Three New Gamer Videos for Republican Presidential Debate

August 14, 2007 -

Last week the Entertainment Consumers Association issued a call to action, challenging gamers to create grassroots video questions for Republican candidates participating in next month's CNN/YouTube debate. As a show of support, ECA president Hal Halpin even promised to send an ECA t-shirt to everone who submitted a gamer issue-oriented video.

The response has been unprecedented with new gamer-created videos appearing almost every day. Here are three brand-new submissions:

Jordan from Maine wants to know what the Republican candidates will do to keep his video games safe from censorship. Tim from Pennsylvania wonders how the candidates would help parents make the right video game choices for their children. UGIPhobose from Atlanta wonders if the candidates believe it is the government's duty to censor digital media, including the Internet and video games

To see all of the gamer debate videos submitted so far, click on the Presidential Debate Videos category tag in the right sidebar. And if you're submitting a debate video to YouTube, don't forget to contact GamePolitics or the ECA to claim your t-shirt!


Comments

test

the halo video is pointless. unelss your real name is ugi fugil or what ever.

Apparently mine was deleted. I like the second one best. Machinima doesn't really work for this.

I expect a complete dodge on the "what will you do to hold parents responsible for their choices" question.
-- If your wiimote goes snicker-snack, check your wrist-strap...

must avoid spam filter, must not sing the lyrics to the monty python spam song.

In the .0007 percent chance this does get through these videos don't seem to be as good as the ones before.

I don't like these videos at all. The Machina ones just need to go away. Politicians want to respond to real people, not cartoons.

The other two were very weak questions that would recieve very weak answers.

We need to call these politicians out, not cater to their two tongued tactics.

All of these questions are good, but they are too clear, if that makes sense. The answer you want to hear is obvious. If it were phrased more neutrally, like "How do you feel about video game violence and regulation." I would do it myself, but I can't afford a decent camera.

@jabrwock

that or they will be answered by candidates who never intended to legislate games in the first place, like guliani or ron paul.

I can't watch the videos at work, but doesn't Machinma violate one of the rules?

Machina definitely violates rules.

At first I didn't want to post anything on this, because I made the second video, but after seeing a few of these comments I thought I'd say a little something here.

The whole arguement about videogame legislation is that it's not suppose to be up to the government to make decisions on what kids should and shouldn't play, view, read, or listen to, it's suppose to be up to the parents. That's the answer WE want to hear, but most politicians don't want to say it.

From my POV, simply asking the politicians how they feel about videogame violence and regulation lets them talk around the issue. Grilling them about regulation conflicting with the first ammendment gives them an easy way out. Neither put the real fix (getting parents involved) to the problem at hand (unwanted and unconstitutional legislation). Asking them specifically how they would implement the fix leaves them no choice but to A) talk about legislating videogames, or B) working with established groups (like the ESRB) to get parents more involved.

Either answer would give everyone a better picture of how the candidates will handle the problem.

Thanks to everyone for the cirticisms though, because they did give me some ideas for a second question.

the 3rd one isn't going to cut it...

I sent an email to GP regarding these debates. They have been "rescheduled" to November 28, read: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/08/13/cnn%e2%80%99s-gop-debate...

The main reason cited for the change was "scheduling conflicts" with major candidates. Unless something changes dramatically in the next 3 months I would put money on Guilaini and Romney skipping out on these and at least a 50% chance the entire debate crumbles and is canceled. The debate has been planned for quite some time now, and if candidates thought it was important they would fix their scheduling conflicts. Republicans are not ready to embrace the technological movement just yet.

@ Evan

Guiliani is going to be there. If Romney doesn't, then he's a coward.

The first two were at least decent efforts. Timmay, memorize that shit. It looks a lot better when you make eye contact with the camera. But hey, I liked it. You were easy to understand, thought out your question beforehand, and really used those 30 seconds to their fullest.

I love--absolutely love--the way you posed your question. What will you do to hold parents responsible? That's genius. It's a direct question, which makes it that much more obvious should a candidate try to dodge it, and completely turns the tables on the debate, illustrating the parents as the responsible party. It's like a slap in the face, but in a valid and polite way. Saucy.

The last video... made me want to bash my against a wall for the sheer stupidity of it.

First: Machinima. Don't. It makes you look like an idiot. This is a serious issue and if you can't be serious about it, stay away from it. No one will respect a question asked by someone hiding behind a game character. Seriously, we already know these people don't take games seriously. Do the math.

Second: Ask something important. It seems little or no thought went into formulating the question. If you only needed 10 seconds, you weren't trying hard enough. Bland and generic. Most importantly, it's not direct enough. The question, as posed, would give candidates too much room to maneuver. And believe me, they will. They'll talk for minutes on end without actually saying anything.

Third: For the love of everything holy, people need to learn to enunciate... especially when you have a wacky name like "Ugio F. Foma... see..." something. See? I couldn't understand it. Not that they'd remember it anyway, but anything you don't pronounce clearly becomes a distraction.

And finally... are you serious? A copyright notice?

Get the **** out. Right now. Seriously, just go.

/sigh.

One missed tag and the whole post goes to shit.
 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
MattsworknameWilson: how? Im still waiting for my upgrade notice07/29/2015 - 3:44am
Matthew WilsonI updated to a clean instill of windows 10.07/29/2015 - 2:36am
Mattsworknameargue that it's wrong, but then please admit it's wrong on ALL Fronts07/29/2015 - 2:06am
MattsworknameTechnoGeek: It's actually NOT, but it is a method used all across the specturm. See Rush limbaugh, MSNBC, Shawn hannity, etc etc, how many compagns have been brought up to try and shut them down by going after there advertisers. It's fine if you wanna07/29/2015 - 2:05am
Mattsworknamediscussed, while not what I liked and not the methods I wanted to see used, were , in a sense, the effort of thsoe game consuming masses to hold what they felt was supposed to be there press accountable for what many of them felt was Betrayal07/29/2015 - 2:03am
MattsworknameAs we say, the gamers are dead article set of a firestorm among the game consuming populace, who, ideally, were the intended audiance for sites like Kotaku, Polygon, Et all. As such, the turn about on them and the attacking of them, via the metods07/29/2015 - 2:03am
MattsworknameAndrew: Thats kind fo the issue at hand, Accountable is a matter of context. For a media group, it means accountable to its reader. to a goverment, to it's voters and tax payer, to a company, to it's share holders.07/29/2015 - 2:02am
Andrew EisenAnd again, you keep saying "accountable." What exactly does that mean? How is Gamasutra not accounting for the editorial it published?07/28/2015 - 11:47pm
Andrew EisenMatt - I disagree with your 9:12 and 9:16 comment. There are myriad ways to address content you don't like. And they're far easier to execute in the online space.07/28/2015 - 11:47pm
Andrew EisenMatt - Banning in the legal sense? Not that I'm aware but there have certainly been groups of gamers who have worked towards getting content they don't like removed.07/28/2015 - 11:45pm
DanJAlexander's editorial was and continues to be grossly misrepresented by her opponents. And if you don't like a site, you stop reading it - same as not watching a tv show. They get your first click, but not your second.07/28/2015 - 11:40pm
TechnogeekYes, because actively trying to convince advertisers to influence the editorial content of media is a perfectly acceptable thing to do, especially for a movement that's ostensibly about journalistic ethics.07/28/2015 - 11:02pm
Mattsworknameanother07/28/2015 - 9:16pm
Mattsworknameyou HAVE TO click on it. So they get the click revenue weather you like what it says or not. as such, the targeting of advertisers most likely seemed like a good course of action to those who wanted to hold those media groups accountable for one reason07/28/2015 - 9:16pm
MattsworknameBut, when you look at online media, it's completely different, with far more options, but far few ways to address issues that the consumers may have. In tv, you don't like what they show, you don't watch. But in order to see if you like something online07/28/2015 - 9:12pm
MattsworknameIn tv, and radio, ratings are how it works. your ratings determine how well you do and how much money you an charge.07/28/2015 - 9:02pm
Mattsworknameexpect to do so without someone wanting to hold you to task for it07/28/2015 - 9:00pm
MattsworknameMecha: I don't think anyone was asking for Editoral changes, what they wanted was to show those media groups that if they were gonna bash there own audiance, the audiance was not gonna take it sitting down. you can write what you want, but you can't07/28/2015 - 8:56pm
MattsworknameAndrew, Im asking as a practical question, Have gamers, as a group, ever asked for a game, or other item, to be banned. Im trying to see if theres any cases anyone else remembers cause I cant find or remember any.07/28/2015 - 8:55pm
Andrew EisenAs mentioned, Gamasutra isn't a gaming site, it's a game industry site. I don't feel it's changed its focus at all. Also, I don't get the sense that the majority of the people who took issue with that one opinion piece were regular readers anyway.07/28/2015 - 8:43pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician