Sign on Options
Theme:
To Dark

Congressmen call for ESRB transparency

California Democrat and Virginia Republican asking ratings board to make publisher submission videos publicly viewable online.

Last month, four US senators, including current presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton (D-NY), petitioned the Entertainment Software Rating Board with an array of proposals and concerns about the way it doles out ratings to games. After an edited version of Take-Two Interactive's Manhunt 2 was rated M for Mature in the US but remained banned in the UK, the senators suggested it was time to revise or enhance the ESRB system. They also wanted more transparency in the rating process, and a re-evaluation of rating games for the Wii, suggesting that the system's motion-sensitive controls may increase any effect violent games have on children.

Now a pair of congressmen are opening their own dialogue with the ESRB, albeit one with a narrower scope and a more specific request. In a draft version of a letter directed to the ESRB and obtained by GameSpot, Congressmen Joe Baca (D-CA) and Frank Wolf (R-VA) are asking the rating board to make publishers' video submissions for games publicly viewable online. Publishers are already required to submit videos with the most objectionable content of their games as part of the ESRB rating process.

The congressmen's letter acknowledges that the video clips can sometimes be lengthy, and in such cases they suggest that the ESRB post segments of the clips raters feel were most relevant to the game's final rating. Given the number of games the ESRB reviews on a regular basis, the letter says that such clips would only be necessary for titles rated T for Teen or higher.

According to the drafted letter, "Parents must have access to consistent, accurate, and objective information about video game content so they are able to choose games that are right for their children. By posting clips of T-rated games and above, parents and consumers will be better informed of the content of the games."

A representative with Congressman Baca's office confirmed the politicians' plans, and the two congressmen offered a joint statement on the matter.

"We believe that posting comprehensive clips of T-rated games and higher online is advantageous for both consumers and the ESRB," they said. "The public will be more accurately informed of the substance of games before making purchasing decisions, and the rating process of the ESRB will be brought to light and given more credibility."

As of press time, an ESRB representative had not returned GameSpot's request for comment.

438 Comments

  • blackcro55

    Posted Dec 10, 2007 8:30 am GMT

    If a parent cares enough to research the games, videos, screenshots and reviews are already available that give me enough of a clue if I want the game for me, let alone a child. Adding yet another source makes no sense.

    Then again being a politician makes no sense. When looking at a politician, don't mistake motion for action.

  • V-IGamer

    Posted Dec 9, 2007 4:55 pm GMT

    Note: Joe Baca's last name is one letter off from "baka," which is japanese for "silly" or "stupid."

  • PixyMisao

    Posted Dec 9, 2007 12:02 am GMT

    Of all the issues facing our country... this is the least important, without question. I loved Bill Clinton, but Hillary is nothing like him. In fact she seems to be taking after he colleague Tipper Gore on issues (or rather non-issues) of scapegoating various media outlets.

  • ringwraith58854

    Posted Dec 7, 2007 6:59 am GMT

    budboarder This is idiotic. I cant even think of words to say how stupid and pointless changing the ESRB process is. In my opinion there should be 2 ratings. Under 12 and over 12.
    so changing the system is stupid and pointless, yet you suggest changing the system. strange, your logic is.

  • starfoxmcleoud

    Posted Dec 6, 2007 8:22 pm GMT

    Most parents don't care these days, it's just that simple! If the congresspeople want to do something about it, they need to b1tch at the parents and not at the esrb! The esrb does their job! Parents don't! They get their kids anything they want, and if the kid doesn't get it they whine and complain and do everything they can. Not to mention parents are too busy nowdays to spend quality time with their kids, so they get them a video game and tell them to go for it. If parents would actually sit down with their kids, play the games they play, get to know what they're playing, and actually spend time with them, then that would have more of an effect than politicians raising hell about something they can't do anything about!

