July 24, 2007 -
A Chicago area library's planned Halo 2 competition has turned into controversy.As reported by the Daily Herald, the tournament is scheduled to take place on Sunday at the Mount Prospect Public Library. While the library is requiring parental permission slips before admitting underage players to the event, the game's M-rating is not spelled out. Some worry that parents may not realize that their kids will be playing a violent shooting game.
Rose Allen (left), the Mount Prospect library's teen director, explained that the Halo 2 tournament was created on the recommendation of the library's teen advisory board in order to attract more teenage boys.
The most prominent critic of the event is Dr. David Walsh, president of the National Institute on Media and the Family:
I think it's a mistake from top to bottom. I think it borders on irresponsibility for a public library to sponsor an activity for kids as young as 12 that the [video game] industry itself has said is for adults.
Library Director Marilyn Genther disagreed, however:
It's the parents' obligation to know what their kids are doing. It's up to them to know (the rating). It's not our responsibility.
Debates over video game content in libraries are a relatively new phenomenon, but expected to become more frequent, said Robert Doyle, executive director of the Illinois Library Association:
The whole area of video gaming in general is an area that is relatively new for libraries, and there has been prejudice against this area by some.
About 45 players participated in a January event without controversy. Said Allen:
I've talked to a number of parents who thanked me for having the tournament. They said their son now wants to come to the library.
GP: It's true that Halo 2 is M-rated, but it's certainly not Grand Theft Auto.
Comments
"The Dr. Walsh’s of the world have long blamed the video game industry/retailers when children are getting their hands on M rated games. They rarely state that parents should be responsible when supervising what kind of content goes into the game console."
Insofar as you are referring to Walsh himself, it was not hard to find multiple examples on the NIMF website of Walsh urging parents to be responsible for their kids video game (and other media) activities.
Here are a few of them (with what is perhaps the strongest example first):
1. “Furthermore, the game makers and most of the retailers make a good, though not perfect, effort to educate parents about the video game ratings, earning them a B. All of this praise for the industry surprised the reporters who cover the Report Card. But another grade we gave created even more of a buzz. That's because this year, for the first time ever, we gave a grade to parents: INCOMPLETE. The fact is the tools and information parents need to protect their kids are mostly available. And yet, as our survey of parents and their children showed, too many of us parents don't do a very good job of providing a healthy media diet for our kids.”
http://www.mediafamily.org/mediawisecolumns/wakeup_mw.shtml
2. “Regular readers of this column know there a few simple things individual parents can do to help protect their kids from the harmful effects of media. Setting limits on content and amount is a big start. Being aware of what's on the screen - watching what your kids watch - is a big part of it too.”
http://www.mediafamily.org/mediawisecolumns/coming_together_mw.shtml
3. “[P]arents have a greater responsibility than ever to be aware of their kids' video game habits.”
http://www.mediafamily.org/mediawisecolumns/10_years_vg_mw.shtml
4. “When parents do a good job of limiting the amount and content of games their children play, video games can be a healthy part of a child's life. But many of the most popular games kids play are not appropriate for young people, and parents have no idea. Our survey showed less than five percent of parents knew about the content of the most popular game on the market.”
http://www.mediafamily.org/mediawisecolumns/videogames_and_kids_mw.shtml
5. “For years I've been repeating a simple slogan to parents: be MediaWise and watch what your kids watch. The premise is pretty straightforward - if you want to make sure your kids have a healthy media diet, you need to pay attention to what's on the menu.”
http://www.mediafamily.org/mediawisecolumns/kuwyk_mw.shtml
Walsh does pin some of the blame elsewhere, but he clearly doesn't ignore the responsibility of parents.
Now let's check out Final Fantasy games for role models. Cecil rejects his evil way, becomes a paladin devoted to righteousness, and destroys the avatar of hatred to save the world. The various characters in Final Fantasy 6 get their respective ducks in a row and unite to defeat Kefka, to the point he mocks them as sounding like self-help books. Cloud, in the last Final Fantasy game I admit to existing, gets his act together and defeats the great evil. Personally, I think stories of people overcoming their troubles and putting their lives on the line in service to others is better than the hedonism and homicide supported by Shakespeare, but his books are classics?
Anyway, this is the game Halo. Wheather you like it or not, everyone and their grandmother has heard of it. If you are a parent and you have never heard of Halo by now and you are not Omish, you do not deserve to have children. And they required permision slips for minors. If every one under the age of 17 has to sign a slip for a game tournament, what the hell do you thing they will play? Mario Kart Double Dash?
