There is a good deal of buzz this week surrounding video game-oriented legislation passed overwhelmingly last month by the New York state legislature. New York Gov. David Paterson (left) must decide by July 23rd whether he will sign the bill into law or let it die.

In a story broken by GamePolitics on June 24th, we reported that the NY State Senate passed, by a 61-1 vote, Sen. Andrew Lanza's bill which:

• requires that games carry a rating
• requires games consoles to have parental controls
• establishes a 16-member advisory council on media violence

While the various segments of the video game industry have taken no unified position to date, the Binghampton Press details opposition to the bill from some unusual corners.

Grover Nordquist, head of Americans for Tax Reform, said:

This is a feel-good piece of legislation that really doesn't so anything.

GP: That's certainly true (see: NY Video Game Bill Barks, Doesn't Bite)

Robert Perry of the New York chapter of the ACLU, added:

This bill would have the state regulating constitutionally protected speech. The courts will not permit that.

GP: Since the bill doesn't restrict content or sales based on content, we're assuming that the ACLU's Perry is referring to the requirement that games be labeled with a rating, which they already are on a voluntary basis.

Derek Hunter of the Media Freedom Project said:

The bill is unnecessary. The video-game industry is praised as the best at policing itself. They have a great ratings system.

Adam Thierer, writing for the Tech Liberation Front, calls the bill "unnecessary, unworkable, and unconstitutional" in an open letter to Gov. Paterson.

Meanwhile, Jason Della Rocca, executive director of the International Game Developers Association, has apparently issued an alert to IGDA members based in New York, calling upon them to contact the Guv in opposition to the bill.

The key piece of the puzzle will be whether the ESA decides to challenge the law's constitutionality. The game publishers' trade group, busy with E3 this week, has not said what it plans to do in that regard. Their most likely response will be to wait and see whether the Governor signs the bill into law. In the meantime they have urged VGVN members to write the Governor in opposition.

Comments made by the Entertainment Merchants Association, however, give the impression that video game retailers believe they can live with the law's provisions:

The bill is unnecessary and seeks to solve a problem that does not exist. But we do not anticipate that video game software retailers will have a problem complying with its requirements. (It is important to note that NY law already requires DVD packages to display the rating of the movie.)

A lawmaker in the Philippines has introduced a bill designed to prevent minors from puchasing violent video games.

As reported by the Asian Journal, the measure proposed by Rep. Narciso Santiago (left) could imprison retailers for up to one year for selling mature-themed games to underage buyers.

Santiago cited studies showing increased aggressiveness following violent game play. The lawmaker commented:

[The state has] compelling interests to prevent violent, aggressive, asocial behavior [and] prevent psychological harm to minors who play violent video games, and prevent physical harm to the victims of violent minors, including other minors....  It is also the responsibility of the state to eliminate any societal factors that may inhibit the psychological and neurological development of the youth and facilitate the health development of the youth  into well-meaning productive adults.

GP: Our old pal Jack Thompson wrote in a comment to another story that Santiago's bill is patterned after his 2006 legislation from Louisiana. That bill failed miserably under US constitutional law, but made for good theater, nonetheless (see: The Circus Comes to Louisiana)...

In a commentary for WorldNetDaily, singer Pat Boone frets that video games are part of a social upheaval which will cost America its very soul:

[While the presidential race takes place], there's another campaign in full swing, one perhaps even more crucial, one that will certainly determine the future of our country. One that will determine the direction and morality of our young. One that quite possibly will cost America its soul.

 

It's the campaign, in the world of entertainment to absolutely throw off every restraint, abandon every moral guideline, exploit every taboo and be free to portray and present anything human beings are capable of. In prime time and full color and without any regard for the sensibilities of parents or ministers or censors, or anybody else. On TV, in movies, in music even and especially in video games.

 

Target? Our young, virtually every age from grade school through college. The next generation – our future.

