BBC: Video Games Bear Byron’s Brunt… Internet “Gets Away With It”
There’s provocative commentary from the BBC’s Darren Waters (left), who wonders if the Internet got off with a Tanya Byron slap on the wrist while video games will face new rating system and new governance of sales in the U.K.
Waters writes:
Video games have been the focus of pretty much all of the coverage of the Byron Review… The reason is simple - when it comes to legislation, only the games industry is being affected.
For the internet, specifically virtual worlds, social networks and video sharing sites Dr Tanya’s emphasis is on education and awareness… this is because regulating the net and the morass of user generated content on it is a task no government in its right mind would want to tackle, because it is a geo-political nightmare.
And if you read the official statements and reaction from different quarters of the internet industry all of them are universally applauding the review. Why? Because they know they have been let off the hook, so to speak. There’s no legislation, no hint of regulation, no potential fines, no requirements to implement technological change.
March 28th, 2008 at 11:07 am
perhaps, rather than a genuine attempt to fix the (ahem) problem, its because the british government cant control the internet, but can control what is sold in stores in the uk?
March 28th, 2008 at 11:15 am
Let’s hope it STAYS that way.
Regulating games is one thing, regulating the internet on the other hand is another. As far as the internet is concerned, it NEEDS it’s freedom to actually work.
March 28th, 2008 at 11:16 am
I’m not all that surprised.
March 28th, 2008 at 11:20 am
just cause the internet is vast and doesnt recognise government borders doesnt mean that it cant be regulated lol duh just take over the world!!
(although you have to make sure ireland doesnt nuke turkey[superpower joke])
March 28th, 2008 at 11:26 am
Huh? I thought it specifically stated recommendations for regulating social networking sites. Of course, all I have to go on is GP’s coverage of the report, I haven’t had the time to read it myself yet, but that was mentioned in the last article.
March 28th, 2008 at 11:28 am
“this is because regulating the net and the morass of user generated content on it is a task no government in its right mind would want to tackle, because it is a geo-political nightmare.”
He nailed it right on the head. Video games are easy to regulate, because you can regulate the stores, distributors, and manufacturers. There’s a physical item that is passed across a counter-top.
Not so with internet information. How do you regulate a website that may not even be in the UK? Pull a “Great Firewall of China”?
March 28th, 2008 at 11:29 am
@cppcrusader
It does. His point is that lawmakers will focus on the medium that is easier to regulate (read: games).
March 28th, 2008 at 11:41 am
Internet would also affect a persons freedom of speech (at least for most cases). Pretty much the only thing the governments of the world can do is crack down on the illegal portions of it and some dangerous situations (If anyone saw the movie Untraceable, something like that).
Basically the internet is a massive New York City…
March 28th, 2008 at 11:46 am
@cullarn
You’re talking about England. They’ve tried the “take over the world” thing.. with lots flags, just ask Eddie Izzard. If you say that any louder, they may be willing to try again, after they make some more flags.
As for the internet getting away with it. They have, and his statements are too true. Couldn’t agree more, it’s something that most governments would not even attempt to regulate, due to the complex and open environment. There is no universal Point of Sale or vertex btwn content and user that a government can easily police… short of disconnecting from the entire grid.
March 28th, 2008 at 11:53 am
Why?
Why?
Why?
Why?
I bet thats the question what every Brit gamer is asking. Videogames do not harm anyone you Brit politician retards.
Your people are in more debt than the US and you want to restrain one of your country’s biggest money makers?
For shame…who the hell is authorized the Byron Report anyhow??
March 28th, 2008 at 11:54 am
Well, to be fair it can be done. Why does the US have to be the only one to suffer having MTV online? They block it from other countries themselves. The technology is there. Youtube is blocked in many middle eastern countries due to content. The question is not “can it be done.” The question is “should it be done.” And the answer is no.
March 28th, 2008 at 12:19 pm
In fairness to Dr. Byron no one has a hope in hell of regulating the internet, all they can do is fire wall a nation off from the world; that would upset a lot of people and be rather illegal in a democracy. Games, on the other hand, are much easier to regulate and consequently get more scrutiny.
Gift.
March 28th, 2008 at 12:19 pm
f*cking ell.
I hate it here.
March 28th, 2008 at 12:37 pm
“There’s no legislation, no hint of regulation, no potential fines, no requirements to implement technological change.”
That’s right: there’s no censorship.
Just wait until the day comes that more games are distributed via downloads rather than shipped to stores in DVD cases.
March 28th, 2008 at 1:04 pm
He was saying something similar yesterday too.
Byron’s report takes it without question that (many) parents are pretty helpless and need the government to ‘empower’ them, to the point that she considers it a problem that information on consoles’ parental controls may be ‘concealed in a cumbersome manual’ (para. 7.101); faced with the complications of the Internet, it’s no wonder she concludes that all the government can do is try to exert some pressure on ‘popular’ sites and encourage parents to pay some basic attention.
March 28th, 2008 at 1:33 pm
@Robert Seddon
Can’t all of the problems she points out be fought with an information campaign?
March 28th, 2008 at 2:08 pm
Even though the Byron report soberly reports the facts, the recommendations seem to ignore the facts and go for a lot of personal agenda recommendations by either Byron or the reasearch team on the report. And there are some nasty recommendations for websites, even though most cannot be regulated by the UK. Oddly enough, the recommended regulations only target industries that make a lot of money. Hmmmmmm.
March 28th, 2008 at 2:35 pm
Yet another case for people to stop buying from stores. If I have the choice between buying something at Best Buy or Steam, it’s Steam every time.
It’s just like that post Mass Effect rating bombing that book got on Amazon. While chain stores and malls are the domain of the last generation of old farts without computers, the net is ours.
Don’t f*ck with us. We own the internet.
March 28th, 2008 at 2:57 pm
Nobody can control the Internet. Ask the Chinese government how that is going.
March 28th, 2008 at 9:52 pm
There are too many factors involved technological to successfully censor the internet.
March 29th, 2008 at 4:29 am
Newgrounds dot com have many Flash games that have adult ratings….
the only thing is, Newgrounds rates them, NOT the BBFC…
Of course you have never regulate the internet because the internet is NOT commercialized.
Also…
(sings the song from Avenue Q musical)
The Internet is for PORN…
March 29th, 2008 at 9:20 am
Goatse bears Byron’s Brunt
http://goatse.ch
March 29th, 2008 at 5:01 pm
Many internet sites are bases in the US (e.g. servers and the like) so this alone would make it very difficult for anyone to regulate the internet, unless the free western world would like to be compared to say China or some Middle Eastern countries.
And isn’t the point in Byron’s report that even 12+ ratings should be enforcable by law? As it is in say, Finland, Canada, and yes, the UK for games that have an 18+ rating on them.
Raising consciousness amongst parents is always a good thing, I find
March 29th, 2008 at 5:37 pm
Well with any luck, this Byron report will cause all video game developers to go online with 100% digital distribution to circumvent the ratings system entirely. That will be the ultimate slap in the face of all who wish to legislate against video games.