August 25, 2007 -
In the wake of the brutal ride-by slaying of an 11-year-old Liverpool boy on Wednesday, the leader of Great Britain's Conservative Party has attacked a number of cultural influences - including video games. As reported by the Times, David Cameron said:What has become of our society when we have this spate of children killing children?”
It means understanding and acting on that age-old maxim that it takes a village to raise a child. It means retailers stopping the sale of alcohol to young teenagers. It means music companies, media companies, games manufacturers, not just thinking, ‘What is my social responsibility as a company in terms of the projects I support and the charities I back, good and important as they are’, but asking, ‘What is the effect of the music I produce, the games I market and the programmes I broadcast?’
Coincidentally, fellow Conservative Jeremy Hunt was interviewed recently by MCV regarding the British game industry. Among his comments:
The UK video games industry is obviously a vitally important part of our economy. The Government needs to do all it can to support the video games sector and allow it to flourish.
I would, however, place equal weight on the cultural influence that games can have. As children and young people make up a significant proportion of video game users it is important for the industry to act in a responsible and sensitive way.
Issues involving content have largely focused on the negative aspects associated with games. The arguments around Resistance: Fall of Man and Manchester Cathedral being the most recent example. The industry needs to accept it has a duty to act responsibly when it comes to appropriate content and politicians and the media needs to realise that the industry can have a positive impact on young people’s lives...
I believe that it is time for the games industry to act in a responsible and sensitive way and play their part in the prevention of unsuitable material falling into the hands of children. It is essential that manufacturers take seriously the messages sent out by violent and increasingly life-like video games and I believe that most currently do so.
Comments
He's not blaming the media. He's saying 'there there is a lot of blame to go around here.' Hell, he even says that the politicians are at fault here too.
Also, GP, it wasn't really a 'Slam'. The headline is rather sensational!
@Jack Thompson
At least before you blow your stack answer to why all of these things happened even before very violent video games.
Those people acted because of the way people in America started changing. Today people in America are getting ruder and ruder to innocent people for instance. That is the reason why all of the school shootings so on and so forth are happening.
And as for the situation of some of the shooter playing video games, most kids these days play video games.
GP: My bad for omitting the info on the shooters. I've added a link to the story. All arrested were teens.
What a calm and measured response that aids in proving that gamers are not socially mal-adjusted lunatics.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article2327074.ece
Whoever's responsible for Jones's death, police are definitely looking at teenagers. Arrested so far are four boys (15, 15, 16, and 19) and two girls (15 and 18).
So, some who meet the recommended age for M-rated games and some who don't. Of course, they use a different ratings system in the UK but the point still stands.
Andrew Eisen
Oh for crying out loud. Our society hasn't *become* that way! It's *always been* that way!
I mean, does he even know the daily lives of those arrested? Their interests, what they do in their spare time, etc. They may not be gamers, or care for TV, or whatever. Then what, hm?
Let me see: Ah yes: http://society.guardian.co.uk/children/story/0,,2012512,00.html
And surprise, surprise, which country is second to last ? Good ol' USA. Seems there are more problems then the media in the UK.
(And I'm proud that MY country is the BEST to grow up in.)
It means parents being involved in their children's lives to the extent where they just might noticed if they're involved in I don't know... possessing a fire arm in a country where it's illegal in any and all forms.
I love how this dipstick just bypasses any responsibility by the shooter or the parents and goes right to cultural influences.
I'm sick of listening to this crap, I'm so past done. You don't get popular with parents by telling them it's their fault their kids are dying, so you blame whatever is the most convenient.
A viciously religious and devious lawyer, a quack psychiatrist who claims to solve years of emotional problems in a 10 minute segment, an elitist ex junkie MP... why is it these idiots make headlines constantly and specialists , who actually do research, are left twisting in the wind while these whores fight for the spotlight.
Well, to be fair, Cameron is blaming society as a whole for perpetuating a culture where bad things like this can happen. Video games are a part of that culture but as Cameron points out, so are other forms of media, guns, drugs, alcohol, and crap parenting.
Andrew Eisen
Yeah, that's true. But what gets me is you can't simply say it's all cultural influences. Education and finances also play a role as well, and probably other things as well; while culture does play its role, you have to look at everything in the whole, not just cut a piece out and blame that particular section.
