Common Sense Media: SCOTUS Decision Disappointing for ‘All Who Care About Kids’

As you can probably guess even before you read the official statement from Common Sense Media, they are not pleased with the Supreme Court’s ruling on Brown v. EMA today. The children’s advocacy group said in its reaction statement to the decision that they were disappointed and felt that parents had been let down by the court.

But the Supreme Court isn’t congress or the president of the United States; in other words they should really only concern themselves with their area expertise – the law as it relates to our constitution. Nevertheless the group that is squarely against the videogame industry voiced its strong opinion that the court erred in its decision. Below is the full statement from Common Sense Media CEO James Steyer:

"Today’s decision is a disappointing one for parents, educators, and all who care about kids. But the fight is far from over. Advocates for kids and families can work within the scope of this ruling to protect the best interests of kids. An overwhelmingly high percentage of parents would support a bill that would prevent their kids from walking into a store and buying the most ultra-violent and sexually violent of video games. That decision should be in the hands of parents, not kids or video game vendors, and certainly not the video game ratings board, which recently approved the Dead Space 2 ad campaign that clearly markets a Mature-rated game to kids. We respectfully disagree with the Court when it comes to their analysis of the First Amendment rights of children and families — this is a sanity issue, not a censorship issue.

If parents decide a violent game is okay for their kid, that’s one thing, but millions of kids are not able to judge the impact of ultra-violence on their own. Today, the multi-billion dollar video game industry is celebrating the fact that their profits have been protected, but we will continue to fight for the best interests of kids and families. Moreover, we look forward to working with national and state policy makers on another common sense solution in the very near future."

Thanks to Andrew Eisen for the tip.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on RedditEmail this to someone

33 comments

  1. 0
    Cecil475 says:

    "That decision should be in the hands of parents, not kids or video game vendors, and certainly not the video game ratings board…"

    This needs a little editing. Give me a second.

    "That decision should be in the hands of the goverment, not kids parents, or video game vendors, and certainly not the video game ratings board…"

    Fixed. Crappy Sense Media they are.

     

     – W

  2. 0
    Adamas Draconis says:

    Dear Common Sense Media,

     

     Everytime I read one of your press releases, I just have the sudden urge to play New York Echo and yell:

     

    SHUT THE F^(K UP!

     

     

    Your Eternal and Implaciable enemy,

    Ada

     

    Hunting the shadows of the troubled dreams.

  3. 0
    hellfire7885 says:

    I know about that.

    And for the record, I absolutely fucking hat the PTC, especially since their so called leader didn’t have the balls do say anything against one of our greatest comedians until AFTER he passed away.


  4. 0
    HarmlessBunny says:

    Ah Common Sense Media. Media with no sense what-so-ever.

    Common Sense isn’t that common, that is why it should be renamed to Good Sense.

    ==============

    James Fletcher, member of ECA Canada

  5. 0
    PHOENIXZERO says:

    It’s the PTC, lying to push an agenda (which includes making money) is just what they do. I wish Vince/WWE would have really stuck it to them when WWE’s lawyers had the chance instead of settling.

  6. 0
    GoodRobotUs says:

    ….this is a sanity issue, not a censorship issue.

    Nope. It’s a censorship issue. Unless such a law is tailored to take into account the similar impact of other forms of media on the same cognitive functions, it is tailored to censor a specific kind of speech. Even the Supreme Court hinted at the dichotomy of singling out computer games.

    Until someone comes up with a law that does not discriminate against a specific kind of media, it will, now and always, fall into the censorship box.

  7. 0
    Rodrigo Ybáñez García says:

    I´ll be translating:

    – If parents decide a violent game is okay for their kid, that’s one thing, but millions of kids are not able to judge the impact of ultra-violence on their own.

    Kids and parents are stupid as fuck. We are the ones who will take all desicions for them. No one else but us knows what is right.

    – Today, the multi-billion dollar video game industry is celebrating the fact that their profits have been protected,

    That´s unfair. We must get a cut of all that profit just because we exist to complain about everything we don´t like.

    – but we will continue to fight for the best interests of kids and families.

    We will expend more money from donations to push our agenda and opinions inside the throats of everybody.

    – Moreover, we look forward to working with national and state policy makers on another common sense solution in the very near future."

    We´ll also encourage more politicians to keep wasting tax money to supress freedom of speech for everyone. We are insane and we´ll prove it in the very near future.

     

    Dear CSM:

    Please stop. You hate freedom of speech. You hate anything that is different from your warped worldview. "Common sense" is the one last thing you should be appealing, because nothing of what you do is even sane.

    You even hate children and don´t care for them. They are just tools to keep pushing your ridiculous ideas on the throats of everybody else and don´t care for the laws of your very own country.

    You have failed again in understand what the people really need from you, and the events of the past monday just proves how wrong you really are and your methods will get you nowhere.

    You are useless and a waste of time for everybody. You have lost the war.

     

  8. 0
    Magic says:

    I’m tempted to go to the extreme and say that 13% is still too high (Ideally we would not like any kids playing ultra-gorey games like Manhunt or what-have-you, right?), but, hey, let’s get our priorities right and focus on the other mediums that are failing to do age-checks before lambasting games.