  • arby64

    Posted Dec 6, 2007 8:08 pm GMT

    Oh, and does anyone else appreciate the irony that in order to protect children from this content, they want to make it available free to the public online where it will essentially be easily accessed by any child with a computer.

  • arby64

    Posted Dec 6, 2007 8:01 pm GMT

    Any parent that buys a game like Manhunt or GTA and doesn't already know it is inappropriate for children, aren't going to take the time to look at these videos.

  • Ungdi

    Posted Dec 6, 2007 6:03 pm GMT

    I've seen a 9 year old play GTA san andreas. How would this change it?

  • unndead16

    Posted Dec 6, 2007 3:03 pm GMT

    I think this is full of S**t !!! It's for showing the world how "wanna by President" Hillary cares about children's mental health and to show parents how she wants to get involved in the education of their children! ESRB is doing a great job already why change it?

  • catseyez

    Posted Dec 6, 2007 2:37 pm GMT

    This is a waste of time. ESRB doesn't need to post the videos online when they are already made available from the developers site. Not to mention the sites clearly state the games content. I say everyone should write to these turds and tell them to butt out. Parents these days are to damn lazy. Parenting has really changed from when I was growing up. Someone needs to ask them have they actually played Manhunt or GTA? Or are they just complaining because some idiot parents bought these games and didn't read the print. Or because hackers decided to exploit the games and it became a media frenzy. I say to stop all this nonsense there should be a law for how old someone has to be to purchase Mature, AO and make it 18. Then maybe there will be less crap. Sorry kids but most of these games arn't for you and your ruining it for us adults. I know who Im not voting for.

  • shoeman12

    Posted Dec 6, 2007 2:14 pm GMT

    wtf they stay out of the mpaa's business so why can't they stay out of the esrb's business? there are reasons on the back of the box for the rating, thats enough.

  • topgunmv

    Posted Dec 6, 2007 12:39 pm GMT

    Parents are too lazy to even look at the rating on the box, what makes these idiots think they'll look up videos online?

  • Firedragon7686

    Posted Dec 6, 2007 11:47 am GMT

    tclvis said
    "Walmart edited the new Kid Rock album to suit themselves. Why doesn't Congress just have Walmart edit video games to their satisfaction, too, and nevermind the ESRB?"

    which is funny cuz in my walmart there are absolutely no unedited cds. but one aisle away form the rock cds, theres the game case with an M(now AO) copy of GTA: San Andreas in it!!! i think its rather funny, wouldnt you guys agree?

  • TAEnemy

    Posted Dec 6, 2007 10:50 am GMT

    "Parents must have access to consistent, accurate, and objective information about video game content so they are able to choose games that are right for their children."

    Could someone please direct this man's eyes to the lower corner on EVERY VIDEO GAME PACKAGE THAT EXISTS?

    If parents are too lazy to read a one letter rating on a game box then what would make them want to go download videos and sit through them? The bottom line is that a lot of parents don't WANT to parent. They want the government to pass laws and babysit their kids for them. instead of taking initiative, people want legislation to move in and spoil it for those of us who actually care.

    The good thing about that is that these people are often so reactive and have such short attention spans that they constantly forget about video games in favor of other current "issues" like whether or not they are offended when Wal-Mart has a banner that reads "Happy Holidays." This will go nowhere just as it has time and time again. The ESRB is the most efficient and reliable independent rating system there is. There is nothing to hide here and I am constantly sickened by people who beg the government to intrude into their lives at everyone else's expense.

  • dj_b02us

    Posted Dec 6, 2007 10:32 am GMT

    yea as soon as the MPAA is asked to do the same thing JERKS.

  • DrKill09

    Posted Dec 6, 2007 9:58 am GMT

    Stupid politicians...

  • wainojake

    Posted Dec 6, 2007 9:44 am GMT

    so games can be banned for violence but movies like the saw and hostel movies are ok

  • user9000

    Posted Dec 6, 2007 9:36 am GMT

    I don't think this will happen. I sure wish it would it's a great idea. I think many gamers themselves would like to know specifically what the objectionable content is in their potential purchase. but like I say, it won't happen.