If you want to fix something, you find out everything that's wrong with it, not say "Oh, that needs fixing!" and then leave the rest unattended. You don't call a house finished when it's still missing the roof and a wall :P
Education and the financial background you come from effect the culture that you are exposed to. Richer more well educated folks will like more well read subjects and more intelligent programs. That's why you never hear someone say 'I've saved up my unemployment benefit so I can go and see the Vivaldi concert tonight' or why you never hear upper class people say 'Oh, turn off the blood Bronofski and put on Pop Idol would you?"
Culture, Education and Finance are utterly inseperable.
Kids in this country have no fear of the law because there are no cosequences to their actions. They can destroy, steal and murder and not have to face up to the penalties for doing so.
Before we start to complain about what kind of image the media is putting into kids heads we should be concerned about what kind of example the law is setting for them. The law is far too leniant on young offenders.
I've been in stores and seen 14yr olds trying to buy a game rated 18. In one instance the store refused so the kid got his Dad who went ballistic at the fact they had denied sale to his kid and then purchased the game and gave it straight to his son. Rather than blaming the industries they should blame the parents.
Was everyone immortal until Pong first hit bars across the world? Was when Ralph Baer invented the most primitive version of TV table tennis the same time people started dying?
Now, to be fair, he also talks about parents a great deal. In his "social covenant" theory, he seems to hint that the community should be doing more to discourage bad parenting. This might work at first, and lots of people will probably get involved with Rhys fresh on their minds. However, as with cities, there is only so much they can do. Problem is, most of parental abuse and neglect occurs behind closed doors, where even neighbors can't do very much. Also, as a comment on the Times article indicated, there are many different kinds of abuse and neglect, not all are obvious. There are parents who spoil their kids, there are parents who put one of their kids above his/her siblings. The community can't reliably track down and stop these parents. The only certain way to lessen their impact on society is to nudge them out of the laziness which is so common in bad parents. Namely, put an end to excessive and unecessary state benefits to encourage these parents to find work. Though this won't deal with all bad parents, a hard-working parent is a much better role-model than one who depends on welfare.
About his comments on media, he brings up an interesting point, but one that should be taken with two jumbo grains of salt. One must be careful about blaming media, even in small part, for social ills. For example, in the 60s, many parents thought The Beatles were a bad influence on kids. But today, if I said they were even a minor factor in the rise of crime rates during that decade, I'd be laughed down the block. That's the problem with 'passing the buck' to media, often our fears of it stem from the beliefs we pick up from the last generation. However, those beliefs change and become more flexible over time, and often we as a society are better off for it. Also, the issue of addressing the media becomes dicey in itself, because we are an imperfect society that searches for scapegoats there. Though Cameron's remarks may not have been a condemnation of rap music of video games, they will certainly seem that way to Keith Vaz. Finally, the problem with tackling media in the name of social reform is itself flawed, as we do not yet know how the media contributes the social problems or if it contirbutes at all. We don't even know if Rhys' murderer was a fan of video games or rap. What we do know is that millions of people play violent video games and listen to swear-laden music and yet grow up to be normal, upstanding citizens. For the children who might be influenced in a negative way by these, I would refer back to my previous paragraph about the parents, because they have likely already failed the child by not teaching them good values to stand on, if the child must get them from the media. Besides which, it is also the parents who get these things for their kids in the first place. At worst, media likely plays a tiny role in some children going out and commiting crimes. Thus, our energies would be better spent on other issues, like addressing the deeper social problems. This is not carte blanche to stifle free expression in the name of "social responsibilty." In too many societies this amounts to censorship based on arbitary views which STILL doesn't address youth violence.
In conclusion, this speech does SOUND good. You could make a catchy slogan out of it, and progressives will swarm on it like flies on honey. Taken as a whole, however, these ideas aren't attainable. Throughout history, many attempts have been made to create a society like the one Cameron describes. To date, none have succeded on a national level.
They do. It's called the ratings board:
ET, E, E 10+, T, M, A/O
Industry job done.
How about we all cut the bullshit and stop trying to have the government make laws for things the parents should be doing their-damn-selves?
ESRB doesn't rate games in the UK ;)
The BBFC is an independant review panel who charge for each submission they rate. If you are refused a rating you have to pay to have it re-evaluated.
I was thinking after i put up my previous comment. Now that there are both a British and European ratings on game boxes. mabye it wouldnt be a waste of time for an awareness campaign for the european ratings system (although its a fairly standard set of ratings)
hes not making the link, hes asking the question if theres a link. Sure its political rhetoric for the same thing, but at least its not some JT alarmist crap;
games = T3H MURDER!
it opens the debate for a rational defence by the games industry rather than trying to ostracise them.
all he is doing is doing the vague politician schtick untill the investigation is ongoing. or at least I hope he is.
Don't even mention ET it almost killed videogames!!!!
(Disclaimer: I am not in the US or UK, but from what I read, schools do not differ that much and bullying is an issue everywhere).
How the fuck have we come into this century when we keep celebrating democracy like it's the greatest thing apart from oxygen and water, and yet, we still LONG and DEMAND for a motherfucking, all-encroaching government. I'll admit this, Cameron doesn't single games out, however, he just advocates what can only be described as a Lenin-like naivety, believing that everybody will band together and work for the good of society. STOP DAYDREAMING AND GROW THE FUCK UP. They already invented that: They called it Communism, and it crashed and burned. This kind of optimistic bullshit:
"To me this is what social responsibility is all about. Not just sitting back and saying that the Government must act, but all of us saying, ‘This is my country, my society, my responsibility, and I must play my part."
Will never fly because, let's face it, that kind of work ethic, determination, and loyalty exists in relatively few of us.
"What has become of our society when we have this spate of children killing children?”
Yeah, society has JUST become like this, ignore the fact that people have been killing other people for as long as there have been other people that just fucking piss them off. Ignore the fact that kids have been killing kids forever. Ignore the fact that gangs have formed, and that kids have joined them, for goddamn ever. NO. Society has JUST transformed into that godless age when children kill children. Goddamn man, try to think back to when YOU were a kid. Didn't that one guy just piss you off so much that you dreamed of getting even? Now imagine that your parents pretty much ignore the fact that you exist, or worse, they beat your ass like there's no tomorrow because they're too much of pussies to go talk back to their boss. Add on the fact that the other kids don't like you because you look weird, or talk weird, or maybe you're just a dumb fucking piece of shit. Layer on that all-so-human desire to fit in, and to top it off, throw on that cocktail of hormones they call puberty. Yeah, it must be fucking SOCIETY that causes you to go out and join a gang or blast that jock asshole who's been beating your ass everyday in school.
On to the nanny state. Old fucking concept, get a goddamn new one. I'm not that familiar with the gun laws in the United Kingdom, but from what I have gathered, it is pretty damn hard to get a gun legally, and then you have to jump through hoops to show them that you're storing it well (or you have to keep it at the local hunting club). Either way, it is supposed to be damn hard to get a gun and even harder to get something like a handgun which has been permanently banned if I'm not mistaken. So how the FUCK is it society's fault when one little bastard gets a weapon and rides around on a bike, blasting other little kids? Answer this: Near the top of the responses, DoggySpew posted an article listing the best places to live. Topping the chart was the Netherlands, a hotbed of liberality with liberal outlooks on practically everything from drugs (I believe you are allowed to purchase small, recreational amounts of marijuana from the local cafe) to prostitution (it's legal). In fact, unless I'm mistaken, the number of violent deaths (that's including other forms of killing such as knives and drowning) is remarkably LOW compared to the UK and the US.
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur-crime-murders
How is this possible? Could it be that, when the government isn't stamping their boots into your face and telling you what to do, people actually have to be RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR ACTIONS?! OH MY FUCKING GOD. It's like a motherfucking bolt of inspiration, glowing warmly on the faces of the ignorant and naive. Bottom line, government CAN'T tell people how to live every aspect of their lives; government exists as a general guideline and boundary to prevent extreme cases.
Parents who did not know where their children were and what they were up to at night should not only be helped to do their job properly, they should be shamed into it, [Cameron] said.
Well holy fuck, if the bastard doesn't contradict himself. Is anyone dumb enough to think that, if the parents are too lazy to fucking keep track of where their children are on their own, government regulation will make them care any more? The cold truth is that this world, while it does have a large number of people who are level-headed, rational, and generally decent, is largely populated with bastards. Bastard-coated bastards with bastard filling. Especially with the explosion of life-lengthening medicines and liberal free-speech policies. You see, in the old days, these bastards would have simply died off because they needed SOME people to like them and help them out. But nowadays, these sons-of-bitches can live completely separate from society, ordering their food online, and doling out criticism while experiencing nothing firsthand that would soil their plastic bubble. Even worse, is when these fuckers find each other and procreate for some reason. Then, they raise a herd of little fuckers and beat them when "the world just ain't fair, never mind that I didn't pay attention in school or job training..." Then they get mad when their little fuckers go out smoking and boozing and generally fucking around. That is when we get goddamn complaints about the government not doing shit to control the population of deviant motherfuckers.