It seems that Boone serves on the board of watchdog group the Parents Television Council, a frequent critic of video game content. And while he singles out video games as especially worrisome, he mentions nary a one in his column, focusing instead on TV shows like Gossip Girl, Nip/Tuck and Sex and the City.

The good news is that Boone has a suggestion. If modern media content troubles you, just wind the clock back, oh, 70 years or so and listen to old radio shows:

Many adults, fed up completely... are doing the logical thing: tuning out and turning off. My friends Ed and Jean Lubin, whose three kids are mostly grown and on their own now, just told me they're spending their evenings out on their patio listening to old radio shows! Classic shows like "The Green Hornet," "The Lone Ranger," "Fibber McGee and Molly," "Abbot and Costello," "Jack Benny," dramatic and comedic and music shows from a time when entertainment was just that – entertainment...

GP: Gosh, he hardly sounds out of touch at all.

What's really ironic is that on the album pictured here, Boone sings lounge lizard arrangements of tunes like Alice Cooper's No More Mr. Nice Guy. Now, when Boone still actually had something of a career in the mid-70's, Alice Cooper was regarded by the mainstream much as Marilyn Manson is today.

Watchdog group the Parents Television Council has issued a "entertainment alert" condemning Grand Theft Auto IV as well as the CBS TV series Swingtown.

PTC president Tim Winter narrates:

Unfortunately, sex and violence often go together in today's media environment. That's especially true for many of the violent video games that are now flooding the marketplace. Topping them all for worst content is Grand Theft Auto. 

 

In the latest edition of, the player is a thug who gets points for having sex with prostitutes, running over pedestrians and even shooting police officers. And our research shows that many chidlren are able to buy this adult-rated video game far too easily. That's because the retailers don't have any consequenced for abiding by their own rules. We're asking major retailers to not carry this sick game at all...

 

You can also write Congress to ask them to pass the Video Games Rating Enforcement Act which will give teeth to the current ratings system.

Via: GameArgus

GP: Thanks to Matt Paprocki for the heads-up!

According to the BBC, Oasis guitarist Noel Gallagher (left) has suggested that violent video games may play a role in Britain's wave of knife crimes.

Speaking at awards ceremony in London, Gallagher said:

[It's a] pity scumbags are taking over our streets. In my day, status was trying to be somebody, do you know what I mean, not trying to kill somebody?

 

I was up in Liverpool for a week a couple of weeks ago and even on the news there [knife crime is] every single night. I don't even know what [Conservative Leader David] Cameron or [Prime Minister] Gordon Brown are going to do about it...

 

People say it's through violent video games and I guess that's got something to do with it. If kids are sitting up all night smoking super skunk [cannabis] and they come so desensitised to crime because they're playing these video games, it's really, really scary.

When violent video game controveries flare, it's often said that critics are unintentionally increasing traffic to the game in question.

Such appears to be the case with The Torture Game 2.

The amateur, online game has been attracting no small amout of attention lately, including a parental alert from watchdog group the Parents Television Council.

The free game is available at online gaming portals Newgrounds and Kongregate.

But a message posted by Newgrounds guru Tom Fulp documents that the controversy is actually bringing many new players to the game:

The latest controversy has been surrounding The Torture Game 2, a fun little ragdoll physics engine that lets you do all sorts of horrible things to a lifeless dummy. Sensible Erection put together a gallery of all the fancy artwork you can create with TG2... at which point Derek Yu made a post about it on TIGSource and a whole debate erupted.

 

MSNBC picked up on the TIGSource debate and posted their own article about the game, but the real fun came when FOX News weighed in with a Fair & Balanced video, expressing their disgust while showing real-time footage of the person being tortured. Hey! At least we slapped a MATURE rating on the game and made you click a link to view it... Fox just dumped it into every living room in America!

 

As a result of their efforts, many more people are now enjoying The Torture Game 2.

 The Fox News video mentioned by Fulp appears at left.

