April 12, 2007
A much-anticipated report released today by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) gives the video game industry mixed reviews in its efforts to limit sales and marketing of violent games to those under 17. Viewable at the FTC website, the report finds that the video game industry, along with the music and movie businesses:...generally comply with their own voluntary standards regarding the display of ratings and labels. However, entertainment industries continue to market some R-rated movies, M-rated video games, and explicit-content recordings on television shows and Web sites with substantial teen audiences.
The FTC report applauds the game industry's "significant progress" in limiting retail sales of M-rated products to underage buyers, while noting that movie and music retailers made only "modest progress" in this area. One area where the FTC found the game industry lacking, however, was enforcement of Internet advertising standards:
Although ads for M-rated video games on television shows that are popular with teens appear to be diminishing, the same is not true for Internet advertising. Currently, the ESRB prohibits ads for M-rated games on Web sites where the under-17 audience is 45% or more. The report suggests that the ESRB is not adequately enforcing even this limited standard.
The FTC also spanked the industry for failing to place content descriptors on the front of game packaging:
The video game industry generally provides clear and prominent disclosure of rating information in advertising; however, the ESRB has not adopted the Commission’s previous recommendation that content descriptors for games be placed on the front of game packaging... many parents still believe the system can do more to inform them about the level of violence in some games.
Said FTC Chairman Deborah Platt Majoras:
Self-regulation, long a critical underpinning of U.S. advertising, is weakened if industry markets products in ways inconsistent with their ratings and parental advisories. This latest FTC report shows improvement, but also indicates that the entertainment industry has more work to do.
Of note was the FTC's tracking of social networking sites and viral marketing techniques for the first time:
Advertisers often set up profile pages with industry-generated content or uploaded videos for users to then share on their own... few profile pages contain prominent rating information. Although they are general audience sites, they reach a large number of children under 17.
Mobile phone games also generated a level of concern with the FTC:
The report also flags a new trend in gaming, mobile phone games, and noted several challenges they pose. For example, mobile phone game developers often do not seek ESRB ratings and they do not sell their products through traditional retail channels...
The full report is available here.




Comments
Content description on the front of the game packaging? Sure, because you always see the MPAA's rating and reason for it on the front of a DVD. In fact, I took a look at Scary Movie 3 while I was in Toys R Us and... oh wait, the MPAA rating was nowhere to be seen. I wonder if they have anything to say about that. While they're at it, maybe they could explain what's so difficult about looking on the back of the box if you're curious about the content.
Come on guys, the video game industry is obviously doing a much better job than the folks in the TV and movie business when it comes to informing users of the content of their product. The rating's on the front of the box: not a sometimes nebulous icon in the top left-hand corner of the screen, nor is it unseen like it is on some DVDs. Use some common sense and some logic before you slam the industry just because it's popular to do so.
How hard is it to turn the game case over and see the rating information on the back?
I don't understand. Having the rating on the front of the box and a descriptor on the back is not enough? The movie industry does not even have a rating on the front of the box and the rating/descriptor if freakishly small and hard to read on the back.
Can any oone say "double standard"?
books are not the current scapegoat looking at "restrictions" on a governmental level, if books where they would be labeled by age by now.
Pawsie
it seems to me they are stretching a bit they have yet to btch at the movie indutry for showing ads for "older than the general audience" of the web site.
when is it the web site fault for showing the gruesome ads? >
The FTC does not have jurisdiction over books. If there was a need for them to expand their jurisdiction to books tehy would be given it. Yet there is no need to do so as books are well established.
Why?
Where's books?
Until every book is rated and restricted (and that will never happen), there's a powerful bias going on here. This is feel-good clap-trap designed to make selfish, greedy people feel better about themselves.
As far as I know, books are pretty straight forward. There is never a question as to who the book is written for as stores and libraries have clearly defined age based sections. Books that are not appropriate for kids are not put in the kids books section.
With movies, music and games it is different. G and R movies are both shown in the same theatre on screen next to each other. the same DVDs are across the aisle from each other in the store. Music CDs are next to each other at the store. M and E video games are next to each other in the store. So here you see the difference.
Books have moved beyond the need for ratings. They have had centuries to work out demographics and marketing to the proper demographic.
So don't trash a report that you have not even read. This report is the best thing to come from a government body in years when it comes to entertainment.
I wouldn't mind seeing a list of descriptors on the front, and a description of them on the back. Makes for easier browsing in places where all the games are locked behind 4 inches of glass and a minefield...
Then again, I think they should put more pressure on the movie/music industry to put their ratings clearly on the front of their boxes first.
For example
Good place: Ad in a magazine for adults (Maxim, Cosmo, etc.).
Bad Place: Ad in a magazine for Kids (Highlights, or others)
Good Place: Spike TV
Bad Place: Disney Channel
Good Place: Late night TV
Bad Place: Late Afternoon approaching Prime Time TV.
I hate to say it this way...but, any place you can see those stupid "Girls Gone Wild" tapes advertised, then I'd say you're in the clear. When you might be exposing primarily kids to rated "M" content, then it's a bad idea. It's the damn grey area that's the problem.
Gamespy and other gaming sites present a HUGE grey area that can be an issue. I don't mind ads for rated M games being on those sites, that would be stupid. Hell, I play primarily rated M games and I learn about those games from those sites and those ads. I just think that advertisers (ANY advertiser, actually) could show more responsibility and forethought into their ads, both placement and content.
