Three New Gamer Videos for Republican Presidential Debate

August 14, 2007 -

Last week the Entertainment Consumers Association issued a call to action, challenging gamers to create grassroots video questions for Republican candidates participating in next month's CNN/YouTube debate. As a show of support, ECA president Hal Halpin even promised to send an ECA t-shirt to everone who submitted a gamer issue-oriented video.

The response has been unprecedented with new gamer-created videos appearing almost every day. Here are three brand-new submissions:

Jordan from Maine wants to know what the Republican candidates will do to keep his video games safe from censorship. Tim from Pennsylvania wonders how the candidates would help parents make the right video game choices for their children. UGIPhobose from Atlanta wonders if the candidates believe it is the government's duty to censor digital media, including the Internet and video games

To see all of the gamer debate videos submitted so far, click on the Presidential Debate Videos category tag in the right sidebar. And if you're submitting a debate video to YouTube, don't forget to contact GamePolitics or the ECA to claim your t-shirt!


Comments

test

the halo video is pointless. unelss your real name is ugi fugil or what ever.

Apparently mine was deleted. I like the second one best. Machinima doesn't really work for this.

I expect a complete dodge on the "what will you do to hold parents responsible for their choices" question.
-- If your wiimote goes snicker-snack, check your wrist-strap...

must avoid spam filter, must not sing the lyrics to the monty python spam song.

In the .0007 percent chance this does get through these videos don't seem to be as good as the ones before.

I don't like these videos at all. The Machina ones just need to go away. Politicians want to respond to real people, not cartoons.

The other two were very weak questions that would recieve very weak answers.

We need to call these politicians out, not cater to their two tongued tactics.

All of these questions are good, but they are too clear, if that makes sense. The answer you want to hear is obvious. If it were phrased more neutrally, like "How do you feel about video game violence and regulation." I would do it myself, but I can't afford a decent camera.

@jabrwock

that or they will be answered by candidates who never intended to legislate games in the first place, like guliani or ron paul.

I can't watch the videos at work, but doesn't Machinma violate one of the rules?

Machina definitely violates rules.

At first I didn't want to post anything on this, because I made the second video, but after seeing a few of these comments I thought I'd say a little something here.

The whole arguement about videogame legislation is that it's not suppose to be up to the government to make decisions on what kids should and shouldn't play, view, read, or listen to, it's suppose to be up to the parents. That's the answer WE want to hear, but most politicians don't want to say it.

From my POV, simply asking the politicians how they feel about videogame violence and regulation lets them talk around the issue. Grilling them about regulation conflicting with the first ammendment gives them an easy way out. Neither put the real fix (getting parents involved) to the problem at hand (unwanted and unconstitutional legislation). Asking them specifically how they would implement the fix leaves them no choice but to A) talk about legislating videogames, or B) working with established groups (like the ESRB) to get parents more involved.

Either answer would give everyone a better picture of how the candidates will handle the problem.

Thanks to everyone for the cirticisms though, because they did give me some ideas for a second question.

the 3rd one isn't going to cut it...

I sent an email to GP regarding these debates. They have been "rescheduled" to November 28, read: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/08/13/cnn%e2%80%99s-gop-debate...

The main reason cited for the change was "scheduling conflicts" with major candidates. Unless something changes dramatically in the next 3 months I would put money on Guilaini and Romney skipping out on these and at least a 50% chance the entire debate crumbles and is canceled. The debate has been planned for quite some time now, and if candidates thought it was important they would fix their scheduling conflicts. Republicans are not ready to embrace the technological movement just yet.

@ Evan

Guiliani is going to be there. If Romney doesn't, then he's a coward.

The first two were at least decent efforts. Timmay, memorize that shit. It looks a lot better when you make eye contact with the camera. But hey, I liked it. You were easy to understand, thought out your question beforehand, and really used those 30 seconds to their fullest.

I love--absolutely love--the way you posed your question. What will you do to hold parents responsible? That's genius. It's a direct question, which makes it that much more obvious should a candidate try to dodge it, and completely turns the tables on the debate, illustrating the parents as the responsible party. It's like a slap in the face, but in a valid and polite way. Saucy.

The last video... made me want to bash my against a wall for the sheer stupidity of it.

First: Machinima. Don't. It makes you look like an idiot. This is a serious issue and if you can't be serious about it, stay away from it. No one will respect a question asked by someone hiding behind a game character. Seriously, we already know these people don't take games seriously. Do the math.

Second: Ask something important. It seems little or no thought went into formulating the question. If you only needed 10 seconds, you weren't trying hard enough. Bland and generic. Most importantly, it's not direct enough. The question, as posed, would give candidates too much room to maneuver. And believe me, they will. They'll talk for minutes on end without actually saying anything.

Third: For the love of everything holy, people need to learn to enunciate... especially when you have a wacky name like "Ugio F. Foma... see..." something. See? I couldn't understand it. Not that they'd remember it anyway, but anything you don't pronounce clearly becomes a distraction.

And finally... are you serious? A copyright notice?

Get the **** out. Right now. Seriously, just go.

/sigh.

One missed tag and the whole post goes to shit.
 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Will an M rating hurt Batman: Arkham Knight's sales?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
ConsterDon't 'beauty rags' already get plenty of criticism?02/27/2015 - 9:02am
ZippyDSMleeEh still rather subjective… the haters would be better off going after teen and beauty rags and magazines than fiction, fiction follows reality and going after fiction tends to turn into a bullying fest’s… plus its fiction its unrealistic to start with….02/27/2015 - 1:10am
MechaTama31That's a pretty difficult anatomy to break.02/26/2015 - 11:09pm
MechaTama31"the way her animations repeatedly break her anatomy" <-- I'm sorry, but we are talking here about the woman who can roll up into a little ball and live to tell the tale, yes? ;)02/26/2015 - 11:09pm
Andrew EisenAs far as examples that could be culled from female game characters though, that one's pretty mild.02/26/2015 - 9:11pm
Andrew EisenNot as much the heels or the suit in and of themselves but certainly the way her animations repeatedly break her anatomy to show off her lady bits.02/26/2015 - 9:10pm
E. Zachary KnightWell, Samus's heels are certainly impracticable, but I wouldn't really call her Zero suit objectified. I don't really feel that the new Lara Croft is objectified either, but that is my subjective opinion.02/26/2015 - 9:08pm
Andrew EisenTomb Raider: No but we haven't seen much of anything yet. Samus: Yes.02/26/2015 - 9:07pm
ZippyDSMleeWould you call the new tomb raider objectified? WOuld Samus Aran from the new Smash bros be objectified?02/26/2015 - 9:02pm
WonderkarpI'm hoping they put the rest of the comic book ghostbusters in there. Ortiz and Rookie(From GB the game)02/26/2015 - 8:38pm
Wonderkarpghostbusters board game is doing great. getting close too a 3rd extra playable Character. Ron Alexander.02/26/2015 - 8:37pm
Andrew EisenSmurfette is not subjective. If there's more than one female character, it's not Smurfette. Anyway, as with everything on the list, Smurfette is, in and of itself, not necessarily a bad thing.02/26/2015 - 8:32pm
Andrew EisenI think there's 5 women (out of 15, I think) but other than one being a bit more "hippy" than the others, they pretty much all have the same body type. Especially when compaired to the huge variety of male body types.02/26/2015 - 8:31pm
Wonderkarpso I dont see Smurfette as a bad thing. Unless like all your female characters are Smurfette. remember the Smurfs also had Sassette02/26/2015 - 8:29pm
E. Zachary KnightOne good example of the larger issues is one Anita used in the presentation, Blizzard's Overwatch game. There are a dozen men in the game with a dozen body types. But there are only 4 women with 2 body types, but 3 of them have the same one.02/26/2015 - 8:28pm
Wonderkarpthe smurfette thing is subjective to how many female characters you have. Take Sonic for example. You have Amy, who is obvious smurfette, but there's several other female characters now without that. Including the original animated seriescomics with Sally02/26/2015 - 8:28pm
E. Zachary KnightAE. Very true. I think that is where I was going, but it didn't come out right. Jack Harkness is sexy but not objectified. Whereas, a women would have to be objectified in order to be "sexy" in most games.02/26/2015 - 8:26pm
E. Zachary KnightAnd as Andrew pointed out, there is a big difference between a sexualized man, and an idealized man. But for some reason, there is no distinction between women in games. For the most part.02/26/2015 - 8:25pm
Andrew EisenI think one of the issues we run into repeatedly with these conversations is the confusion over "sexy" and "sexually objectified."02/26/2015 - 8:24pm
E. Zachary KnightYet, for some reason, in orde rto have a sexualized women, she must be wearing lingerie or a bikini. Can't women be sexual and still dress for the job at hand?02/26/2015 - 8:24pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician