50 Cent should be excused from racial stereotyping in games, because it's not the game that does so. It's 50 Cents 'franchise', which he also spreads through other media. 25 to Life and Saints Row were a cash-in on the other two games, and GTA:SA is popular, but not a common thread through all games.

Did this guy just read about GTA:SA and assume there were many games like this? That's the only way I can conclude that he he believes that racial stereotyping and rape are common occurances in gaming, when any real gamer would know that the exact opposite is true.

Actually, Shaded Spriter, court rulings have basically been unanimous that even private institutions can't censor. I was an editor of the student newspaper at Temple University, which operates like a private school, and we always operated with the knowledge nothing we printed could be restricted by the university.

Freedom of speech is freedom of speech, especially under the header of "the press." Even private institutions can't suppress that.