Dr. David Walsh, president of the National Institute on Media and the Family, is the subject of an  interview in the July issue of Game Informer.

The politically-connected Walsh, whose organization delivers its Annual Video Game Report Card each holiday season, is described by the magazine as "one of gaming's most thoughtful and reasoned critics." He dishes on a number of topics, including:

• ESRB ratings (watchdog-ish, cautiously supportive)
• his criticism of the Grand Theft Childhood book (disagrees with its premise)
• his thoughts on video game legislation (opposes censorship)
• Jack Thompson (publicly distanced himself from Thompson)

Regarding legislation, Walsh told GI:

I'm not in favor of censorship. Once we delegate to the government what we can and can't say and freedom of expression - and video games are a form of expression - that's a very slippery slope. I think government can have a role. I think the role they've been playing is the "bully pulpit" to raise awareness.

As to Thompson, Walsh said:

Extreme positions create a lot of heat but very little light. Television and talk radio love extreme positions. So there are folks out there who do not hesitate to take positions that they can't defend. You get the these food fights going on that talk radio loves, but don't really advance our knowledge and understanding whatsoever. It got to the point where I had to publlcily distance myself from Jack Thompson. 

Distance himself, indeed.

The high-profile split with Thompson came in October, 2005. The story was broken by GamePolitics, and set Internet tongues wagging for days. Read Walsh's letter breaking ties with Thompson here.

Last week GamePolitics reported on the controversy surrounding The Torture Game 2, an amateur online offering in which players inflict injury upon a defenseless human-like figure.

One News Now reports that media watchdog group the Parents Television Council has issued an alert to parents about the game. The site quotes PTC exec Gavin McKiernan:

The Internet can be a great resource for kids...  [But] parents need to be aware that there's [sic] so many negative things they can be doing – from chat rooms, where they expose themselves to sexual predators, to violent and depraved games and so-called entertainment like this.

 

 ...any kid who's sitting around playing the Torture Game or whose parents are allowing him to play Grand Theft Auto at home, is opening themselves up to a lot of potential negative repercussions that they may not realize for years.

While Lawrence Kutner and Cheryl Olson's recent book Grand Theft Childhood has given cheer to video gamers (and the video game industry), a longtime media violence researcher strongly disagrees with the authors' conclusion that violent games aren't all that bad for younger players.

In an op-ed for the Detroit Free Press, University of Michigan professor Brad Bushman writes:

Kutner and Olson’s advice to parents is particulary puzzling since their own data suggest that such games are linked to aggressive behavior... Although laboratory experiments can be used to establish cause-effect relationships, they quickly dismiss most lab studies as artificial and invalid.

 

I strongly disagree. Consider a laboratory experiment I recently conducted... Boys about 14 years old were randomly assigned to play a violent or nonviolent video game for 20 minutes... Next, they completed a noise blast task, with the winner blasting the loser with a noise...

 

The boys were told that inflicting higher noise levels could cause “permanent hearing damage” to their partners... These boys were even willing to give another boy noise levels loud enough to cause permanent hearing damage...

 

Violent video games are not the only risk factor for aggression, or even the most important factor, but they are definitely not a trivial factor...

Bushman was among the authors of the American Psychological Association's 2005 resolution which held that there is an increase in aggression following violent video game play. Bushman also participated in a 2007 study which found correlation between violent Biblical passages and aggression. He is also one of controversial Miami attorney Jack Thompson's expert witnesses in an Alabama lawsuit alleging that an 18-year-old's murder of two police officers and a dispatcher was motivated by playing Grand Theft Auto.

Last week, GamePolitics was the first game-oriented site to report on a New Haven Advocate story detailing Connecticut State Senator Gayle Slossberg's controversial remarks about Grand Theft Auto IV.

The newspaper reported that Sen. Slossberg, a Democrat, was concerned about a possible rape scene in the game and was considering introducing game-oriented legislation in the upcoming session.

The following day, however, Slossberg issued a statement to the effect that her comments were "misrepresented" by the Advocate. 

Despite the Senator's protestations, the paper is standing by its story. Following an inquiry by GamePolitics, we received the Advocate's statement a short time ago:

The Advocate defends its reporting on this story. Sen. Slossberg was clearly speaking about stricter video game labeling in her capacity as a lawmaker, rather than as a mother or a private citizen. Also, our story said nothing about the senator wanting to restrict video game content, only video game labeling.

 

While we are sympathetic to the senator's concerns, there is no privacy protection for public speech. It is misguided to assume a conversation between an influential state senator and a reporter, or reporters, occurring in a public place, is off-the-record. The Advocate is happy to talk on background, if it's requested. In this case, it was not.

On Wedneday GamePolitics reported on comments attributed to Connecticut State Senator Gayle Slossberg (D) regarding an alleged rape scene in Grand Theft Auto IV.

No such sequence exists, however.

PSXextreme now has Sen. Slossberg's response to the furor created by the earlier report, which appeared in the New Haven Advocate. Slossberg's statement reads:

The article in the New Haven Advocate misrepresented my off-the-record-comments during an informal conversation about parenting. I was in no way announcing a legislative proposal, announcing intent to introduce legislation or taking a public position on restricting the content of video games.

GP: It's unclear what Sen. Slossberg means when she says that the Advocate "misrepresented" her remarks. Her insistence that her comments were "off-the-record" would seem to indicate that she may have indeed made the remarks, but did not anticipate that they would be reported. We can't help but notice that the Senator has not issued a denial of what the Advocate reported.

GamePolitics has requested comment on the issue from the Advocate. We will report that when it is received.

The Lyndon LaRouche organization has thoughtfully collected all of its wacky attacks on video games on a single page.

The chronology dates back to 1996 and contains some real classics. Here is a sampling:

May14, 1999: EIR publishes an article by Anton Chaitkin and Jeffrey Steinberg, “Unnatural Born Killers: Video Brain-washing and Littleton,” accompanied by an interview with Colonel Grossman, “Video Games Teach Children To Kill.”

July 2, 1999: EIR cover story leads with Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr., “Star Wars and Littleton,” in which he emphasizes that “this murderous rampage will persist . . . whether or not the producers and distributors of cult-films and Nintendo-style video games intend that specific effect.”

Feb. 20, 2000: Helga Zepp-LaRouche gives a speech on “The Mark of the Beast: American’s Children Are in Mortal Danger...” She reviews the influence of Pokemon and Anime videos, as well as violent movies, on young minds, pre-teen as well as teen.

April 8, 2000: At a town meeting in New York City, Lyndon LaRouche urges the formation of a National Commission Against the “NewViolence.” (GP: LaRouche was running for president at the time)

Oct. 2, 2006: An adult gunman kills five girls and himself at an Amish school in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania.

April 16, 2007: Mass killing at Virginia Tech. Cho Seung-Hui, a student and violent-video-game afficionado, kills 32 people, before taking his own life.

As GamePolitics has reported, LaRouche representatives repeatedly testified before the Virginia Tech review panel in an attempt to push the video game theory (see: VA Tech Panel Witness: Violent Games Should Be Banned Like Heroin).

As far as the 2006 Lancaster schoolhouse massacre, this is the first time that a video game linkage has even been suggested, as far as we know.

Connecticut State Senator Gayle Slossberg (D) is eager to do something about the rape scene in Grand Theft Auto IV, she told the New Haven Advocate.

But she faces a major hurdle: There is no rape scene in the controversial game.

From the newspaper story:

[Sen. Slossberg] wants confirmation of the rumored rape scene in Grand Theft Auto IV—but she can't reach that level of the game. The Milford state senator's never played GTA, but she fears it's corrupting the youth and thinks a law requiring better warning labels might be the fix. She told the Nose as much at a Capitol press conference last week...

 

Slossberg hints she'll... introduce legislation next session calling for clearer labeling of depraved video games like Grand Theft Auto...  Slossberg's a bit unsure of how the warning labels might read: "I mean what would it say? 'This game will make you a sociopath'?"

Moments ago the New York State Senate voted 61-1 to approve a bill proposed by Sen. Andrew Lanza, a Republican from Staten Island.

Sen. Lanza is seen arguing for passage in the photo at left. Sen. Thomas Duane (D) of New York City cast the lone dissenting vote.

The video game bill mirrors that passed yesterday by the State Assembly, a Lanza staffer told GamePolitics that the measure will now go to Gov. David Paterson for consideration. If Paterson signs the bill, it will become law in 2010.

Prior to that, however, the video game industry is likely to sue, arguing that the measure is unconstitutional.

UPDATE: We've got an mp3 of Sen. Lanza's final three minutes of argument in favor of the bill. Here's an excerpt:

If you look closely at this bill, [concerns expressed by Sen. Duane] are not valid. Let's start with speech. There's all kinds of speech. If we take an old-fashioned pinball machine and plunked it down here in the middle of the chamber, no one would call it speech. But when we put that up on a video screen, it does become speech and I acknowledge that. And it deserves protection under the Constitution... There is some confusion with respect to what this bill actually accomplishes... The word prohibition was talked about. I want to be clear. This bill does not prohibit the sale of any video to anyone...

 

This simply says that every video game sold in the state of New York simply should have a rating consistent with what the ESRB does presently in a voluntary way... it does work. But the problem with "voluntary" is that tomorrow someone can change their mind. Someone could decide tomorrow to no longer place ratings on these games. So this is not about prohibiting the sale, this is simply about providing information to parents...

 

Last year's version... that included a provision that would have made it an E-felony to sell these games, we all thought it was wrong. And we took that out. We worked with the [video game] industry. We worked with the Assembly and we do have an agreement here on a piece of legislation that I think will go a long way in allowing parents to make good decisions in regard to what is and what isn't appropriate for their chidlren...

The New York State Assembly unanimously passed a video game bill yesterday. A similar measure is now under consideration in the State Senate.

A11717 was proposed by Assemblyman Joseph Lentol (left), a Brooklyn Democrat. If signed into law it would require new console systems to be equipped with parental controls, would create a 16-member governmental advisory council and would mandate that ESRB ratings be displayed on game packaging.

The proposed advisory council would examine the potential impact of violent media, make recommendations regarding the ESRB rating system, and establish "a parent-teacher violence awareness program to identify and appropriately assist students who  may  have  a  propensity toward violence."

The Senate version is sponsored by Republican Andrew Lanza. Given that the New York legislative calendar wraps up at the close of business today, it's likely that the Senate will pass the bill. If not, it may be revived in a special session.

Should the Senate bill join the Assembly version in passage, the measure will then proceed to New York Gov. David Paterson (D). If the Guv signs the bill into law, it is scheduled to go into effect on September 1, 2010. Of course, if the Governor signs the bill, there is little doubt that the video game industry will file a federal lawsuit to block the law from taking effect on constitutional grounds.

GamePolitics readers may recall that New York seemed destined to adopt a video game law in 2007 but the measure was ultimately derailed by bitter political infighting between then-Gov. Eliot Spitzer and Senate Republicans.

The ESA, which represents the interests of US video game publishers, has urged New York-based members of its Video Game Voters Network to contact their elected officials in opposition to the bill.

MCV reports that London Mayor Boris Johnson has mentioned violent video games in relation to a wave of knife crime plaguing Great Britain.

Former Parliamentarian Johnson, never a friend to video games, has previously linked games to illiteracy. In his latest rant, Johnson writes:

We must show young people that knives are not cool, and for that we need positive role models. I want to counteract the damaging influences drug-addled celebrities and violent video games and the lure of the life in the gang by providing opportunities.
 

The National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children has become the latest group to call out Grand Theft Auto IV over the game's edgy content.

