Switch Lights

The lights are on

Proposed Bill Would Add Warning Labels To Games

A proposed bill would require most video games to carry a warning label that says, “WARNING: Exposure to violent video games has been linked to aggressive behavior.”

The Violence in Video Games Labeling Act was introduced Monday by Joe Baca (D-Calif.) and Frank Wolf (R-Va.) in response to what the group claims is increasing evidence that playing violent games can be bad for your health.

"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," Baca said, as reported by The Hill. "They have repeatedly failed to live up to this responsibility.

"Just as we warn smokers of the health consequences of tobacco, we should warn parents — and children — about the growing scientific evidence demonstrating a relationship between violent video games and violent behavior," Wolf said. "As a parent and grandparent, I think it is important people know everything they can about the extremely violent nature of some of these games." 

If the bill passes, it would require any game with an ESRB rating of E (Everybody) and above to carry a warning label regardless of whether or not it was actually considered "violent." The only games that would not have to carry a label are ones rated EC (Early Childhood). Previous attempts to pass the bill occured in 2009 and 2011.

The Entertainment Software Association, a trade group that represents U.S. video game publishers, released the following statment to Game Informer from SVP of communications Rich Taylor:

The Entertainment Software Association supports providing parents with complete and useful information so they can make informed purchasing decisions. The current video game rating system does so and has been lauded as the leading rating system in the entertainment industry.

Unfortunately, Representative Baca’s facially unconstitutional bill—which has been introduced to no avail in each of six successive Congressional sessions, beginning in 2002—needlessly concerns parents with flawed research and junk science. Numerous medical experts, research authorities, and courts across the country, including the United States Supreme Court, exhaustively reviewed the research Representative Baca uses to base his bill and found it lacking and unpersuasive. Independent scientific researchers found no causal connection between video games and real life violence.

We would commend Representatives Baca and Wolf to the reams of bourgeoning academic research demonstrating that video games can be innovative learning and assessment tools in engaging and educating America’s youth, especially in core subjects such as science, technology, engineering and math.

[Source: The Hill]

Comments
  • Isn't the ESRB rating enough?

    EDIT: yes, because we all run around with C4 on our buggies driving into the backs of tanks on our days off! (battlefield 3)
  • k
  • Here we go again...
  • Really?
  • I stopped caring about discussing this topic long ago. Singling out just video games as a cause is just absurd.
  • Show me the proof. Wait, there is none you say? Then, what is wrong with our current rating system? Here's the deal: parents are responsible for raising their children. Not the media. Not babysitters. Not video games. Parents hold the greatest responsibility. The fact that many of them are too lazy to research a game before they purchase it for their child is shameful. For crying out loud, you don't even have to look hard! Turn the game case over and read the ESRB box!
  • I have no issue with a parental advisory warning like you see on CD's (though I think the ESRB rating is sufficient) but I don't like the wording of the warning here. Mainly because it's very suspect and highly debatable that violent games cause aggression.
  • It's a good thing we all have common sense. Otherwise there would be warning labels on everything. Oh...
  • That would be dumb if that passes. The letter rating and content information on the back do the job just fine!
  • Same ish, different day. You're free to own weapons but you gotta have a little logo on the box of a video game that blames them. When will you ever change, America.
  • Short term aggressive behavior. Who stays mad after a bad game of CoD? People who were mad before playing.

  • Really now? This is interesting. When I am driving and some idiotic jackass cuts me off, I get mad. Should we put a little label on steering wheels to warn people? Should we put a label on our younger siblings that aggravate us? No. This is stupid. Pure and utterly stupid.


    EDIT: ESRB does their jobs at rating a game. It is up to the parents to keep an eye on what their child plays/buys. And even if the parents are too lazy to watch what their kid plays, there is a setting that doesn't allow certain rated games to be played. But parents are just too lazy it seems.
  • The only thing that has ever made me have violent and aggressive thoughts is whenever I hear of some stupid new law or bill being proposed by stupid idiotic lawmakers that have nothing better to do like say fixing the country.
  • While we're at, we should put a warning boxes of cereal "Warning, eating cereal has been linked with serial killing" You cant put something like that, based on flawed pseudo science on the box. The ESRB rating like they said, says a game has violence in it. That is enough, their attempt to create a one sided view of video games will fail miserably, par usual.
  • (EDIT)so what your saying is that when i play super mario brothers jumping on goombas will make me want to get high off of real shrooms and kicking koopas will persuade me to conduct animal abuse?

    WHATS NEXT ARE YA GOIN TO BRING BACK THE COLORED SIGN'S! thats right im bringing racism into this we got to fight the power not just for our social right but for our video game right.
    FIGHT THE POWER!!!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_t13-0Joyc
  • First, most researches into violence related to video games will concede that any support is very flimsy.

    Secondly, why a sweeping bill? The fact that the ESRB is more effective and efficient in its assessments completely undermines this bill.

  • This subject is tired. They've tried time and time again to pass laws like this and it has never happened.*Sigh* When will they learn?
  • A mature rating that sais 17+ isn't good enough?
  • Watch it. Try to say something else that won't probably offend people.
  • ***! ok maybe with some games but even then i want to see the facts!prove it to me. i think it's a stress reliever from a hard day and it's fun. Never had me thinking any violent thoughts about anyone  

1 2 3 4 5 Next ... Last