Regulating Video Games
Darwin points me to this documentary trailer.
The best line? At the very end one of the experts says ‘we can’t fathom what video games will be like in 40 years’ as a way of warning the viewer of the potential hazard of violent videogames and why they need to be regluated today. If you ask me the fact that we can’t fathom their impact is the reason to leave them alone instead of regulating them. My default setting is not to regulate that which you can’t predict, but in fact to only regulate when there is good reason to believe an undesirable set of events will actually occur. Even then I’m quite skeptical of the regulation and would like to look at it first.
The trailer also shows an expert talking about the dangers of exposing children to violent video games. The children argument is prevalent in political rhetoric because its one of the most effective ways to get around the libertarian counter argument of regulation. The counter argument focuses on the notion that regulation will stop a citizen from being able to live their life in the way they see fit. The underlying principle is that citizens should be allowed to live in a fashion of their choosing regardless of how others may feel about their lifestyle. Only in cases were a citizen’s choice directly and involuntarily harms others does the libertarian argument yield to regulation.
Thus, to respond to the libertarian counter argument those supporting the regulation must employ an argument that shows how the law attempts to regulate something that involuntarily affects a group of people in a harmful way. Often times, supporters of regulation will use children as a group that has involuntary harm done to them. Since children are not considered an autonomous group capable of free choice, supporters of regulation will argue they are involuntarily harmed by the activity they wish to regulate, even when it seems children choose to engage in that activity. Such regulation will often times regulate adult’s choices, which in a lot of ways is the original intent of the law, but is not politically viable because of its violation of the fundamental libertarian principle that people should not be allowed to regulate lifestyle choices of others.
As a side note, disease is being used more and more as another way of getting around the fundamental libertarian argument. Those with a disease are no longer voluntarily doing those things that others find distasteful. Thus, government intervention is justified.
January 6th, 2007 at 8:44 am
I am not sure if you fully understand how impressionable children are. They are like sponges. What they see is what they do. We must protect - becuase if the government doesnt - who will.
January 7th, 2007 at 10:23 am
parents
January 7th, 2007 at 10:25 am
my favorite line is the one where leiberman says, you should adopt a video game rating system of your own free will, because if you don’t we’ll make one for you. Sounds a lot like a terrorist saying, convert willingly or we’ll force you to convert. Doh.
January 8th, 2007 at 6:05 am
The thing about that line is that it’s worked for them in the past. The comic book industry adopted the Comic Code under threat of government regulation, self-scensoring themselves into squeaky-clean boring-ass shit, and ultimately came close to going out of business before dropping the code. I THINK (not sure) that all of the ratings and warning stickers and etc. on music are also industry-generated under a similar threat.
Hell, I’m pretty sure the ESRB ratings that games already have are industry-generated; I’m not sure how much more you can ask for from the companies themselves.
January 8th, 2007 at 6:24 am
Darwin,
Just curious, you support such measures as a means to insure that consumers have maximal amount of information before deciding to purchase comic, music, and video games?
January 8th, 2007 at 6:53 am
I’d say I’m alright with a ratings system as long as it doesn’t lead to actual censorhsip (and actually, I don’t think it does; addind the line ‘for mature readers only’ to comic books had led to a giant resurgence in intelligent, adult-marketed comics).
On the other hand, I’d prefer that the system be industry driven rather than regulated; it may seem hypocritical since I’m ok with mandated calorie counts in restaraunts, but we have actual proof that overeating causes health problems, and no real prrof I’m aware of that being exposed to sex/violence in entertainment actually has any dangerous effects on anyone. If we had that data and it was as strong as data for overeating or smoking or whatever, then I’d feel bettter about government mandating the rating system.
January 8th, 2007 at 9:32 am
I presume you would be willing to burden the cost that such regulation would incur on the cost of the commodity. At what point do you draw the line for paying additional costs for protecting some groups of people from the product you wish to purchase?
Why do you prefer industry driven standards as opposed to government driven standards? Its unclear how there is a difference here or more to the point the only difference I can see would undermine many of your other arguments.
How do you feel about retail places ignoring industry ranking and selling to minors products ranked for adults?
While I doubt the studies have been done, I’m willing to bet good money that science would show that rock climbing can be harmful. Do you support federally mandated warnings about the perils of rock climbing. Do you support federally mandating all activities that science might prove harmful? Are you willing to burden the cost for all of that additional bureaucracy at the retail, industry, and government levels?
January 8th, 2007 at 10:08 am
i’d have to say that there is no difference between industry driven standards and government standards in this case. For the comic book industry, where sales were helped by the creation of a labeling system, then obviously they weren’t coerced into labeling their products. On the other hand, the gaming industry they were definitely coerced. watch the video and listen to the first thing leiberman says. The gaming industry was threatened into adopting their own ratings. Because they were forced to adopt a system, that isn’t really any different from the government stepping in and creating a system for them.