As reported by The Telegraph, the NSPCC charges that the game trivializes pedophilia via an in-game spoof of an underage site.

While playing GTA IV, players can enter Internet cafes and access parody websites. One of these, www.littlelacysurprisepageant.com triggers a message from the Liberty City Police Department and automatically elevates theplayer's "wanted level" to five stars. The high wanted level triggers a massive police search for the player's character (see video). In real life the URL forwards to Rockstar Game's official GTA IV site.

The NSPCC's Zoe Hilton told The Telegraph:

It is disturbing that it is meant to be funny and that it is glamorising something that is actually really shocking and upsetting. I just think it is in very poor taste and they should withdraw it.

GP: While we commend the many good works of the NSPCC, this seems like a non-issue. The spoof website is part of GTA IV's parody of the online environment, which also includes such faux elements search engines, scams and dating services. Moreover, there's no underage content to be accessed and the high-level police alert triggered by visiting the site makes it an annoyance more than anything else.

While a small Oklahoma town reels from the senseless murder of two young girls, a columnist for the Wichita Falls Times Record News, has alluded to a video game connection.

While Deanna Watson never explicitly blames violent games, today's column is laden with suggestions that the killer or killers were gamers:

To some horrible creature... Taylor Paschal-Placker and Skyla Whitaker were nothing more than target practice. The two young girls... were gunned down as if they were images in a video game...

 

The gunman, or gunmen, never even needed to get out of the vehicle... They never even needed to come to a complete stop.

 

You get extra points for that, right?

 

...I wonder just how this despicable person -- or persons -- received such training. Could it have been with a video game controller? Granted, not every gamer who plays “Grand Theft Auto” goes on to commit murder...

 

Perfectly sane and humane individuals can entertain themselves with... games where one can take on the role of an antagonist and assassin, rise through the ranks through bank robberies and pimping. Voyaging through the criminal underworld could be quite fun to someone who would never, not in a million years, commit such a crime.

 

It’s a game.

 

Could driving up on Taylor and Skyla been the next level of an absurd game?

 

In less than 30 minutes — Game Over.

 

...What we can suspect, though, is the indifference it takes to end these girls’ lives. Indifference that could be the result of hitting the “Quit” button one too many times.

Meanwhile, CBS News reports that police are pursuing several lines of inquiry in the slaying:

Several motives have been explored, including a random thrill killing, attempted abduction, a case of mistaken identity and the possibility that the girls happened upon a crime in progress... it is suspected that a local person was involved because the killings occurred in such an isolated area.

 

CBS has also reported that police are seeking a man of roughly 35 years as a "person of interest" in the case.

As GamePolitics has previously reported, Rep. Jim Matheson (D-UT) is co-sponsor of HR 5990, the Video Games Rating Enforcement Act.

The measure, currently before Congress, would require game retailers to check the ID of M-rated game buyers.

In today's Salt Lake Tribune, a letter written by an apparent constituent refers to the Congressman as "Silent Jim" and mocks the introduction of the video game bill:

My biggest disappointment in this campaign cycle has been the silence of Jim Matheson. His silence is curious and maddening, especially given the bold results of how his district voted for Barack Obama in the primary. Even if he had supported Hillary, at least it's a stand. 

 

How is Matheson going to have any respect in the Democratic caucus if he continues to act in this way? Oh, I know - maybe he should sponsor a frivolous and unconstitutional video game bill like H.R.5990. That should do it... 
   
 

Reports in The Times and Guardian newspapers suggest that longtime video game violence critic Keith Vaz (left)was offered a knighthood by Prime Minister Gordon Brown in return for securing the votes of two Muslim MP's for an anti-terrorism measure.

Video game site MCV reports:

Vaz, MP for Leicester East , has ‘strongly denied’ the rumour. Mr. Brown’s proposals to extend the maximum time that police can hold terrorist suspects from 28 to 42 days were approved by MPs by a margin of 315 votes to 306.