Halo isn't that bad of a game. The characters restrained from saying the F word, and 'Shit' is a PG-13 word. Heck, the multi-player by itself is more of a T game than an M. There is no gore, and a little bit of blood. Thats T rated violence. It's mostly because of the Flood that the game has the M rated 'Gore'.
Yes, your last explanation makes it more clear. Thanks. Your previous posts made it seem like you were in complete agreement with Dr. Walsh's statements. The Dr. Walsh's of the world have long blamed the video game industry/retailers when children are getting their hands on M rated games. They rarely state that parents should be responsible when supervising what kind of content goes into the game console. This is why it would be irrelevent as to whether something is shown at the library or has to be seen at home (it's obvious that the NIMF doesn't make villians out of parents for economic reasons). Also, again, books can contain inappropriate-for-minors content, but the library certainly cannot supervise children if they choose to find and read these books right then and there. But that's a whole other topic of discussion...
ESRB ratings suggest age appropriateness. That’s it.
Exactly, the M rating is a recommendation not a you must be at least "add arbitrary age limit here" to buy, rent or play this game. It's recommended for persons 17 and older, not an outright restriction. The AO rating is more of a restriction as the ESRB suggests it's only meant for adults.
BTW, the Halo games are at the very low end of the M rating spectrum and it's only rated "M" due to the fact that humans in the game shed red blood. I personally feel it those games should be rated Teen.
"If a parent gives their kid access to the home DVD player, for whatever reason, they are responsible for what the kid watches on said player."
Sounds like I'm targeting the player instead of the content, which I'm not. What I'm really talking about is WHO is the current "supervisor"... who is expected to be taking care of the kids. At a library event, the librarian is as much a supervisor as the parents are. The librarian supervises what kind of content goes into the DVD player, whereas at home the parent should be doing that job.
Hopefully that's more clear.
"...it should also be poor judgment to allow minors near R rated movies. That’s what I’m saying. But neither you, nor Walsh have said that."
Then you need to read my whole post before responding:
Quote: "It was irresponsible of the library to not clarify that it was an M rated game, in the same way that they should let parents know that a movie is R rated before showing it to their kids."
I didn't go further into movies because they are not the topic of discussion here, but be certain that I did not single out games.
Moreso, I think there's a difference between letting people check out the games/movies and actually showing/playing them at the library. If a parent gives their kid access to the home DVD player, for whatever reason, they are responsible for what the kid watches on said player. But if the kid goes to the library and is shown "inappropriate" material, that is as much the fault of the librarians as it is the parents.
Anyway, hopefully you can see that there was no hypocrisy in my statement: I did mention movies in my very first post, but to dwell on them would be to go on a tangent from the actual news item.
personally i dont think its a big deal and hey if it gets your kids to the libary and gets them intrested in reading and such then isnt that what matters????
oh yea and BTW Freddy vs jason really even though was a R rated movie it was so lame and funny that there was no reason for the r rating (ok well maybe cause of stoner dude)
as for david walsh
F*** him and the rest of the anti gamers they can all kiss my a** and go to hell
Link:
http://www.mppl.org/teens/index.html
The point I bring up is why haven't you (and Walsh) spoken about the "irresponsibility" of libraries for carrying and allowing minors to check out R rated movies, but speak up when it involves video games?
I'm not necessarily saying what the library did was ok, and just like you, I can see this as poor judgement, but if this is poor judgement, then it would also be poor judgement to carry R rated movies and allow minors to check them out, which is exactly what has been happening all along. (Let's not even get into the fact that there are numerous books in libraries that contain inappropriate-for-minors material in them). You don't have to frequent library checkout websites, just visit any local public library and you'll see.
If it's poor judgement to allow minors near M rated games (and I don't necessarily disagree with you here), then it should also be poor judgment to allow minors near R rated movies. That's what I'm saying. But neither you, nor Walsh have said that.
The industry has not said M-rated games are for adults. The ESRB has recommended the game for ages 17 and up. Have they said that younger persons should not play it? No, they have not.
ESRB ratings suggest age appropriateness. That's it.
Andrew Eisen
Like I said, "...don’t libraries let you rent out movies like Glory, Saving Private Ryan, Schindler’s List, and other similar R rated movies? And all you need is a library card, which you can have at any age."
How come you (and Walsh, for that matter) aren't saying that libraries are irresponsible for carrying R rated movies that can be checked out by minors who only need a library card? They have been doing this for numerous years, but only now that it involves video games, you speak up?
Parents should take more interest in their childrens activities and take time to learn about them.
The amusing part is, even if there WAS legislation around games, it wouldn't affect this one whit, the laws are about who buys the game, not who plays it, so this really is a storm in a teacup being stirred by NIMF.
Because I don't frequent websites that discuss library checkouts? I'm not specifically targeting games... why would I, as both a gamer and a game developer? But I'm certainly not going to ignore the issue "just because it's games". To do so would make me a tool.
This was a game played at their location, on their systems, supervised by their workers/volunteers, and they should have thought a bit harder about what that kind of responsibility means.
Now don't mistake this for me saying "they should be punished... aaahhh... fire and brimstone!!!!!!" It was irresponsible, not illegal, and was most likely an unintentional oversight. All I did was criticize, I did not suggest that we take any sort of action against them. I'm still free to criticize poor judgement, right?
Why did you have to end on this? Are you questioning whether or not Halo deserved it's M rating? (I am, it should be T in my opinion). Whether or not you agree with its rating, it was an M rated game and we need to treat it as such.
Grand Theft Auto is M-rated, but it's certainly not Manhunt. Doesn't matter though, they're both 17+, and to argue that one is ok for kids to play and the other isn't is pure hypocrisy.
It was irresponsible of the library to not clarify that it was an M rated game, in the same way that they should let parents know that a movie is R rated before showing it to their kids. Whether that movie is Freddy VS Jason or Beverly Hills Cop is irrelevant, they're both (supposedly) meant for adults. Sure, in the end it IS the parents responsibility to know what their kids are watching, but that doesn't mean the library shouldn't attempt to help the parents out.
Anyway, since they are using parental permission slips, I don't see a problem with it.
Plus, the library required parental permission! Talk about attempting to raise other people's kids. The real focus of the NIMF is becoming clear - raise your kids our way or be a bad parent. As long as the parents are involved, who cares if a 12 year old plays Halo 2? Oh yeah, those who want their 'morals' forced into other people's lives.
I know theres some gaming tourneys in my area (latest I believe is Guitar Hero 2 Tourney). They had Halo 2 tourneys and I know that place has a LOT of kids go to that store to hang out (a baby-sitter practically) but I've never seen such problems there.
@Dr. David Walsh
With your recent stance against games in general, and not analyzing things on a case by case basis, I do declare that NIMF is no longer a legitimate watchdog agency by my books. Sealed and stamped. Goodbye.
I don't see Dr. Walsh yelling and screaming because of that. Man, this NIMF is really one of the most ignorant organizations out there.
On the other hand, the library could at least have spelled out in the permission slip that they needed the parent's permission specifically for the kids to play M rated games. The parents can figure it out from there.
On the other hand, parental slips were only required for underage kids. So it's also pretty clear that there's parental involvement needed for a reason. Parents can't play *completely* dumb...
As for the controversy, the only thing wrong is that they did not note it as an M rated game in the promotional material. But that is not a very big deal as they had parents sign permission slips, so it will all come back on the parent if their kid was corrupted by the library.
Not to mention the fact that Johnson's awesomeness could seriously injure the feeble minded.
I think more exposure and more in-depth study (i.e. literary, film, etc.) of video games might foster a higher level of literacy among kids and I think libraries are recognizing the potential benefits. Come to think of it, I wanted to read more about Cloud than Hamlet.
People like David Walsh need to get their heads out of the sand. Unless the participants in the tournament immediately went out and started shooting each other, he is just being an alarmist. The Library director got it right. It's the parents responsibility to decide whether the underage players should be allowed to play or not. They required permission slips for underage children and I doubt a 10 year old could make it there on foot.
@ janarius
Yeah, but Cloud is just plain awesome. He would kick Hamlet's ass any day of the week, too.
Is Dr. Walsh now saying that HE and HIS ORGANIZATION should dictate what is or is not appropriate for other people's children?
Personally, if I were Yuki, I'd be pissed off that the wonderful debate he had with Dr. Walsh turned out to be a scam on the part of Dr. Walsh.
At any rate:
(1) Parents are informed and are required to sign a permission slip.
(2) Parents are the one making the decision whether or not their child may or may not participate in the tournament.
(3) The Parents themselves know their own children better than anyone else on the planet.
(4) Whether I would allow my child to participate or not, and whether I would find this or any other game appropriate for my own child has no bearing on whether I should have the Right to make the decision for other people's children. And if someone else makes a decision that I would not make, does not mean that either of us are "good" or "bad" Parents or even superior or inferior Parents. It just means we are being Parents to our own children.
