Is it possible that playing a violent video game can be considered the same as smoking a pack of cigarettes? According to one Congressmen from California, yes. On Wednesday, January 26th, U.S. Representatives Joe Baca (D-CA) and Frank Wolf (R-VA) introduced a bill called the Video Game Labeling Act.
According to this bill, video games that have a rating higher than teen (T) would have to warning that reads " WARNING: Excessive exposure to violent video games and other violent media has been linked to aggressive behavior.”. The rating system for video games in America is handled by an independent group called the Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB) but according to Congressmen Baca ESRB stands for Electronic Software Rating Board. In my opinion, if someone is trying to get a bill to pass, that person should do a little research and become knowledgeable about the topic first.
In defending the bill Congressmen Baca stated the following: (quote from ars technia, Ben Kuchera.)
“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. They have repeatedly failed to live up to this responsibility. Meanwhile, research continues to show a proven link between playing violent games and increased aggression in young people. American families deserve to know the truth about these potentially dangerous products.”
I believe that this statement does not make much sense in the argument because the video game industry already does warn parents, families, and consumers about what games contain as far as violent content. Every single game a person buys from the store has a warning on the front and on the back of the game is the explanation of that rating. For example I will use the rating on "Call of Duty: Black Ops". This game is rated M for Mature 17+ on the front of the game; on the back of the game the rating is explained by blood and gore, intense violence, and strong language.
As far as research that has proven a link between playing violent games and increased aggression, most people opposed to this bill argue that there is not enough research to make that statement. They feel that any studies done on the links between violent games and aggression are conducted under conditions that far too different from those conditions in which people play video games. Those opposed to the bill believe that this leads to misleading information in the studies.
In my opinion there is no need to add an extra warning to games that are rated over T because there is already ample warning on the games. I do not see this bill getting enough support to make it through all of the required steps to pass.
This video is of a man opposed to the bill.
This is a video of Congressmen Baca defending his bill.