Running Head: JUSTIN_WEESE_ASSIGNMENT 3
Assignment 3 – Final
No Censorship for Video Games
Justin Weese
COSC 460
10/22/12
1
JUSTIN WEESE_ASSIGNMENT 3
2
No Censorship for Video Games
Introduction
Occasionally video game developers in the produce titles that involve questionable
violence or sexual content, leading to government outcry and intervention in the United States’
otherwise free market. Specifically, the government employs measures that bar video game sales
to safeguard children from exposure to video games with purported objectionable content.
Ironically, government action upon video game sales damages individuals in society, where
censorship restricts and ignores key principles for the overall benefit of the people: First, forced
regulation violates the freedoms of many citizens granted in the First Amendment. Second,
exposure to violence and objectionable content is necessary and inevitable. Finally, censorship
systematically disregards informative tools of the video game market, designed to teach the
unsure or concerned. In tandem, the government creates future generations restricted in both
freedoms and expression.
Freedoms Violated
If the United States government imposes a censorship on video game sales, they are
blatantly ignoring their citizens’ freedom of speech granted by the Constitution. As defined by
the First Amendment, “congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech,”
(FindLaw, 2012). Government officials, however, are not deterred from proposing, and passing,
censorship laws that impact the video game market -- the game developer’s voice. As an
example, Governor Rod Blagojevich signed the Violent Video Games Law, reasoning that
children should not be exposed to violent content; “that all may be OK if you’re a mature adult
or a soldier training to fight, but is it necessary for a 10-year-old child” (Calvert & Richards,
JUSTIN WEESE_ASSIGNMENT 3
3
2004-6, p. 91)? Likewise, the Sexually Explicit Video Games Law was designed to block games
that featured “sexual contact” or “lewd exhibition” (O’Holleran, 2000, p.596). Though signed in
2005, the laws were revoked in four months. This was because video game developers were
forcibly stripped of their expression, especially when it pertained to serious issues in the world.
For reference, Call of Duty Modern Warfare 3 (2011-2) featured a highly controversial scene
featuring a firsthand account of an innocent family dying from terrorists’ actions (Activision,
2011-2; Liebl, 2011). This is an obvious statement of terrorism’s horrors by the developers of
Modern Warfare 3 (2011-2) as clearly, the scene was designed into the game (Activision, 20112). For the government to deny this meaningful expression limits the view of the minors denied
access to this game; rather it is best to expose a child to real-world issues before they occur.
Exposure is Necessary
Exposure to danger, violence, or societal evils is imperative for preparing a child to
withstand the trials of real life -- inevitable at best -- despite the attempts of censorship. As an
example, “violence,” as stated by Judge Richard Posner, “has always been and remains a central
interest of humankind… to shield children right up to the age of 18…would leave them
unequipped to cope with the world as we know it (Calvert & Richards, 2004-6, p. 94).” If a
violent video game, in this case, was presented to a minor, they are then able to identify the
existence of violence, and formulate an opinion on violence in real world applications. It is then
a disservice to the youth of the United States if video games are subject to legislative restrictions,
as people have less capacity to understand, and impact, the world around them in debates, action,
and morals. It is also a disservice to say that the government can effectively block violence and
graphic content in entirety.
JUSTIN WEESE_ASSIGNMENT 3
4
If a child, for example, could not access censored games , other media outlets are close at
hand; television showcases series of numerous police investigation shows, such as CSI: Crime
Scene Investigation (2012), including the high prevalence of crime so often expressed in daily
news stories (CBS, 2012). It is impossible to ignore the Internet’s pervasion, too; though
deliberate use of a search engine or by accident, a child may easily find content similar to what
was originally denied by an imposed censorship – or worse, such as pornography.
Regarding such content as pornography, some may question that by prohibiting
censorship upon the entertainment market, any media is permitted to openly display rape and
pornographic content. Moreover, one may argue that the parent or child does not wish to see
such material on their video games. Pertaining to television and the Internet, “every state has
some regulation of pornographic and obscene material as it relates to children”, serving as active
and voluntary filters for undesired material (O’Holleran, 2010, p.594). This is the same for video
games -- many systems are well-established to inform the concerned public on the content within
video games, which is far more effective than forced government regulation.
Disregard of Informative Tools
Through censorship, the industry’s informative practices are blatantly ignored by
government officials vowing for such legislation, where the practices are, rather, to help the
video game developers and consumers in market decisions. The practices themselves are the
result of the Entertainment Software Rating Board, or ESRB; the ESRB rates video games based
on contained subject matter, ranging from “EC” - games suitable for players three years old, up
to “M” and “AO”, recommended for 17-year-olds and adults only, respectively (Byrd, 2007-8,
p.419). In addition, the ESRB, after evaluating a game, places an irremovable label that describes
JUSTIN WEESE_ASSIGNMENT 3
5
and rates the contained content. While ESRB is voluntary for developers, this is no cause for
concern -- using this information, video game console developers, including Sony and Microsoft,
will not sell or house extreme or obscene AO-rated games on their game systems. As a result, an
AO-rated video game developer cannot sell a game in major market -- eliminating the
appearance of any extreme video game wishing to display heinous material en masse in the
United States. To this end, the industry filter out extreme content to acceptable levels , as “this
limits the sexual content to corresponding with that in R-rated films” (O'Holleran, 2010, p.595).
Nevertheless, parents may still decry that games with any form of violent or graphic
content still remains accessible to minors. However, these parents can look deeper into the First
Amendment to find the response; the Amendment also grants that individuals can exercise the
freedom of speech and expression, and not simply to prohibit the government from doing so
(FindLaw, 2012). If a parent or child does not desire a game, based on the given ESRB rating,
then they do not have to buy the game. Conversely, any parent or child who does desire a video
game can, based on the rating, fully understand the internal content and makes an effective
purchasing decision. However, willing parents or children cannot enjoy or react to otherwise
violent or graphic content expressed for legitimately viable causes in video games when
censorship is imposed. In this regard, censorship profoundly affects all citizens in the video game
market.
Conclusion
Based on the prior observations, it is imperative that the government does not infringe on
the necessity of violent and graphic content in video games. Children must understand the issues
of war, terrorism, and sexual indecency, for their own good; they cannot experience these issues
JUSTIN WEESE_ASSIGNMENT 3
6
before they occur in reality, and they are unable to rationalize what is on television or the
Internet. Regarding those other forms of media, surely the government would restrict other
media to “protect the children” if allowed to block the video game market so restrictively; at that
point, the United States is raising unprepared children. In response, the video game industry is
best left alone –freedom of expression and choice is sufficient to addressing any concerns in
video games.
JUSTIN WEESE_ASSIGNMENT 3
7
References
Activision Publishing Incorporated. (2011-2012). Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3. Retrieved
October 22, 2012, from http://www.callofduty.com/mw3
Byrd, P. R. (2007-2008). It's all fun and games until someone gets hurt: The effectiveness of
proposed video-game legislation of reducing violence in children. Houston Law Review,
44(1), 401-432. Retrieved October 8, 2012, from http://www.heinonline.org.proxyub.researchport.umd.edu/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/hulr44&div=19&collection=jo
urnals&set_as_cursor=0&men_tab=srchresults&terms=video|game|censorship&type=mat
chall#406
CBS. (2012). CSI: Crime Scene Investigation. CBS.
Clavert, C., & Richards, R. D. (2004-2006). Precedent be damned - it's all about good politics &
sensational soundbites: The video game censorship saga of 2005. Texas Review of
Entertainment & Sports Law, 79-155. Retrieved October 8, 2012, from
http://www.heinonline.org.proxyub.researchport.umd.edu/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/tresl6&div=6&collection=jour
nals&set_as_cursor=1&men_tab=srchresults&terms=video|game|censorship&type=matc
hall#81
FindLaw. (2012). First Amendment freedom of speech, religion and expression - U.S.
Constitution - FindLaw. Retrieved October 7, 2012, from Findlaw - For legal
professionals: http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment01/
JUSTIN WEESE_ASSIGNMENT 3
8
Liebl, M. (2011, November 7). Modern Warfare 3 "London Scene" isn't controversial, it's
realistic. Retrieved from Game Zone: http://www.gamezone.com/products/call-of-dutymodern-warfare-3/originals/modern-warfare-3-london-scene-isn-t-controversial-it-srealistic
O'Holleran, J. (2010). Blood code: The history and future of video game censorship. Journal on
Telecommunications and High Technology Law, 571-612. Retrieved October 8, 2012,
from http://www.heinonline.org.proxyub.researchport.umd.edu/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/jtelhtel8&div=23&collection=
journals&set_as_cursor=6&men_tab=srchresults&terms=video|game|censorship&type=
matchall#575