Keith Vaz Wants Parents to be More Responsible; Doesn’t Know What Games His Kid Play
By John Kershaw on Monday, November 16th 2009
The radio program Debate is Free this week put its focus on videogames. To address the hotness that is Modern Warfare 2‘s controversy the show invited Activision to send forward a spokesperson to defend their game, but as they don’t really care they declined. Instead we got an interview with Tom Watson, chairman of TIGA, and Keith Vaz, a strongly anti-games UK MP once described by Jack Thompson as “deceptive [and] unreliable” and a “political opportunist”.
Watson does a grand job of defending gaming by simply pointing out everything that we, as players of videogames, already know. Where we get to hear something less sensible is with the interview with Vaz. Though, to his credit he starts with a similar argument as Thompson and one I agree with: we should be concerned with under-age kids getting games unsuitable for them.
He then stresses that he is so interested in “Modern Warfare: Call of Duty” (tee hee, he got the name wrong) because of its violence. He says that the government needs to make people more aware of what’s in the games and that retailers and manufacturers need to know they have a responsibility. The latter point not being the responsibility to enforce the age ratings, but to make suitable games. He condemns the No Russians mission, giving it no context, then quotes the Byron Report claiming that research shows that “young people more susceptible to a predisposition to violence look at these games [and] may well act in that way”.
When questioned if it’s actually parents not fulfilling their responsibilities that’s the problem he re-iterated that it’s a combination of parents, the government and the people who make the games that need to sort this out. He then amusingly states that he has a 14 year old child and doesn’t know what games they play.
Then we get the idiocy.
Have you looked at the packaging of an 18 [videogame]? [The age rating] is a tiny bit. It’s a 10p coin. What it should be is the same as cigarettes: It should be splashed across the front. “This has the potential to damage your health”
Still, he does continue to re-iterate that the responsibility belongs to all of us, which I think is something I could get behind.
Via: gamesindustry.biz
YouTube
iTunes
Tumblr
Friend Feed
10p coin? Really? Wow.
His argument doesn’t hold up though. I mean, he doesn’t have a problem with DVD certificates, and seeing as they’re all red and imposing sometimes I’ll look at the rating before the title.
I like the bit about the studies: “research shows that ‘young people more susceptible to a predisposition to violence look at these games [and] may well act in that way’.”
He just said that violent people choose violent games, therefore video games that include violence are evil. I hate it when people make this mistake. He has decided that the effect is the cause and the cause is the effect because it strengthens his position.
I think Vaz is ignorant of the issues rather than against videogames on prinicple. A lot of MPs rely on reports and studies to form their policies and I think that he has been given misinformation. That doesn’t excuse him though, as it’s his job as an MP to research and study issues.
Although what is really worrying is his lack of concern over censorship. He’d rather focus on banning violence in games, rather than sorting out ways to protect children – which is actually a valid cause. Also his alignment with the tabloids such as the Mail is irritating. Seems to me like Vaz is using videogames as a ‘hardline’ policy to appeal to the middle-class voters who might otherwise see Labour and himself as weak when compared to the Tory opposition.
Oh common, stop blaming the games. How about start busting out drug syndicates out there rather than virtual stuffs?