November 24, 2006 -
Boston Mayor Thomas Menino is not pleased with the refusal of the Massachusetts Bay Transit Authority to remove ads for GTA Vice City Stories
from its subway cars.As reported by the Boston Herald, Menino accused the agency and its head, Daniel Grabauskas, of "hiding behind the First Amendment." The mayor said:
These ads are outrageous. The MBTA is a public entity and has a responsibility to protect the public from being bombarded by violent images.
To hide behind the First Amendment is despicable. We are talking about games that promote killing prostitutes, shooting police officers. So what if the ACLU is going to get mad? The MBTA is a public entity and the public is my first concern.
Menino was among those who signed a letter to the transit authority recently, demanding removal of the ads. Grabauskas told the Herald the MBTA has no legal authority to regulate ad content and pointed out that the agency spent over a million dollars in legal fees a few years ago in a failed attempt to block ads promoting a change in marijuana laws. The MBTA boss said:
As offensive as I, or any MBTA person, may find this particular game, we do not have the legal authority to remove it. The content on whatever is being advertised, whether it be a video game, a movie, a music album, a Web site, is not something we are allowed to be concerned about.
Comments
If the public were truly the mayor's first concern, maybe he should show some respect for the rule of law and not shoot his mouth off about his personal, uninformed opinion. Indeed, were that his first concern, he would probably be more receptive the information that trying to remove the ads would result in a costly lawsuit he's unlikely to win. Incidentally, that's the "what" in "So what if the ACLU is going to get mad?". When the ACLU gets mad, stuff ends up in court.
Really, he doesn't care about our country's most fundamental right if he thinks he's "protecting the public?" I shudder to think what other lengths he would be willing to go. Good thing he's only a mayor.
And I also hope he leaves office soon. People who have so little regard for the Constitution should not be in public office. Ever.
Not really, that -exact- phrasing ("hiding behind the first amendment") is actually pretty common when people want to censor something, whether it's an advertisement or a racist group, or simply politically incorrect speech.
Maybe it's time the Boston mayor went back to school and learnt basic English.
So i'm guessing a lot of people in Boston are against the president's wiretapping program, because its against the constitution right?
But, when it comes to videogames, then its not ok to follow the constitution?!?
It seems Hypocracy and Liberal values go hand in hand
Am I right people?
Don't try to turn this in a "liberals are hypocrits!" political debate. Politicians and hypocrisy most often go hand in hand, wether they be liberal or conservative.
Prove that these games are hiding behind the first amendment. Prove that they promote killing prostitutes and police officers.
Until then. Shut your dirty mouth you ignorant piece of dog shit.
THOSE BASTARDS! Using the First Amendment as it was intended to be used! Oh, those freedom hating...er..wait.
"So what if the ACLU is going to get mad?"
Oh yeah, THAT'S why the Bill of Rights exists... to appease the ACLU.
http://www.cityofboston.gov/contact/default.asp?id=55 for anyone who cares.
So the mayor represents every single liberal in Boston? I guess I can assume President Bush represents every conservative in the US and it would be clearly aprropiate for me to bash thousnads of pople based off the actions of a single moron right? I consider myself liberal and I am appaled at this man's actions. Seriously its that kind of thinking that makes people think all gamers are psychopathic serial killers in training based on a few nut jobs that blame grand theft auto.
I think the funny thing here is that he thinks these advertisments have magic powers that make children kill cops and rob stores, among other violent acts, all without even playing the game. He's waging a war against the glorification of a game that glorifies violence (or so I'm told). He's not even ballsy enough to fight the game directly because he'll get slapped with the first amendment even harder.
Back in the day of slavery speech that was aimed towards abolition was considered offensive and wrong, same with speech that dealt with woman’s rights. If the government could ban such speech we might still have slavery and women might still be treated as secondary citizens.
This is very good point and for this you win the internet congratulations.
What? What's that you say? I'm making a knee-jerk reaction to something? What do you mean that ads displaying content generally don't cause people to drastically change their behavior? But what about video games then? OH. I get it. You're all insane jackasses, to quote John Stewart.
"Hiding behind the first amendment is dispicable..." is he fucking kidding me?
@Eric Greif
Stole the words right out of my mouth. Don't worry, I'll be contacting Mr. Menino very soon.
If their trains are showing the same ads I've seen in the DC metro, its nothing but the cover art of the video game. That's it.
You mean like all those times they advertised for horror movies?
Hey, wait a sec...
Of course not, horror movies are works of art that the current generation grew up with! Now, Metal Gear Solid, on the other hand, is nothing but a killing game! /sarcasm
This guy's in government, and basically makes a comment that screams "I hate the constitution! Rights? Inalienable freedoms? BAH!" I'm going to write an email to him about this... sure, it'll probably get ignored, but gotta do something.
"Sorry man, I gots plans right now."
"Oh? What are ya doin'"
"Oh I'm going downtown shooting up some cops, ya know, same old same old"
...I doubt any similar form of conversation will ever leave the lips of some kids mouth. What this man doesn't realize is that no game whatsoever promotes such things as killing hookers or the police officers. If anything, it promotes "Do something bad, you get chased by authorities" Hence the Stars you gain from doing so. Sometimes you don't get caught at all, and that's the slim chance they might be pointing out. Hell, there are REAL murders and the like the people get away with that you don't know.
