[...] Here’s some light weekend reading about politics, the media and gaming. Earlier this week the U.S. Federal Trade Commission released a report about the gaming industry. The real fun for industry folk was seeing how all the various media outlets would report the news and what their headlines would be. Below is the list, shamelessly ripped-off from Dennis McCauley over at GamePolitics, of various media outlets and their take on the report: [...]

[...] This week saw the publication of a report(PDF) by the U.S. Federal Trade Commission into the marketing of violent entertainment to children. Joystiq has an article (with a list that was “shamelessly ripped off” from GamePolitics) on how the report’s findings were reported by various media outlets. [...]

The world doesn't stop spinning, and neither does the news, it would seem. Damn. At least Joystiq and GP tries to show that the news was both good and bad in their blurb to get folks hooked on the article.

@Jabrwock

I'll give the media a little bit of leeway for sensationalism, but they still have to stick to the facts. The NYT headline is a blatant misrepresentation of what the study actually found. There's a large difference between making your product attractive to people and flat out lying.

@Ned

While the rating itself is on the front, the other descriptors aren't, and in a place like Walmart where there is the Wall-O-Glass, it'd be nice to be able to see the additional descriptors. A detailed explanation if needed can be on the back, but it can't hurt to put 2-3 words extra on the front label.

My favorite yellow journalism technique is the question mark. You can say whatever the f*#@ you want, as long as it has a question mark after it. For example, you all probably know that we have pretty conclusive exculpatory forensic evidence in the Duke Rape Case and that all charges were dismissed (and there was enough misconduct by Nifong that he's now under investigation)...if this was being covered the way games are being covered, you'd see headlines like this:

"Duke Rape Case Coverup? Evidence Falsified?" (actually, come to think of it, let's wait and see because I wouldn't be at all surprised to see a headline that skirts close to the one I just made up).

"Finally, it recommends that the video game industry place content descriptors on the front of product packaging and research why many parents believe that the system could do a better job of informing them about the level of violence in some games."- Hollywood Reporter


I just looked through most of my games; every one has an ESRB label. On the back of the box are another label and the content in the game (content descriptors).
I don’t understand why it’s so hard to flip over the box, to get the same information. I also fail to see the difference it will make.

In my local game store as well as a near by Target there are signs explaining the ESRB code.
It seems to me that there are tools for parents, they just don’t utilize them. I don't understand why it’s so hard for parents to understand the ESRB code.

@point09micron

"all the so-called journalists do is keyword search things like “violence” and “gun” etc. rather than actually read the full report."

Depends on the paper. Sometimes the headline, which is chosen by the editor, barely has anything in relation with the story. Read some of the articles. Especially the ones where the headline is pretty dire. I'll bet the actual story is pretty disappointing in comparison...

@Jabrwock

I wouldn't buy the paper. All that news was available online last night

I've submitted a similar story on several websites. I find this journalism absolutely appalling. If this isn't the definition of a 'media bias', I don't know what is.

@Matt

Think sensationalism. Honestly if you see a newspaper that has the headline: "Games industry doing fine, could use some improvement: Gov Watchdog", are you going to pick it up? Or are you going to pick up the paper that says "CHILDREN ARE BEING MIND-RAPED BY INDUSTRY: GOV MORALITY WATCHDOG"

Panic sells...

Thanks, GP, both for a reasonable, intelligent article on the FTC report when it was released as well as this interesting little story. Coverage of the coverage is a pretty poignant way to point out the bias and sensationalism of even the mainstream media outlets.
Here's to GP for showing more journalistic integrity than the big boys of media.

LA Times- Does not mention that 3/4 of undercover kids were able to buy R movies. They only focused on Movie Tickets because that is the only good that the movie industry showed in this report.

NY Times- fairly good. Focused on the movie industry and its lack of enforcement on all levels.

Both Beta News and Advertising Age go to the same page.

Hollywood reporter- "Finally, it recommends that the video game industry place content descriptors on the front of product packaging and research why many parents believe that the system could do a better job of informing them about the level of violence in some games."

They said the same thing about movies. Other wise a decent article. I like the quotes from the MPAA and the RIAA. The MPAA basically said, "We are the Best. Yay for us." the RIAA basically said, "We don't care what you think."

Broadcasting and Cable focused mostly on the advertising.

Variety is the same as B&C

Adweek sounds like they are in bed with the CSM group.

The rest were game only sites and focused on the game aspects of the report and made little or no references to the movie and music side. I found that the most Biased of the articles came from California, surprise surprise.

If I hear "violence is marketed/sold to kids" one more time, i swear i'm gona punch a baby or something. For the last time, they are not doing in intentionally! It's the dummy parents buying Gears Of War for little timmy, oblivious to the giant M in the right hand corner of the box, and apparently to the word WAR in the dam tittle. But even then it's not allways the parents fault. It's the clerks fault for selling the kid the game in the first place. It's not the Video game companys fault that Wal-mart decided to hire some idiot that would sell F.E.A.R to a 9 year old. Don't people who work at places that sell video games get told to ID people who look underage? Excuse me if the ESRB can't have a represenitive at every store on the planet to enforse the rules. But atleast they are trying to enforce it by telling parents what is in the game and what the ratings mean.