So it seems that U.S. Representatives Joe Baca (D-CA) and Frank Wolf (R-VA) are pretty clueless about video games and several other things. The pair introduced a bill a few days ago titled The Video Game Health Labeling Act which wants to apply labels to games similar to those on cigarettes. Knowing how absolutely out of touch the US Government currently is, this unfortunately has a chance at passing.
If it becomes a law, The Video Game Health Labeling Act would state that a game with an ESRB rating of Teen (T) or above would need a label that states:
WARNING: Excessive exposure to violent video games and other violent media has been linked to aggressive behavior
This after research just recently stated that Gaming Makes Us Better People.
In the bill, the Clueless Duo called the ESRB the “Electronics Software Ratings Board” instead of its actual name Entertainment Software Ratings Board.
Rep. Baca said in a quote at Ars Technica:
“The video game industry has a responsibility to parents, families, and to consumers—to inform them of the potentially damaging content that is often found in their products. They have repeatedly failed to live up to this responsibility. Meanwhile, research continues to show a proven link between playing violent games and increased aggression in young people. American families deserve to know the truth about these potentially dangerous products.”
This is obviously just a knee-jerk reaction to some random report that was probably funded by some personal pork barrel from one or the other. There has been no conclusive evidence to link video game violence to actual violence. This seems like it’s a case of backlash for recent events and instead of pointing fingers at inflammatory rhetoric of politicians like Sarah Palin and others they have instead decided to blame something that is most likely not at fault at all.
How does he define that the industry has failed to live up to the responsibility? Games are labeled and it is then the consumer and more importantly, the parents’ responsibility to watch what their children are buying and doing. I agree with the ESRB rating system for the most part and I also believe that children should be protected from certain forms of free speech which include violence, certain situations and language until they are at an age where they can handle it. That of course varies from child to child and that is why it is the responsibility of the parents.
The bill itself is poorly written and so broad that it seems they drew it up in a matter of minutes. Perhaps they were huddled around their overpriced cognacs and in a drunken stupor (most likely funded by the US people or special interest groups) decided that something ought to be done ’bout that video game problem...
HR 400 - Video Game Health Labeling Act
Here’s the text of it:
To require certain warning labels to be placed on videogames that are given certain ratings due to violent content.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION
REGULATION.
(a) REGULATION Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Consumer Product Safety Commission shall promulgate regulations to require the warning label described in subsection (b) to be placed on the packaging of any video game that is rated T (Teen) or higher by the Electronics Software Ratings Board.
(b) WARNING LABEL CONTENT
The warning label required under a regulation issued under subsection (a) shall be placed in a clear and conspicuous location on the packaging of the applicable video game and shall state: ‘‘WARNING: Excessive exposure to violent video games and other violent media has been linked to aggressive behavior.’’.
(c) VIDEO GAME DEFINED
As used in this Act, the term ‘‘video game’’ means any product, whether distributed electronically or through a tangible device, consisting of data, programs, routines, instructions, applications,symbolic languages, or similar electronic information (collectively referred to as ‘‘software’’) that controls the operation of a computer or telecommunication device and that enables a user to interact with a computer controlled virtual environment for entertainment purposes.
You can clearly see they didn’t even bother to cite any sort of report or research and in fact, don’t appear to be very clever in their bill drafting in any way, shape or form. Theoretically, you might include places like Facebook in that definition of a video game if you were savvy enough in the speaking of the legalese. It could also include pretty much the whole Internet in one way or another.
Prev: 
Next: 