  • ControllerLord

    Posted Dec 6, 2007 8:23 am GMT

    erocstangs said:

    "Oh this is going to work! Politicians are morons. It does not matter how much you inform someone of something they are still going to do it. I mean we've proven cigarettes cause cancer, yet people still smoke. The government needs to loosen up and spend it's money where it is needed."

    That's the smartest thing I've heard all day.

  • ControllerLord

    Posted Dec 6, 2007 8:21 am GMT

    Parents don't pay attention to what their children buy and play now, so how many will actually watch these videos before they buy games for their kids? This is stupid.

  • SonySucks21

    Posted Dec 6, 2007 8:04 am GMT

    Hmmm. Looming US recession, world on verge of massive economic slowdown, but instead these dumb congressmen are talking about this! This makes me weep for the future of America.

  • bottaboomstick

    Posted Dec 6, 2007 8:00 am GMT

    All this coming from the hippy generation. That generation are now nazis.

  • Ian_Michael

    Posted Dec 6, 2007 6:53 am GMT

    It's the parents to blame if their child goes "bad" not the games, good parenting is what keeps kids from doing bad things. Retailers should also be sure not to sell M rated games to kids without the parents consent, then it would be on the parent heads to decide. Congress should go stick their noses in other places like illegal firearms out in the streets or internet pornography. The ESRB is doing a fine job already. There's already a crap load of really influential things out there that children easily get a hold of, violent games is the least of our worries.

  • erocstangs

    Posted Dec 6, 2007 6:42 am GMT

    Oh this is going to work! Politicians are morons. It does not matter how much you inform someone of something they are still going to do it. I mean we've proven cigarettes cause cancer, yet people still smoke. The government needs to loosen up and spend it's money where it is needed.

  • generalish

    Posted Dec 6, 2007 6:24 am GMT

    I dont see a point of posting a video online. If a parent is concerned enough about a games rating then they will simply go and look on a parental website for reviews on the game or another website to see what violent content the game has.

  • Yuck_Too

    Posted Dec 6, 2007 6:21 am GMT

    Honestly Manhunt 2 is mediocre at best anyway and would be abysmal if not the for stupid amount of press around it.

    For example, when the guard urinates into the prisoners cell...what in the world does that have to do with anything other then being politically controversial and smacks of nothing but the desire for the attention of the press.

  • NA3D

    Posted Dec 6, 2007 6:15 am GMT

    Is there no update on this yet? Seriously... Who the heck is going to vote for the psycho anyways? When it comes election time, I will vote for any Rep. over her, and I hate all of the Rep.... Well... I hate all politicians, but I mean within their own scale....

  • KingKoop

    Posted Dec 6, 2007 6:11 am GMT

    So the ESRB gets Manhunt 2 and an overhaul? Maybe the BBFC should follow suit? I'm fed up being left in the dark.

  • budboarder

    Posted Dec 6, 2007 5:05 am GMT

    This is idiotic. I cant even think of words to say how stupid and pointless changing the ESRB process is. In my opinion there should be 2 ratings. Under 12 and over 12.

  • ApoIlo

    Posted Dec 6, 2007 12:19 am GMT

    i honestly dont think that if parents don pay attention to the rating that a game has, surely they wont bother to go to a website to check images about such games

  • venom_jabon

    Posted Dec 6, 2007 12:01 am GMT

    This is like asking the MPAA to take all of the rated R or rated NC-17 parts of a movie and put them on the internet where kids can easily view them for free.

    Making objectionable content available free on the internet, what a stupid way to keep kids away from violent images!!

  • tclvis

    Posted Dec 5, 2007 10:31 pm GMT

    And then children will have access to those clips on the websites. Stop the madness. Congress cannot parent every kid in the nation. Do they make the MPAA show deleted 'objectionable' scenes from movies to the general public? Do they do they make the RIAA post clips from songs with "parental advisory" lyrics? NO. Why are games being singled out? September showed they're bigger business than even movies thought. Oh, wait....there's your answer.

