SCEE Boss Challenges Tanya Byron: "You've Been Too Nice to Us"

SCEE Boss Challenges Tanya Byron: "You've Been Too Nice to Us"

April 9, 2008
MCV UK has coverage of meetings held last week between members of ELSPA (the U.K. equivalent of the ESA) and Dr. Tanya Byron.

In the first installment, SCEE president David Reeves tells Byron that the industry is in favor of giving the PEGI rating system the force of law. This is a quite different approach from the U.S., where the ESA strenuously opposes any such regulation. During the meeting, Reeves told Byron:
We funded research into the subject of age ratings... the findings that came out were this: the ratings are well known in Europe, less so in the UK and there’s more confusion In the UK than anywhere else in Europe...

They concluded also that retail is doing an excellent job at policing the ratings... But they also concluded that the ratings had no teeth whatsoever and that they believed PEGI should be given teeth, it should be made law... And we supported that... and we were hoping that the Byron report would recommend to Government that was the way to go.

And Dr. Byron, I don’t want to be controversial, but I think you’ve been too nice to us. We... were looking for something that was perhaps a little bit more direct... This debate goes on in every European country and in Switzerland it’s at the top of the agenda for every political party. It’s a major hot potato...

For her part Byron defended her recommendations, including a surprising degree of concern for the video game industry:
...One of my big things... was about the emotion that was happening – the paranoia that was around – and I have felt quite protective of the video game industry. I didn’t want to make a recommendation that would have huge implications for PEGI, but I also had to make a recommendation on the evidence presented to me and what I was hearing...

I’m disappointed you don’t think I’ve been clear, I don’t think I could have been clearer, but I think I’ve certainly been fair. Europe is full of different countries, different people. But the UK’s parents need to understand the context of a game and that’s very important...

I don’t think that [PEGI] recommendation would have done well for the industry at this point in time.

Comments

"This debate goes on in every European country and in Switzerland"

I'm sorry, I can't help, but point this out. When did Switzerland leave Europe? Did I miss something here?
[...] wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptMCV UK has coverage of meetings held last week between members of ELSPA (the U.K. equivalent of the ESA) and Dr. Tanya Byron. In the first installment, SCEE president David Reeves tells Byron that the industry is in favor of giving the PEGI rating system the force of law. This is a quite different approach from the U.S., where the ESA strenuously opposes any such regulation. During the meeting, Reeves told Byron: We funded research into the subject of age ratings… the findings that came out were this: the ratings are well known in Europe, less so in the UK and there’s more confusion In the UK than anywhere else in Europe… [...]
Delin: He means EU countries, ie countries not part of the European Union and Switzerland has never been in the EU, so his comment stands.
@Delin:
Well, Switzerland is neutral. Maybe they are now continentally neutral, not picking one continent over the other.

But I don't understand why everyone attacks the ratings. From what I can tell, PEGI works pretty well when self regulated.
How the hell they got people to say that PEGI was better than a massive logo with a very clear 15 or 18 cert on it is beyond me. They have been in use for a very long time in the UK - absolutely everyone knows what they mean.
Am I the only one confused by this article? I really don't understand who is saying what about whom, and why they are saying it. As such, I cannot for a coherant comment (or at least one that is as close to coherant as I've ever been).
How the BBFC got any nod over PEGI, well thats just bizarre. I think its pretty clear what the PEGI ratings mean. Sure, the symbols aren't the simplest... but the best thing would be to make PEGI legally required, and leave the BBFC to the Film that the F stands for.
BBFC is currently a lot more well known than PEGI in the UK - any British citizen would tell you that.
I shall point out that in Finland, Poland, and Austria, PEGI already holds weight of law. In the UK, although PEGI doesn't have the weight of law, the BBFC does.
Why would he choose a rating system can can ban and censor games over one that rates them and does not believe in censorship and banning?
I agree with paul. It's like role reversal here. Suddenly the top is being dommed >>
Over in the UK, BBFC is recognisable.
They should just move everything over to BBFC, that would erase all these problems in a single stroke, and would be far easier for the videogames industry to defend itself.
The man is a sellout. Sony needs to fire him.
A couple thoughts when I read this article.

I think Mr. Reeves was looking more for direction on SCEE's part on things they haven't already done.

The second one is much... dirtier... the cleanest way I can think of his words is that he's simply saying "Thank you, ma'am! Next time, put your wrist into it!"
So he's basically saying he's upset that the Byron report didn't say that game ratings should be made into law or enforceable by law.

This guy is a tool.
Wait, video games aren't blamed for everything since the death of Abel, and this dork is upset about it?! Where is he from?

Oh - Sony. That explains a lot.
I don't think he's really upset by the lack of legal backing. I think it's more a case of "if a ratings body must have legal backing then we want it to be ours". The industry put a lot into PEGI, and the BBFC being picked to legally rate games is a bit of a kick in the head for them.

Gift.
What is he upset about? She gave a non biased recommendation that doesn't hate on the industry and opionions that don't make a nanny state so Umm... WTF?!
[quote]But the UK’s parents need to understand the context of a game and that’s very important…[/quote]

THERES THAT MAGIC WORD FOR ALL YOU LOBYIST TITS! CONTEXT!!!
God damn it, thats 2 messed up tags in a row now =(
I didnt know what SCEE was so I had to search it. Government regulation is normally good for big business, because what it typcially amounts to is big companies colluding with government to squash competition. Regulations are harder for small companies to deal with too. Thats why this guy may be for more strict ratings/censorship. He knows it would help Sony. Itd be bad for free expression and the video game industry as a whole, but a huge corp like Sony would be fine and possibly benifit. Thats corporatism: the government and big corporations working together to control the free market. Strict ratings may be a way for them to do that.
This truly is a WTF moment that is unnecessary. She didn't do much that could possible upset us so he should not be making any remarks like this.

GamePolitics ShoutBox

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.
Posted 07/03/09 at 03:59pm
GoodRobotUs: Just heard about that myself... kinda unexpected
Posted 07/03/09 at 03:58pm
Krono: Huh, apparently Sarah Palin is resigning.
Posted 07/03/09 at 03:34pm
GoodRobotUs: Sounds like he's been mainlining the Angel Dust again
Posted 07/03/09 at 01:50pm
ezbiker555: I'm back. Just in time too, my Jack Thompson sense were going wild
Posted 07/03/09 at 01:47pm
DarkSaber: You mean "playing with himself"? :-P
Posted 07/03/09 at 01:16pm
Matthew: Oh, Jack's back? I guess he got bored of playing single-player.
Posted 07/03/09 at 01:05pm
Andrew Eisen: I'm leaving most of his comments up but he'll be banned again shortly.
Login or register to post shouts