Censorship News #113: November 2010

NCAC devotes the latest issue of Censorship News to video games and the latest in a series of efforts to “protect” minors by restricting their freedom of speech.

panel2
Wafaa Bilal, Carolee Schneemann, and Trevor Paglen at New School’s Tishman Audtorium, September 22, 2010

We discuss the video game case heard in the Supreme Court on November 2,  Schwarzenegger v. Entertainment Merchants Association. The Court will decide whether the state can impose criminal penalties for selling or renting violent video games to minors. It may seem inconsequential to non-gamers, but it poses a critically important issue even for people who will never play a video game: whether representations of violence will continue to be protected by the First Amendment.

Here’s an excerpt from The Video Game Issue: The Case:

Legally, the dispute comes down to two narrow questions: can the government restrict the sale of otherwise legal expression to minors and, if so, under what circumstances? California argues that violent video games should be treated like obscenity – by definition explicit sexual content that lacks social value – which is not protected by the First Amendment for either adults or minors. Whatever one’s views on the relative merits of sexual and violent content, obscenity is a historical and narrowly drawn exception to the general rule that speech is protected. Creating a new exception for a completely different type of content will open a Pandora’s Box.

We also give a brief rundown of The Other Cases,” lower federal court opinions that unanimously hold that laws restricting minors’ access to violent content are unconstitutional, followed Praise for Violent Video Games, comments from those who take issue with the criticism heaped on violent video games.

In The Ratings Game,” executive Director Joan Bertin warns about the many problems with ratings. She argues that “ratings … invite censorship,” citing the California video game case as an example. She says, “Once something is rated as adult fare, as most violent video games are, many legislators develop an apparently irresistible urge to criminalize its sale to minors.”

Read Alexander Nehamas’ observation that the debate over video games “actually predates the pixel by more than two millennia. In fact, an earlier version of the dispute may be found in The Republic, in which Plato shockingly excludes Homer and the great tragic dramatists from the ideal society he describes in that work.”

Advertisements

Activist, Unplugged from the Matrix. Action for Freedom!

Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized
3 comments on “Censorship News #113: November 2010
  1. Nice Post…

    […]I saw this really good post today. Just linked back to it from my site. Thanks![…]…

  2. Moakndwe says:

    Keep up the good work.I’ll return often.

  3. […] Censorship News #113: November 2010 […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email. You have full control over the frequency of emails you receive, and you can unsubscribe at any time. We will NOT share your email address with anyone, ever!

Join 734 other followers

Member of The Internet Defense LeagueBloggers' Rights at EFF
  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
%d bloggers like this: