Three New Gamer Videos for Republican Presidential Debate

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

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
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.
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.

ECA IconA PUBLICATION OF THE ECA RSS IconSUBSCRIBE User LoginLOGIN / REGISTER

Crispy Gamer




       

GamePolitics ShoutBox

Posted 03/16/10 at 10:59am
ZippyDSMlee: JD is jsut pissy cuse he is not getting enough attnetion...hey neither am I damnit!!!!
Posted 03/16/10 at 10:18am
Valdearg: @Cminer: LMAO. I was about to say the same thing. The typical Youtube comment implies they've been at it for years.
Posted 03/16/10 at 10:17am
CMiner: JDKJ: That happened years ago. Look at your average forum poster/youtube commentor/etc for proof.
Posted 03/16/10 at 10:16am
JDKJ: BREAKING: Goodall Institute for Primate Research teaches chimpazee how to type and post to the Internet.
Posted 03/16/10 at 08:39am
ZippyDSMlee: Afirejar:Left you a warm pile in the Venezuela/censorship article. :P
Posted 03/15/10 at 04:05pm
Andrew Eisen: I'm still here and I'm doing a lot of behind the scenes work (as time permits me). But it's true, I've only written one piece under the new GP but if that Facebook/JT bit is the last thing I write for the site, I’d be okay with that.
Posted 03/15/10 at 04:01pm
ZippyDSMlee: I suppose its not inane enough for petes muses*giggles*
Posted 03/15/10 at 03:55pm
PHX Corp: It had the Video Games tag on it, I thought that it had been a video game law that was concerning it
Posted 03/15/10 at 03:54pm
JDKJ: And what happened to "Senior GP Correspondent, Andrew Eisen, reporting from San Diego [and who has a better finger on the pulse of GP's readership than some others]?" Huh? Did he fall victim to the Night of the Long Knives?
Posted 03/15/10 at 03:53pm
Andrew Eisen: No, but my one example was not meant to cover the entire spectrum. Besides, multiplayer is a big part of video games.
Posted 03/15/10 at 03:50pm
Andrew Eisen: PHX Corp - Are you referring to AB 847? I haven't read the bill but the summary doesn't appear to apply to video games.
Posted 03/15/10 at 03:49pm
DarkSaber: 2 mediocre games do not "a big part of video games" make.
Posted 03/15/10 at 03:49pm
JDKJ: I suspect that'll fall victim to the "pass." Wrong side of the fence. It's North Korea we aren't supposed to like.
Posted 03/15/10 at 03:48pm
DarkSaber: Although, following the "MW2 Made Lots of Money" excuse for a story, GP would be hard pressed to justify WHY they passed on it.
Posted 03/15/10 at 03:47pm
Andrew Eisen: DS - Not necessarily. See recent Ubisoft stories.
Posted 03/15/10 at 03:47pm
Andrew Eisen: Zip - Or it will and GP hasn't had a chance in the last couple hours to get to it yet. Or yeah, maybe he’ll pass on it.
Posted 03/15/10 at 03:46pm
DarkSaber: Only if you play multiplayer AE.
Posted 03/15/10 at 03:45pm
Andrew Eisen: Except, aside from following up on an earlier story, GP frequently reports on internet censorship and net neutrality issues (the internet being a big part of video games and all).
Posted 03/15/10 at 03:45pm
ZippyDSMlee: I emailed it in DS, if Venezuela gets covered so should south koera but I gues not :P
Posted 03/15/10 at 03:45pm
PHX Corp: The CA S(Foghorn)heads are at it again, instead of banning M rated video games for children They are going to tax the hell out of them Literally and yhis time Yee aint The one trying to do it
Login or register to post shouts