Video Game Biz Does Well in FCC Report on Content Ratings

September 3, 2009 -

As GamePolitics noted last week, the Federal Communications Commission has floated the idea of a universal content rating system which would span various forms of media, including video games.

While lobbying group ESA quickly raised objections to the concept, the video game industry did quite well in an FCC report on parental controls issued to Congress on Monday. GameCulture has more:

Members of Congress who will receive the FCC's report will find almost nothing negative about the game industry's handling of parental control technology and ratings. Common Sense Media's concern about unrated online content and user-created content is noted but countered by the ESA, which points out that "no rating system or control device can anticipate the extemporaneous world of the Internet..."

While the FCC says it intends to launch a Notice of Inquiry specifically for games, this first round is a clear victory for the industry.  At this rate, even if regulators decide to pursue a "universal rating system," it could end up looking a lot like the system developed by the ESRB.


Comments

Re: Video Game Biz Does Well in FCC Report on Content ...

The real question is, does the FCC or even congress have the authority to implement such a system? Past attempts to force ratings on anything but public air waves have either been dropped or found unconstitutional.

Re: Video Game Biz Does Well in FCC Report on Content ...

Exactly.

While imposing a rating system on all media would doubtless be a regulatory wet dream come true for the FCC, they don't actually have the authority to impose such a rating system outside of broadcast media and cable TV no matter how brazenly they pretend that since the second C in FCC stands for "communications" they must surely have authority over all possible means of communication.

 

Re: Video Game Biz Does Well in FCC Report on Content ...

A general ratings system could be constitutional, but any attempts of legal enforcement wouldn't be, as that would be violating the First Amendment.  As for the FCC running it, I don't think that's legal, either, as they only have the ability to regulate broadcasting, of which video games are not a part of.  As for the FCC warning on your Xbox, that's there to warn of the possibility (no matter how slight) that the electronics could interfere with incoming or outgoing broadcasts, and that incoming or outgoing broadcasts could interfere with it as well.  To this point in time, that is the legal limit of the FCC's control on our beloved industry.

As I said above, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

---

He was dead when I got here.

--- With the first link, the chain is forged.

Re: Video Game Biz Does Well in FCC Report on Content ...

I think there is a FCC regulation about electronic interference, but that applys to basicly anything that gets plugged in.

Hunting the shadows of the troubled dreams.

Hunting the shadows of the troubled dreams.

Re: Video Game Biz Does Well in FCC Report on Content ...

You're right, but it's strictly limited to the scope of the interference itself.

---

He was dead when I got here.

--- With the first link, the chain is forged.

Re: Video Game Biz Does Well in FCC Report on Content ...

FCC, this brings up the old saw:  "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."

---

He was dead when I got here.

--- With the first link, the chain is forged.

Re: Video Game Biz Does Well in FCC Report on Content ...

At this rate, even if regulators decide to pursue a "universal rating system," it could end up looking a lot like the system developed by the ESRB.

Just because the ESBR ratings works for video games dosen;t mean it'll more for movies and tv.

http://www.magicinkgaming.com/

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Did Microsoft pay too much ($2.5 billion) for Minecraft developer Mojang?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Michael Chandrawould clearly not apply, since they weren't used as shield. It's more "hey, just because I don't agree with you doesn't mean I'm CISWASP."09/18/2014 - 5:08pm
Michael ChandraIn comparison though, the more extreme views would be fairly countered with "you don't speak for me". But the batshit crazy people tend not to even use others as the shield to defend their batshit crazy ideas and insults, so at that point #notyourshield09/18/2014 - 5:06pm
Michael ChandraWhich is of course real silly because when there are so many horrible stories and statistics too, it's utterly irrelevant whether some don't mind.09/18/2014 - 5:00pm
Michael ChandraIn this context it would be women claiming they don't see a problem with the stuff, so stop claiming women don't like it!09/18/2014 - 5:00pm
Michael Chandra"You don't speak for me. I am not your shield. You cannot use me to defend your own opinion."09/18/2014 - 4:59pm
Michael ChandraAE, if we leave aside the falsehoods some use with the term, the idea is regarding minorities and such.09/18/2014 - 4:58pm
Michael ChandraKrono did just a bit earlier in the shoutbox prh99.09/18/2014 - 4:56pm
Andrew EisenI still don't get the what #notyourshield is supposed to mean. Who is unfairly using who as a shield for what?09/18/2014 - 4:43pm
prh99Didn't said anything about #notyourshield or it's origins. Assuming your comment was directed at me.09/18/2014 - 4:28pm
prh99Leigh Alexander is right though, no one has to cater to them (trolls). I think a lot of them would likely continue playing even if scantily clad women were omitted or protagonist was female.09/18/2014 - 4:21pm
Michael ChandraSo no, normal gamers feeling attacked was not what sparked #notyourshield and only a fool would suggest otherwise.09/18/2014 - 4:21pm
Michael Chandra#NotYourShield was kickstarted by 4chan people, so don't go and make nonsense claims about that.09/18/2014 - 4:20pm
prh99those toxic individuals conduct their trolling under. It could have easily been under the Men Rights banner etc, they are just generally unpleasant and angry people who can't stand people disagreeing with them. 09/18/2014 - 4:00pm
prh99The whole gamer identity is the scapegoat some have latched onto in the wake of gamergate. I am sure it will fade, only to be replaced with the next thing, it always is. I am not so sure removal of identity will fix the problem, it's just the banner..09/18/2014 - 3:55pm
E. Zachary KnightAs for the whole "death of gamer" thing, I am personally patiently waiting for the day when being a person who plays games is as much of an identity as a person who reads books, watches tv/movie, listens to music. It will happen.09/18/2014 - 2:42pm
E. Zachary KnightThought I would share this io9 article as a bit of a rebuttal to the earlier Spider-man/Spider-woman comparison: http://io9.com/10-stupid-arguments-people-use-to-defend-comic-book-sex-163638182409/18/2014 - 2:41pm
Papa MidnightKyle Orland's response: http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2014/09/addressing-allegations-of-collusion-among-gaming-journalists/09/18/2014 - 12:41pm
Papa MidnightJames, I say this as a person who has managed a gaming press website before: This article is horrendous sensationalism: http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/09/17/Exposed-the-secret-mailing-list-of-the-gaming-journalism-elite09/18/2014 - 12:41pm
Krono@james I never said you did. I was responding to Andrew's statement that he'd seen a mere two articles suggesting that the term gamer was tainted, by pointing him to a list of the articles that were more or less the orgin of the idea.09/18/2014 - 12:09pm
E. Zachary KnightBut james, you replied to my tweet when I tweeted about one of those articles. That is basically the same thing as writing an editorial on GP in support of it. ;)09/18/2014 - 12:04pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician