Boston GTA Controversy Has Roots Well Before "Vice City Stories"

Boston GTA Controversy Has Roots Well Before "Vice City Stories"

November 27, 2006
The recent controversy over GTA ads on Boston subway cars seemed both sudden and unexpected, but GamePolitics has learned that the issue is not a new one for the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority.

As far back as February, Boston Common Asset Management, which describes itself as "a full service, employee-owned social investment firm dedicated to the pursuit of financial return and social change," broached the subject of restricting video game advertising on MBTA vehicles with Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.

February 24th letter on behalf of the organization and its clients requested that an MBTA ad contract for the GTA series be allowed to expire without being renewed. A press release issued that day, which appears on the Boston Common Asset Management website says:
In light of the recent surge in violence in the Boston area, we feel it is particularly irresponsible of the MBTA to act as a billboard for products that promote urban violence. The advertisements have been running on the outside of MBTA Green Line trolleys and the Commuter Rail since January 3, 2006.

The ads mentioned would most likely be for the PSP title GTA Liberty City Stories, which was released October 24th, 2005.

In addition to Gov. Romney, the February GTA letter was forwarded to Mayor Thomas Menino of Boston and Kenneth Reeves of Cambridge. Both elected officials would go on to sign the November 20th letter from the Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood which jump-started last week's controversy.

Comments

Hmmm, interesting, the original letter was also supposedly forwarded to the MBTA...

This does poke a hole in the "this is the first I've heard of it" argument. His point about "the city should be fighting the REAL problems, not imaginary ones" is still valid though.
This is just noisemaking from an organisation that wants an easy win. And they will win. Especially with support from a politician who wants to be seen to be doing something.

Grabauskas has made an attempt to deal with it, but he's not really in a position to put up a fight against this much political pressure. And he's not going to get that much support. The right of a company to advertise their product may be important but it's hardly the sort of thing that's going to get the ACLU steamed up.

A polite letter and discussion with the head of the MBTA would probably have had pretty much the same results, except more quickly and easily, but then the mayor wouldn't get his mention in the papers.
What is it with Boston? Why do they have to attack violent video games? Violence has always existed and it always will. Violent video games have nothing to do with that and Boston has to stop attacking innocent ads, that won't even get anyone to buy the game anyway. No one even buys anything off an ad on a train. What I would like to know is why do they even care? the ads are probably on the outside and the passengers ride on the inside, so when do they even see the ads? To the people of Boston, you're morons and you need to stop listening to that retard, Jack Thompson.
@ Squigs- WE should have done something to support him before he got ganked by censorcrats.
Did I miss something on this website? I can't find any articles on the front page talking about this.

http://www.internetcases.com/archives/2006/11/seventh_circuit_1.html
well this is interesting. who sees the outside of a subway train? no one. so people need to stop fighting little battles and trying to make money off of peoples feelings. how can an ad that depicts no violence, just a name and thats it cause someone to kill someone. plus freedom of expression with the sub not being government propert how can they make them take a non-profane name off the bus.

GamePolitics ShoutBox

Posted 07/04/09 at 01:18pm
Andrew Eisen: Rodrigo - A fun idea but you might want to fix the typos.
Posted 07/04/09 at 12:57pm
GRIZZAM PRIME: Happy 4th of July!
Posted 07/04/09 at 12:44pm
Yuuri: Happy Blow Crap Up Day!
Posted 07/04/09 at 11:09am
Rodrigo Ybáñez García: I designed this shirt for Jack debate today: http://i44.tinypic.com/2552t89.jpg
Posted 07/04/09 at 11:06am
BearDogg-X: There's a one minute and a half preview of the video game episode of Penn & Teller: Bullshit! up at http://www.sho.com/site/ptbs/home.do
Posted 07/04/09 at 10:08am
Arcanagos: Happy 4th all
Posted 07/04/09 at 09:32am
Firebird: Greetings GP community, and HAPPY 4th of JULY!!!
Posted 07/04/09 at 03:48am
Michael Chandra: I missed out on Jack? =(
Posted 07/04/09 at 01:52am
Escanor94: hmm, looks like when someone gets banned all their comments are automaticly deleted
Posted 07/03/09 at 11:46pm
Arcanagos: aww, did i miss the JT party? :(
Posted 07/03/09 at 11:00pm
Leet Gamer Jargon: Where's the recent JT bullcrap? Which comments section has he vomited on? EDIT: Nevermind; it's in the "Radio" thread.
Posted 07/03/09 at 09:17pm
BearDogg-X: I wonder what the Metropolitian Moron of Miami said in response to my comment saying that he got a dose of his medicine on the SGC09 Debate thread?
Posted 07/03/09 at 06:51pm
Rodrigo Ybáñez García: He gets offended with a bunch of flowers.
Posted 07/03/09 at 06:49pm
GoodRobotUs: LOL He takes offence at the fact he might have *chosen* to be crazy?
Posted 07/03/09 at 06:47pm
Rodrigo Ybáñez García: He warned me to get a lawyer after I called him "crazy by his own choice"... that´s libel for him
Posted 07/03/09 at 06:45pm
HilaryDuffGta: "libel" what did he threaten now?
Posted 07/03/09 at 06:44pm
Rodrigo Ybáñez García: Was fun to be threatened for "libel" again.
Posted 07/03/09 at 06:26pm
HilaryDuffGta: hey so what did i miss??? the usual spam of "crap"
Posted 07/03/09 at 06:15pm
FlakAttack: Jack ruined his chance to have civil debates with us here. Glad you banned him (again).
Posted 07/03/09 at 04:04pm
Krono: Unexpected is probably the best word to describe it. Particularly as no decent reason is given.
Login or register to post shouts