IT IS THE PARENT'S FUCKING JOB TO CONTROL THEIR OWN KIDS.
End of that discussion. And when that kid goes out and blows some other guy's head off, that is THAT KID'S fault. Oh yes, you see, no matter how fucking retarded you are, if you go out and kill someone, that is a CONSCIOUS choice. At that point, all blame goes to THE KILLER. Nobody else but THE KILLER. I am so fucking tired of all the goddamn bullshit "Society made me do it" fuck that people try to pull nowadays. Oh no, it was a video game's fault that I went and gunned down that elementary school. Oh no, it was the Matrix's fault that I pushed that guy out of the window to see if he could fly. Oh no, I read a bad BOOK, and it made me want to CUT A MOTHERFUCKER INTO TEN PIECES. Spare me your scapegoating shit. I am NOT deceived by your ridiculous crap, it was YOUR FAULT. ONLY YOUR FAULT.
Oh yes, and at Dennis, It wasn't Cameron who said the second part:
The UK video games industry is obviously a vitally important part of our economy. The Government needs to do all it can to support the video games sector and allow it to flourish.
I would, however, place equal weight on the cultural influence that games can have. As children and young people make up a significant proportion of video game users it is important for the industry to act in a responsible and sensitive way.
Issues involving content have largely focused on the negative aspects associated with games. The arguments around Resistance: Fall of Man and Manchester Cathedral being the most recent example. The industry needs to accept it has a duty to act responsibly when it comes to appropriate content and politicians and the media needs to realise that the industry can have a positive impact on young people’s lives…
I believe that it is time for the games industry to act in a responsible and sensitive way and play their part in the prevention of unsuitable material falling into the hands of children. It is essential that manufacturers take seriously the messages sent out by violent and increasingly life-like video games and I believe that most currently do so.
It was some guy named Jeremy Hunt.
*End Angry Tirade*
The interview you posted yesterday was also the same interview of Jeremy Hunt, not David Cameron.
All he needs to do now is learn when to tell the difference between Sensationalistic and Important. As much as I hate Maggie Thatcher, at least the 70/80's generation of politicians seemed to figure out that the best way to deal with a trend was simply to ignore it for a few years until it died out.
Oh don't worry, this is how political opposition works over here. As long as they're not in power the whole of society is doomed.
People have always been douche-bags to one another. We just sensationalize it more now (and I wish we didn't - farking media). Guy needs to get a grip!
Thank God for MP Cameron, as adult leaders on both sides of the pond are understanding that pop culture is by and large raw sewage in which teens are drowning.
Once you kids grow up, you'll understand. Until then, pay attention. You'll learn something. Remember, I was once as ignorant as you. I grew up.
Jack Thompson
PS: Hooah!
Luscan Says:
August 25th, 2007 at 9:39 am
FUCK THIS IS JUST SHIT THIS IS WHATS GOIN TO STOP MANHUNT 2 EVER COMMING OUT IN THE UK
What a calm and measured response that aids in proving that gamers are not socially mal-adjusted lunatics.
Without getting into a religious debate, more people have been killed in the name of God than in the name of GTA.
Oh shut up and grow up Jack, you're no better than the guy who types in capitals, as your own comment proves.
It goes on everywhere. People killing infidels so they can go to heaven. Madmen interpreting the bible to justify horrific actions.
Do I pigeon-hole all religious people as violent psychopaths with no regard for human life?
No, because it's a big tent and I know better than to compare Ned Flanders to Islamic Fascist #435429.
Get where this is going?
HINT: It has to do with video games.
That's why I get annoyed at Jacks' comments (assuming that's Jack) because I spent several years on here being insulted, belittled and called every name under the sun, along with the rest of GP, and yet Jack 'conveniently' forgets those occasions when he wants to climb onto his own persecution high-horse.
It's the selective amnesia that annoys me the most.