So evidentally, what's the use of whining. If they were hiding behind the First Amendment, they'd just strictly say "!st Amendment says no" and thats it, but there is no legal way around covering such "foul" advertising about nothing more than some words and maybe the main character.
Oh, and I love "hiding behind the First Amendment" arguments. They show such a foundational disdain for the law.
Mumbles Menino is one of the best things to ever happen to the city of Boston. And Grabauskas is a fool of a man, along with most of the MBTA staff - anyone who's had to ride the T more than a day in their life knows how much work needs to be done.
I do understand Mumbles' reasoning, to be fair. It's the nature of politics and the Constitution to interpret the Amendments differently, and the role of the government to determine exactly where the line needs to be drawn - when it comes to video games, Menino apparently feels the violence and suggestive themes inherit with the GTA series represent that line. And that's a reasonable point of view, given how dangerous certain parts of the T can be.
On the other side of the fence, let's keep in mind that Grabauskas isn't a great champion of free speech or gaming rights here. If the MBTA removes the ads before the agreed date, they're in breech of contract, and would likely lose the money they seek to take in from this. He's looking for cash, and Mumbles has likely bought into whatever crap his advisors have told him about the GTA series and its effect on the youth.
In the end, that's why most of these politicians choose to champion "family values" in gaming these days. Their advisors have either given them exaggerated information and convinced them that attacking violent video games is beneficial to their electorate. Joe Lieberman, Hillary Clinton, and Mumbles Menino have likely never played a video game more than a minute in their lives.
Nice idea. Of course, it comes from a French guy, and we all know how popular they've been in the US in recent history. ;)
*Imagines an alternate universe where grabuskas is ESA president*
Oh, wait. then 95.9% of the content on this site would be nonexistant.
Get the point yet?
There, fixed that for him.
Besides, who buys things based on billboard ads anyway? I have never looked at a billboard and then bought something because of it. These ads don't even get anyone to buy anything. Violent video games have a right to advertise their goodness where ever they want. No one has the right to tell them that they can't. Jack Thompson probably got this started and he is a lying jerk punk loser. There is nothing wrong at all with violent images in the media. They don't influence people at all.
The mayor of Boston is just trying to get some votes for himself and it would be nice if gamers could tell politicians, "Hey if you are against video games I won't vote for you." Then this whole controversy would go away. They only want to get elected. That's all politicians care about is getting elected and re-elected and they think it will help them to be against violent video games. If they find out that it won't, they will stop. Another thing I'd like to add is everywhere you look, you see beer commercials. Beer, unlike violent video games, is bad. It makes people fat and when people drive drunk, it causes accidents. Why don't politicians attack beer commercials? Here's a message for you politician morons. Leave innocent violent video games alone and go after beer commercials because beer makes people drive drunk and causes real people to get hurt not violent video games.
Good one!!!!!!!!! That's what it should say and probably what he was thinking!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
"I thought the ACLU was on Jack Thompson’s side of the issue."
What on earth gave you that idea? I haven't heard of ACLU involvement in any game-related case yet. In any event, the ACLU exists to help protect people from attempts to infringe on their rights, including (or perhaps even especially) first amendment rights. I'd think they would come down heavily against government censorship in this one.
On the other end, your government's the one enacting the nationwide internet censorship program in cooperation with the major companies like Telus ;)
True, but then again, we're censoring ILLEGAL activity (yes, electronic distribution of child pr0n is illegal here). Bit of a difference there.
Well, not to people like Boston's mayor and Jack Thompson, but... meh. ;)
Fixed the title.
And EVERY SINGLE OTHER AD. Then ask the mayor for the money, since there's no other way they can appease the first amendment, the city, and taxpayers are responsible for the mayor's big mouth.
He'll change his mind real quick.
I'll bet you $50CAN it A) doesn't end up -just- blocking child porn due to the nature of such filters and B) the program will be deliberately expanded to other categories within 2-3 years.
There are so many things wrong with this statement... I'll have to break it down.
1st sentence: That's what the first amendment is FOR - for people to use as a shield against censors. Hiding behind it is its intended purpose. There is nothing dispicable about it.
2nd sentence: If mayor douch-bag ever bothered to play the game, he'd realize that the game does NOT promote these things. They're simply possible, and it is the player's choice that causes these things to occur. Furthermore, shooting police officers is discouraged because of the "star" system - in the end, it costs you a lot of money or kills your character if you do it.
3rd sentence: Ok, I have to agree there - who cares if the ACLU gets mad? What he should be more worried about is the legality of the issue - the ACLU will get behind the right side on this issue, and they have some good lawyers. It's not the ACLUs anger that he should care about - it's their legal staff.
final sentence: MBTA is a public entity, and as such, must be impartial. Again, if mayor douche-bag bothered to give the issue more than a cursory glance he'd realize how wrong he is.
Can we ask this prat for his resignation because if he believes people in power should be above the law then frankly he needs to be removed.