    Walmart edited the new Kid Rock album to suit themselves. Why doesn't Congress just have Walmart edit video games to their satisfaction, too, and nevermind the ESRB?

  • WR_Platinum

    Posted Dec 5, 2007 10:20 pm GMT

    How more CLEAR can you get when there is a RATING on the game's package? READ the Rating which will clearly say what age range. PLUS! If you look at the back of the package, they will also mention what kinds of things the game has, like for example. ANIMATED VIOLENCE, BLOOD & GORE, SEXUAL THEMES. All the parents have to do is READ! Then decide wether ur child can play the game or not. We don't need the government to handle this at all, simple.

  • supersaiyinx

    Posted Dec 5, 2007 10:06 pm GMT

    I hate to be honest, not really, but I think it's sad that bad/misinformed parents are quick to point their fingers at video games as the cause of their children's violent tendencies. Personally I think the ESRB has done more than the MPAA or even the RIAA by informing people about the ratings games receive. I have played "violent" games for years and I have yet to go all psycho on someone, in fact "violent" games help me keep my stress and anger issues under control. Now, the only games that DO make me violent are those amplitude games........grrrrrrr.........Guitar Hero gets me agitated a bit, but I'm over it before the next song starts, can we say addictive. As for the re-rating of Wii titles, all I can say is these people are misguided in their beliefs of games. If there is a congressman willing to defend games from these untrue and completely unfounded lies, I say we urge him/her to speak up for the gaming community. Besides if a 16 year old gets a M rated game from a major retail chain I think it should be on the retail chains head, or if a parent gets it as a gift for their child the blame should be on the parent, not the ESRB, game publishers, developers, or gamers.

  • bam4280

    Posted Dec 5, 2007 10:02 pm GMT

    wow screw those congress people. this is america the land of the free and home of the brave. Soldiers are dying to protect our freedom and we cant even play games without congress people trying to get another term by striking at videogames.

  • bobblehead875

    Posted Dec 5, 2007 9:43 pm GMT

    So what happens of the most violent part of a game is the epic final battle?
    HUGE spoilers. totally inane IMO

  • Petri87

    Posted Dec 5, 2007 9:16 pm GMT

    its just too bad the publishers wiil never allow it.

  • toaman89

    Posted Dec 5, 2007 9:06 pm GMT

    This is Congress just making everyone believe that they have the average American citizen's interests at heart. The bottom line is that it's the responsibility of the PARENTS to PARENT their children and not let the government take this "holier-than-thou" stance at the video game industry. The constant hassle that the ESRB and game developers endure from these politicians is nothing more than a smoke screen. It makes the Congressman or Senator look like they're doing something good for their constituents, but in reality, they just simply want to get re-elected. Forgive me for my cynical viewpoint on Congress, but their actions have only demonstrated that they are only invested in their own SELF-interest as opposed to what they're elected for. Instead of blaming the video game industry for all the problems of today's society, why don't you try and see how easy it is to get access to a firearm, legal or otherwise? Why don't you monitor that?

  • DGFreak

    Posted Dec 5, 2007 8:56 pm GMT

    There's nothing I read in this article that made me think "HOW DARE THEY TRY TO CENSOR US!"

    It is totally rational for the government to request that the ESRB simply put up videos of game content. Why don't they already do this, in fact?