Nightwng2000
NW2K software
Ah, but Walsh seemed to solely blame video games for obesity, even though it is obvious that video games aren't the sole cause of obesity. Just look at the exact quote that was used in their report card I mention above:
"Content aside, the amount of time kids spend playing games, even the good ones, is contributing to the obesity epidemic among American youth. For too many kids, the only parts of their body they are exercising are their thumbs. We are particularly concerned, therefore, about the launch of games this year aimed at children as young as two. We know that the industry wants to expand its customer base and that it is in their economic interest to hook babies on games. This trend, however, raises serious implications for our children's health."
That fact sheet you point to was revised on 11/06, which coincidentally happens to be at about the same time the BBB complaint article was posted. The report card with the quote above came out in 11/04. My previous post above suggested that the NIMF may have made some changes based on complaints by the public. You are just looking at what the NIMF is currently doing/saying, not what they had been saying all along.
The problem is Walsh gave video games an F grade, not all media, even though there are numerous factors in causing obesity - when the report card that I mention above was released, Walsh never brought up other activities and mediums - just video games, as evidenced by the quote I posted above. That's why I question why he gave video games an F grade. While he and his group do (now) mention other activities like watching television, I find it rather ridiculous that they issued a letter grade for that one report card which focused on video games, and the grade just so happened to be an F. If they want to show that the F grade is indeed justified, they should've given parents an F grade as well, not incomplete (I wasn't implying that you don't agree with that, I'm just bringing it up for comparison).
This means that in order for this to be a legitimate argument, they either should take back the F grade given to video games for obesity and instead issue a grade of incomplete, or give parents an F grade for lack of parental involvement. They haven't done either. That's why I feel they demonize the industry and side with parents because the group has an economic interest to make sure not to portray parents as the problem, or part of the problem. After all, the NIMF sells their books and other items to parents, not the video game industry.
Also, I did mention that kids are spending quite some time in front of the screen. Unlike Walsh, however, I will also say that kids can spend too much time on things like homework, reading (Harry Potter, anyone?), and other activities that don't involve exercise as well. I won't single out video games or only screen time the way the NIMF is doing. Even non-electronic media can prevent children from exercising, but the NIMF doesn't mention that, as you've stated. Why don't they come out and say that all mediums and all activities (or just too much of any activity) could potentially lead to obesity, rather than specify video games/screen time?
"As for Walsh giving all video games an F grade for causing obesity, I don’t know why you are trying to cover it up by bringing up 'calorie consumption.'"
Covering it up? You said, "Are they suggesting that video games are SOLEY responsible for causing obesity in children?" Clearly, the answer is no. He is not singling out video games as the sole cause, even setting aside my sarcastic (and perhaps unfortunate) remark about calories.
Look at the NIMF webpage on obesity: There is certainly discussion of video games, but there is also lots of discussion about television and media in general. True, not every possible activity that kids do instead of exercise is listed, e.g., piano lessons. But you seem to agree with Walsh that kids spend too much time in front of the screen, and there are data supporting this concern.
http://www.mediafamily.org/facts/facts_tvandobchild.shtml
“[Y]ou don’t seem to understand that when Walsh says parents should be MediaWise, the 'MediaWise' phrase is trademarked by the NIMF[.]”
On the subject of the NIMF’s trademark, underneath the mark on the website it says, “Watch what your kids watch,” which is clearly a message to parents and one that is repeated all over the website. I am very sympathetic to this message, but I’m not sure if this -- or my quick reading of the BBB complaint policies (which may be wrong) -- makes me an “NIMF or Walsh sympathizer.”
“Incidentally, Dr. Walsh did give the entire video game industry an F grade a few years ago, claiming it is a wake up call for the industry. Why not do it for parents instead of giving them a grade of incomplete?”
I already said this was a fair complaint.
-Bill
My School has a video game club that has sponsored Halo 2 tournaments before and no one has ever complained. Navy Pier about a year ago also had a giant truck loaded with PCs that had Quake 4 installed on it and kids as young as 7 or 8 were playing with the parents standing right next to them and not a single one of them complained. And oh, there was no age requirement for the game either.
As far as Walsh telling parents to take responsibility, you don't seem to understand that when Walsh says parents should be MediaWise, the "MediaWise" phrase is trademarked by the NIMF, so of course they will use it. Yes, Walsh has talked about parental responsibility, but rarely, and suspiciously makes it feel more like advertisement for their site (parents should be "MediaWise"), rather than making it seem legit. My point is Walsh has never graded parents nor parental responsibilities, and when he had a perfect opportunity to do so (in the last report card) he failed by giving parents a grade of incomplete rather than the more deserving grade of F. No, being a parent isn't easy, but an F would have been a better wake up call for parents to pay more attention to what their kids are doing. Incidentally, Dr. Walsh did give the entire video game industry an F grade a few years ago, claiming it is a wake up call for the industry. Why not do it for parents instead of giving them a grade of incomplete?
The BBB complaint doesn't appear to be something that is out of line with their guidelines, unless you are an NIMF or Walsh sympathizer? In fact, looking over the BBB website, they allow people to file complaints against charities, which I'm assuming the NIMF is since they claim to be non-profit . Even the Parents Television Council is included on the list of charities. Remember them? They got in big trouble with the WWE a few years back. They also claim to be non-profit as well. It also doesn't appear that the complaint is asking the BBB to force Walsh out, rather, it comes across as asking Walsh to voluntarily step down - hence the phrase "step down" rather than something like "forced out". All this aside, the point of linking that complaint is to show that people are watching this group closely, and it appears the group is making some changes, but obviously more needs to be done.
As for Walsh giving all video games an F grade for causing obesity, I don't know why you are trying to cover it up by bringing up "calorie consumption." I think it's pretty obvious that calorie consumption is relevant, and I'm sure Walsh knows that, but he doesn't say anything about it. He only brings up video games. What about books and reading? What about homework, or piano lessons? It's quite foolish to give video games an F grade when there is a plethora of activities out there that can raise obesity levels in children. Focusing on video games is not only narrow-minded, but proves the NIMF is out to demonize the industry while siding with parents. As I said, why did they give video games an F grade when there are other factors that contribute to childhood obesity, but give parents a grade of incomplete because according to Walsh, it isn't a parent's fault entirely? I don't mind if they do talk about screen time and obesity. That's fine and I agree that children should in fact exercise more and spend less screen time. But why give a grade out when you can make the same claim about numerous other activities?
By the way, you can check out the report card that give an F to video games here:
http://www.mediafamily.org/research/report_vgrc_2004.shtml
No, I'm not kidding you. You said, "The Dr. Walsh’s of the world . . . rarely state that parents should be responsible when supervising what kind of content goes into the game console." He has said parents should do this multiple times -- and very conspicuously in the last Report Card.
Now you seem to be saying, instead, that Walsh’s balance is out of whack, that he puts too much emphasis on video game publishers and retailers and not enough on parents. Your complaint that Walsh should have given parents an "F" rather than an "Incomplete" is a fair one. However, your earlier complaint that Walsh rarely urges parents to take responsibility for what their kids watch or play is not a fair one because it ignores the many times he has done so.
“I guess when a complaint is filed against you, you start telling the truth for a change[.]”
If you are now saying Walsh rarely focused on parental responsibility in the past, even though you accept he has now stepped up to the plate, I can’t really speak to this. The columns I quoted lack publication dates, so I don’t know if they are all post 11/12/06 -- assuming this is really the key date -- but it would surprise me if they were all this recent. (Incidentally, David Polus’ complaint doesn’t seem to conform to the BBB’s Complaint Acceptance Guidelines. And was he asking the BBB, a private organization, to force Walsh out of the NIMF??? "What I would like done, at the very most, is to see Dr. Walsh step down as the leader of this organization.")
“Are they suggesting that video games are SOLEY responsible for causing obesity in children?”
Of course not -- this wouldn’t even make sense (calorie consumption is pretty relevant here) -- but he clearly thinks playing video games is a major contributor to childhood obesity.
-Bill
Are you kidding me? You put in a perfect quote there to show that the NIMF is more interested in blaming video games and the industry over parents. Notice they gave parents a grade of incomplete because they feel it isn't parents' fault entirely; that it is also the industry's fault. Their claim is that if it isn't the fault of parents 100%, then it wouldn't be fair to give parents an F grade. This is strange considering they gave all video games, even the good ones as they put it, an F grade for causing obesity in children a few years ago. Are they suggesting that video games are SOLEY responsible for causing obesity in children? Why didn't they give video games a grade of incomplete the way they gave parents a grade of incomplete? Easy. They want to demonize the industry, while showing that they are on the side of parents. Giving parents a grade of F would conflict with the bottom line of this group, which is that they have an economic interest in ensuring parents can trust them, go to their site, purchase their items, and make the group members rich.
In fact, the report card quote you mention was the first such report card that actually called parents out point blank. The other report cards seemed to target just the industry, while just casually mentioning parental involvement. I guess when a complaint is filed against you, you start telling the truth for a change:
http://www.d3dgames.com/bbb.html
Don't fall for Dr. Walsh's nonsense.