Oh, and I don't have a problem with a rated M game like GTA advertised in a public place as long as the ad has no questionable content. The standard cover style with the illustrated images? No problem. Blood and guts? No way.
just curious
start putting them on the front of movies first and then MAYBE we can get something arranged
then there is nothing that can be done except eliminate them from the gene pool
My concerns, which apparently were mentioned in this report, center on the advertising of the Rated "M" games. Now, I don't mind people selling games or other things. And yes, you should show gameplay in order to sell your item, yes. However, I have a problem with ads that are covered in blood or gore where anyone can see them. And not only ads on TV, but on websites as well.
Let me also clarify that my concerns about ads are NOT limited to the gaming industry. Hell, I have to be VERY careful about what COMMERCIALS my daughters see and commercials come from all industries. When it gets to that point, it's a little ridiculous. If me, a life long gamer and general advocate of free speech and rights and all that, if I start wondering if we need a rating system for commercials...then, something's gone off the rails somewhere.
Regardless, I think the industry should take the reports concerns to heart and not pat themselves on the back too much. The game industry wants us to buy their games. It wants us to NEED their games. As such, they have to appeal to us and make the games attractive to us. I have no problems with this. I have a problem with some of their means of advertising. Chose proper places and times for ads, chose responsible internet ads, and in general, don't be stupid.
If the game industry wants to be taken seriously and seen as a serious, responsible part of the wider economy, great. They just have to make sure they behave in such a manner.
I think the report shows improvement on the game industry's part. I just hope it doesn't decide to rest on it's laurels.
hey i'll be the moron parent
"excuse me but i do not have the time to go and turn the case over when i shouldnt have to at all.As a parent i'm far to lazy and ignorant to actully parent my child i have a job i have to do so the goverment can do it for me so i can take yoga and sleep with my husbands fishing buddies"
*end sarcasm*
G/E
PG/E10+
PG-13/T
R/M
NC-17/AO
This is the last time I'm posting this, I promise.
Advertising, I have to lol at that. At least gaming ads don't come up when a pop-up appears...oh, thats what the other medias do (or the people that support them, which is why I
well maybe they will just use the usual "children are going to the sites just like children are the main demographic for video games"
MPAA --- ESRB
G E
PG E10+
PG-13 T
R M
NC-17 AO
The highest rating for movies is not (R). It's NC-17 who could be considered the equivalent of AO for games like M can be considered the equivalent of R.
In the US, NC-17 is the highest rating for films and like the AO rating for video games it spells commercial suicide. Below are the MPAA ratings and their ESRB equivalent:
MPAA ESRB
G E
PG E10+
PG-13 T
R M
NC-17 AO
If the report "spanks" anyone, I would say it spanks lawmakers like Illinois governor Blagojevich, Liar Leland Yee, and others like them, as these individuals have used the FTC reports in the past to show us that M rated video games are falling into childrens' hands too often, yet the same report has always shown that children are getting their hands on R rated movies and CDs with parental advisory warning labels on them much more often. This new report shows exactly that, yet again. How many more reports must be done before these clown lawmakers finally see that there is no justifying the regulation of only video games, while the other industries deserve to remain regulation free?
(Obviously I know why, but it shows that this study isn't really a fair comparison- the games industry, if anything, is doing significantly better than the film industry is)
/b
"For product packaging, the movie industry typically places the movie’s rating and rating reasons on the back of each video and DVD. Although the electronic game industry places the rating on the front of the package, it still places the content descriptors on the back. The Commission renews its recommendation that both industries consider placing all of the rating information prominently on the front of product packaging to make that information more visible to parents. Moreover, the Commission continues to recommend that the music industry consider providing more information on product packaging and in advertising as to why a particular recording has been labeled with a Parental Advisory. Sony BMG’s use of an enhanced label that includes additional information is a good model for others to follow."
As for the report, it covers the Movie, Music and Game industries. Acording to the report, the Game industry is doing the best job at rating and enforcing the ratings. The movie and music industries have poor enforcement rate. With both retailers allowed about 70% of under-age kids buy R-rated movies and PAL music, while game retailers allowed about 42% of under-aged kids to buy M-rated games.
Over all the FTC is pretty positive about the game industry. They have pointed out that the movie and music industries could learn a few lessons from the games industry.
They do have a couple of major/minor beefs with the game industry about mobile phone games not having ratings and the industry advertising M-rated games on websites with a user ration of 45% as under 17 years old.
What on God's green Earth are you speaking of? I read your comments 3 times just to make sure but I still don't get what you're talking about.
This coming from someone who understands Zippy.
because Parents can't turn the game box over? i didn't know we had lost the ability to turn things using our hands. what a sad day this must be for the human race, we'll never find anything on the other side again.
Frankly, I kind of understand their concerns. Sure, they try to keep the games out of the hands of the kids...but, they sure don't seem shy about throwing images of the game content, that which has earned the M rating, onto TV shows and internet sites and other places. IF the industry really does want to improve it's image, taking a few "common sense" steps might be advisable.
Yes, if kids want to, they can find the stuff. That's not the question. It's also a fact that if the kids want an M game, they'll find a way to buy or play it. I just think that IF the industry really wants to tackle these issues and clean up the way it is seen, then it needs to be careful of showing its own double standard.
I get enough of that from the government...I don't need that hypocrasy from my entertainment sources. I'm looking at you as well, TV and Movie industries...
I await you know who. He'll probably spam his reactions to everyone sometime today.
Never underestimate the power of stupidity for while genius has limitations, stupidity knows no bounds.