  • dustopants

    Posted Dec 5, 2007 8:14 pm GMT

    for everybody saying that this will just make kids more suscepptable to all of the violent content, because they'll b e able to log onto the site instead of thier parents...
    Concider this: Game trailers and images posted online on developer's websites and various other game websites already have all of this violent content viewable on there... viewable for kids to view, for parents to view...
    hell, kids can get on porn sites just by clicking a "Yes, i'm over 18" button... instead of making more work for game devolopers, the ESRB, and parents (who need to stop being so lazy in the first place) we need to make some sort of internet security that kids will not be able to get by...
    now, i'm not talking about those "website blockers" that instantly block out 95% of the internet... i'm talking about some sort of barrier put up by website developers that will only enable access to parents...

    here's my idea... if the ESRB goes through with putting all of this violent content on the web, they should also include a free disc that you can get right off of thier website... This disc would contain software to unlock the portion of the ESRB's website with all of the violent material on it... sort of like a key...
    all parents would have to do then is keep that disc out of the reach of children, and then check the website with it whenever a kid asks "can I have thissss game?"

  • alberto2045

    Posted Dec 5, 2007 7:55 pm GMT

    dude you something they should take gaming away all of it, just so they can see how much it is going to affect U.S.A. economy

  • 5ish_bONe

    Posted Dec 5, 2007 7:02 pm GMT

    the_eaglet

    They attacked the US first and the difference you should be arguing isn't killing and self defence, it should be murder and self defence, seeing as killing is the taking life of another.

  • icey05

    Posted Dec 5, 2007 6:50 pm GMT

    yay! more reasons to hate america.
    well i guess its their problem, but if they start trying to get other countries to conform (eg australia)
    then im REALLY going to get pissed off.
    video games are the only freedom us kids have these days, and **** its half the fun of being a kid, these days half if not more then half of the video gamers are ACTUALLY 18+
    its just discrimination.

    oh and when i was a kid, if i left it up to my mum which games i played. i would have just given up gaming all together.

  • gonzalezj1

    Posted Dec 5, 2007 6:25 pm GMT

    This is awesome! Thanks Washington! What makes more sense than protecting kids from the objectionable content of video games by making the most objectionable content freely viewable by anyone online! Genius!

  • the_eaglet

    Posted Dec 5, 2007 6:07 pm GMT

    DaSlyOne. You would call it self defense when a country sends its military forces ~5000 miles away from home to invade a third world country? That sounds more like an attack. Not that I have anything against the soldiers. It's not their fault.
    Oh, and he calls it "killing" because it IS killing. Words have certain definitions, and before you get on someone's back about using a word, make sure you know what the word means. "killing" and "self-defence" are not mutually exclusive things. You can do one by doing the other.

  • lamprey263

    Posted Dec 5, 2007 6:05 pm GMT

    why don't they just do a YouTube search for gameplay videos?

  • Dman4Life1217

    Posted Dec 5, 2007 5:59 pm GMT

    Uhhhh the games ARE publicly viewable online. Go to ANY game developer's/publisher's website and BOOM game is right there. More often than not, with an age verification deal for the more violent/mature themed games so you can even view the contents of the website. I swear, these politicians are not better than parents. They act like this information is kept in the back room of some hidden building on some obscure street when it's not. It's right there on the publisher's website, complete with gore and everything. Information is right there for the taking. If parents would truly want to get involved in their kid's gaming habits, they'd actually look on the box of the game or sit down with their kids and watch them instead of "mommy/daddy, buy me this." the parents just buying without paying attention. We don't need a law to give parents the power they already have. It's not the video game industry's job to say what is, or is not acceptable for YOUR kid to be playing. That's the parents job. And all a law does is show how unwilling parents are to take pro-active steps in their kid's gaming habits to the point where they plead for the government to give them power they themselves already have.

  • Lord__Darkstorn

    Posted Dec 5, 2007 5:42 pm GMT

    finally, a good idea for the ESRB! though it does require more work, it gets parents more involved in their kid's games.

  • rando226

    Posted Dec 5, 2007 5:11 pm GMT

    It is a good idea. However, I think that just watching the video reviews already shows what the game contains. That and reading what the rating box on the back of the game.

Subscribe to GameSpot's YouTube Channel

Hot Stories

Newsmakers

Featured Stories

Submit News

Got tips? Send them in!