Battle Lines Drawn in Looming US Games Ratings War – Full Report

The first shots in what is shaping up to be an epic court battle have been fired overnight, with the ESRB’s Doug Lowenstein facing up to Hillary Clinton’s seemingly ill-fated Family Entertainment Protection act.

Clinton set out her stall yesterday, outlining five key points of her proposed bill to the US Congress. “I have developed legislation that will empower parents by making sure their kids can’t walk into a store and buy a video game that has graphic, violent and pornographic content”, said Clinton, who acknowledged that games are a legitimate entertainment source and that that adults should have free reign. “This is about protecting children”, she said.

The five points outlined were:



Her partner in the act, Senator Joe Lieberman, replacing the somewhat mauled Jack Thompson, an exclusive interview with whom you can read here, commented, “There is a growing body of evidence that points to a link between violent videos and aggressive behavior in children. We are not interested in censoring videos meant for adult entertainment, but we do want to ensure that these videos are not purchased by minors. Our bill will help accomplish this by imposing fines on those retailers that sell M-rated games to minors.”

The ESRB immediately reacted to the proposal, with Doug Lowenstein - a man whose organisation essentially stands accused of failing in its task - issuing a lengthy statement. Essentially Lowenstein and the ESRB agree with the principle of the movement, though disagree with the proposed implementation of the bill.

Lowenstein said, “We share Senator Clinton’s commitment to effective enforcement of the Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB) ratings by retailers, and we appreciate the fact that she has sought to draft a more thoughtful proposal in this area than most others. However, we strongly oppose the bill. We believe the combination of trustworthy ESRB ratings, parental education, voluntary retail enforcement of ESRB ratings, and, most recently, the major announcement that all next generation video game consoles will include parental control systems, makes Senator Clinton's bill unnecessary. There is now a continuum of tools from the store to the home enabling parents to take charge of the video games their kids play. It is now up to them to do their jobs as they see fit, not up to government to do it for them.”

However, Lowenstein believes that the bill will fall foul of the American constitution. He commented, “While we are gratified that the Senator holds the ESRB in such high regard that her bill would give these ratings the force of law, the courts have made clear that giving a private party governmental powers is unconstitutional. Beyond that, the bill clearly infringes the constitutionally protected creative rights of the video game industry. Thus, if enacted, the bill will be struck down as have similar bills passed in several states. So while this bill is positioned as a pro-family measure, in truth it will leave parents no better off.”

Lowenstein then underlined his and his organisation’s belief that parents are responsible for providing their children with inappropriate material in the first place, so limiting sale to anyone under a certain age would be pointless, calling instead for parents to be educated as to the meaning of the ESRB system, without locking the hands of retailers. “It’s important to remember that just as there are books, movies, and magazines for consumers of all ages, so there is also a variety of video games for a diverse game-playing community, which is why parental involvement in the purchase or rental of games is so important. Thankfully, this is already happening. According to the Federal Trade Commission’s own statistics, parents are involved in the purchase and rental of games over 80 percent of the time. Knowing this, the answer is not more government regulation, but concrete, meaningful actions that would really help parents make the right choices for their families.”

Lowenstein concludes on a conciliatory note: “We will continue our dialogue with Senator Clinton in the hope that we can join together to work on initiatives to raise parental awareness and use of the ESRB ratings Senator Clinton so respects. In so doing, we believe we can really help parents keep inappropriate video games from children in a way that’s legal, sensible, and most importantly, effective.”

However, this is unlikely to sate the appetite of those in the anti-games camp. The industry has been seen as something of a runaway train, setting its own standards without acknowledging or legislating for the advancements in technology, subsequent realism in content, and said content becoming increasingly aimed at an adult audience. Of course, content aimed at adults is a great lure for younger game players.

Clinton’s Family Entertainment Protection act, first revealed in July of this year, is set to go before Congress at an undisclosed point in early 2006. We’ll keep you updated.