  9. 0
    Falcon4196 says:

    That FTC info is pretty facinating. 13% of kid were able to buy M rated games compared to the 33% who could get tickets to R rated movies, 47% who could get unrated dvds, and 64% who could buy CD with Parental Warning labels.  (As if the fact that a kid was tryin to buy a CD in the first place wasn’t a big enough clue).

    The store with the worst record, where 20% of kids could buy M rated games was Walmart.  But thats still less than the 30% of kid who could walk into Walmart and get an Unrated DVD.  So a kid that goes in Walmart is more likely to walk out with the Unrated version of Saw than they are a GTA game.

    What do these numbers tell me?  Common Sense Media should be holding up the game industry as the model on how to prevent kids from getting violent media.  But instead the try to demonize it instead.

    Well , whatever, thankyou SCOTUS and ESRB keep up the excellent work.

     

  10. 0
    MechaTama31 says:

    Yes, of course.  Since I don’t agree with you, and am not disappointed by this ruling, I must not care about kids.  Bravo, CSM.  Way to win hearts and minds with your open and inclusive attitude.

  11. 0
    Roh02 says:

    Im starting to think they care/think a bit too much about children O_o

    its the parents right to choose making a law that forces a choice on them is not choosing.

  12. 0
    Soldat_Louis says:

    Just in case you care about what the Parents Television Council has to say, check this : https://www.parentstv.org/PTC/news/release/2011/0627a.asp

    "We call on the Entertainment Merchants Association to redouble its efforts for increased enforcement of the industry’s age-based vending restrictions. The Federal Trade Commission and the PTC’s own ‘Secret Shopper’ campaigns have routinely demonstrated an abysmal failure rate for video game retailers to uphold the industry’s own age-based restrictions. With the exception of GameStop, many in the video game industry appear to be either unwilling or unable to prevent the sale of M-rated games to kids. Now with no threat of consequence for failure, we are concerned that the self-regulatory efforts will be violated in even greater numbers than they already are. We will be monitoring this very closely."

  13. 0
    blindsided21 says:

    "Today, the multi-billion dollar video game industry is celebrating the fact that their profits have been protected,"

     

    I’m sick of hearing this. Really. It’s here and in Yee’s response. Since when did the gaming industry become the tobacco industry or fast-food industry? They are not out there to make a buck out of corrupting young children. The game industry is full of creative minds who do a fantastic job at telling stories and creating intereting experiences. They are artists. They are not evil boogeymen in suits.

  14. 0
    Chris Kimberley says:

    Seconded.  I’m a parent, a gamer, and I’ve worked on a few "ultra-violent" video games, and I fully support the decision.

    And let me be clear.  I don’t think kids should play really violent games.  But that’s my decision to make for my kid.  I certainly wouldn’t trust CSM, any government agency, or the ESRB to make that decision for me.

    ===============

    Chris Kimberley

  15. 0
    Vake Xeacons says:

    Um…I care about my kid and everyone else’s and I’m perfectly happy with the decision.

    So…if we should be able to decide what our kids play, why are you supporting a bill that would let the government take that decision away from us?

  16. 0
    BearDogg-X says:

    Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.

    Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.

    You’re wrong. You’re wrong. You’re wrong.

    James Steyer is also a motard. SCOTUS’ correct decision today is actually encouraging for parents, as it keeps the decision-making in their hands, not takes it away. It only takes away the states’ right to restrict access of "violent" material to minors in place of the parents. It also didn’t take away the retailers’ right to regulate their own employees, it took away the states’ right to do so in place of the retailers.

    Therefore, that would-be pedophile Steyer is not fighting for the best interests of kids or parents.

    Geaux Saints, Geaux Tigers, Geaux Hornets, Jack Thompson can geaux chase a chupacabra. Hell will stay frozen over for quite a while since the Saints won the Super Bowl.


    Proud supporter of the New Orleans Saints, LSU, 1st Amendment; Real American; Hound of Justice; Even through the darkest days, this fire burns always

    Saints(3-4), LSU(7-0)

  17. 0
    GrimCW says:

    i still want to know of these "sexually violent" games these people constantly refer too.

    tmk there aren’t any actually violent ones on the american market (outside of those played out in some peoples uninformed skulls), but i could be wrong, and either way aren’t they already essentially

    a. age restricted BY LAW

    b. effectivelly banned from general retail sales anyways under the same laws

     

    ??

    the rest i can understand, but they said it themselves, the PARENTS should choose. though it contradicts their purpose in FORCING the parents to choose by fining them under law, they almost got the picture.

  18. 0
    Kincyr says:

    If parents decide a violent game is okay for their kid, that’s one thing, but millions of kids are not able to judge the impact of ultra-violence on their own.

    you would think that common sense dictates that those millions of kids also have parents but then again, as usual, CSM lacks any

    岩「if Phyllis Schlafly wants to undo Women’s Rights, she should lead by example and get back in the kitchen」

Leave a Reply