gamepolitics: NIMF Annouces Date, Location For National Video Game Summit

Game Politics (

gamepolitics) wrote,
@ 2006-09-06 05:18:00

Entry tags:

annual video game report card, david walsh, doug gentile, nimf, university of iowa

NIMF Annouces Date, Location For National Video Game Summit

The National Institute on Media and the Family has announced a date and location for its long-awaited National Video Game Summit.

The event, promised by NIMF president Dr. David Walsh in the organization's 2005 Annual Video Game Report Card, will be held October 21-22 at the University of Minnesota's Continuing Education and Conference Center in Falcon Heights, MN.

According to a NIMF press release, the two-day summit will focus on video game ratings and education. David Walsh will chair the gathering, assisted by Doug Gentile (left) of the Iowa State University Center for the Study of Violence.

So what's on the agenda? The NIMF press release says, in part:

"As dozens of new video games are being stocked on retailers' shelves before the holiday season, the National Institute on Media and the Family will be hosting a national summit to address concerns regarding video game ratings and children's access to violent and sexually explicit games."

NIMF expects over 20 "scholars, educators and experts on media violence and child behavior issues" will be in attendance. Attendees will "review current and emerging trends related to video game rating systems, education policy and government regulation; determine the accuracy and independence of video game ratings; and, recommend a 10-year action agenda based on the summit's conclusions."

As NIMF has been sharply critical of the ESRB system, it seems highly unlikely that the video game industry will participate in the summit.

(Post a new comment)

	jaykaos 2006-09-06 01:16 pm UTC (link)
	Before anyone asks, the game on the screen is UT2k4. (Reply to this)

	goodrobotus 2006-09-06 02:45 pm UTC (link)
	Why do I get the feeling this is going to be the political version of a Kangaroo Court? (Reply to this)

They should at least make an appearance

jabrwock
2006-09-06 03:44 pm UTC (link)

As NIMF has been sharply critical of the ESRB system, it seems highly unlikely that the video game industry will participate in the summit.

Disagreements or no, NIMF is seen by parents as being at the forefront of concern. For the ESA et all to shun the conference altogether will be seen as not caring about the concerns of parents.

They show up to every government hearing on whether laws are needed. Why not show up to one where they discuss ratings, education, and government regulation?

I think if the ESA showed up and pledged to work with NIMF to better educate parents, they'd score a lot of points. Plus it might tone down NIMF's rhetoric if they are working with the industry (can't complain too loudly about the ratings if you're being asked to help people understand them, right?)

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: They should at least make an appearance

nightwng2000
2006-09-06 04:41 pm UTC (link)

NIMF means abasolutely nothing to me as far as their research goes.

Despite the good discussion between Dr. Walsh and others, I really doubt there will be anything other than a onesided discussion going on at this event. Even if industry leaders were invited, which I doubt, it will more likely be a railroad event. After all, the last thing NIMF would want would be clear, intelligent, disagreement with their agenda.

Again, while NIMF is seen in better light than some organizations, that doesn't mean this will be a positive event.

But one can hope, I suppose.

nightwng2000

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: They should at least make an appearance

jabrwock
2006-09-06 07:00 pm UTC (link)

Despite the good discussion between Dr. Walsh and others, I really doubt there will be anything other than a onesided discussion going on at this event. Even if industry leaders were invited, which I doubt, it will more likely be a railroad event.

That may be so, but avoiding the conference altogether implies that they don't care about concerns, which would be guaranteed to be used against them.

They should at least make the gesture of offering to come. That way if NIMF refuses them, they can at least say they made the effort, and that it's clear that NIMF is not interested in working with the industry to help educate parents about the ratings

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: They should at least make an appearance

barfo
2006-09-06 10:04 pm UTC (link)

"Disagreements or no, NIMF is seen by parents as being at the forefront of concern. For the ESA et all to shun the conference altogether will be seen as not caring about the concerns of parents.

They show up to every government hearing on whether laws are needed. Why not show up to one where they discuss ratings, education, and government regulation?"

Because that would be the equivalent of local chicken representatives accepting, on behalf of their hen-house, the invitation to be the "guest of honour" at the local convention of foxes(apologies for the rustic analogy). NIMF has shown consistently that they have a specific anti-industry (ESA) agenda, as well as that they will freely wield hyperbolic rhetoric, misguided morality, and misquoted science in support of their narrow agenda. Just because they are (unlike certain lawyers who will not be mentioned) capable of dressing up nicely in their Sunday suits such that you could take them round your Aunt's for Sunday Tea without being embarrassed, no one should confuse them with people who honestly are working to try and find some workable mutually agreeable solution that well serves both parties.

The ESA stands to gain much more by following their own path and tryign to actually forge a consensus among true moderates on such issues while consistently responding to the NIMF assaults in a way that correctly exposes them as the fringe conservative group that they are, than they would by marching in and accepting whatever Mephistophelian bargain NIMF would deign to offer by way of compromise.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: They should at least make an appearance

jabrwock
2006-09-06 10:28 pm UTC (link)

But see, the moderates aren't hosting large public conferences the media is sure to report on...

I just think they should at least make the token gesture of offering to work with NIMF, so that when NIMF tells them no and goes right on criticizing them, they can at least say they tried. It also pulls some of the teeth from NIMF's criticisms that the ESA doesn't care about their concerns.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: They should at least make an appearance

barfo
2006-09-07 12:32 am UTC (link)

Well what they should do is come up with a very specific and long list of all the projects and programs that they have to help educate people about the ESRB, etc (are these sort of things happening, even? if the ESA was organising large public conferences then there would be more moderate views for the media to report on, though the media has a bias against tending to report moderate views, preferring extremes of either side), etc and make the token gesture of offering to let NIMF help them. That would sort of spin the shoe of responsibility onto the other foot.

In a sense tho there is no need for the ESA to be refuting NIMF's point that ESA doesnt care about NIMF's concerns on a specific level (while of course constantly reinterating the message that they care about parents in general just in their own, more sane, way). Because it is basically an acknowledged fact that they dont care much about those specific concerns, considering most of them can be pretty accurately refuted by facts which is usually what ESA always mentions in their press-releases in response to each time the NIMF slams them with a critical release of their own (eg showing studies that show merchant compliance is at or above levels for all other mature-rated media, pointing to the lack of causal evidence linking vg and real-world measures of aggression, the impracticality and redundancy of basing ESRB ratings on reviewing full games completely, and the silliness of trying to say ESRB ratings are incomplete because they do not laundry list every possible instance of potential descriptor content in favour of listing only the most pertinent content that defined the rating for the game). Whether or not the ESA cares about the NIMF's concerns is irrelevant if the ESA can aptly demonstrate that those concerns are invalid, vacuous, or overblown in the court of public opinion.

On which point there is surely much room for improvement, as I think overall though the ESA has a very strong message, they tend to fall onto PR-speak type talking points and vague generalities rather than presenting stuff in a more folksy and engaging way, and they fail to get very good message penetration into the public consciousness (which is also related to how the media covers issues). The above ideas would help with that, token gestures to NIMF (on NIMF's terms) just legitimize them, which is the opposite of what they want to do.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

	This should be... elixer44 2006-09-06 09:06 pm UTC (link)
	- A biased take on game ratings - Parents saying they are better than the ratings system - An oppertunity for the NIMF to display their censorship policies - All of the above (Reply to this)

There's that label again

eternallegenduk
2006-09-06 09:09 pm UTC (link)

"...and children's access to violent and sexually explicit games."

They keep saying this, so that now it reads as a single unit. People don't discuss violent games, but "violent and sexually explicit" games. Now, how many over-the-counter games are are actually sexually explicit? There's the Larry series, the occasional lapdance sim thingy that crops up every so often and dies a death, and for a brief while you could modify a copy of GTA:SA to show the characters engaging in sex-shaped shenanigans.

Hypothesis: You could find more sexually explicit content in a single "top shelf" magazine than in the entire history of commercial video games. Discuss.

(Reply to this)

Why the ESA/ESRB won't show up

gamer81
2006-09-07 12:32 am UTC (link)

If you recall, according to the podcast interview Dennis did with Dr. Walsh back in December, Walsh specifically stated that he would not invite anyone from the gaming industry to join. He said he may in future summits (I highly doubt it), but he said definitely not the first.

In other words, Dr. Walsh most likely fears being made fun of by someone who is actually informed about video games, and therefore, will only invite people that share his agenda (people who also happen to know the least about video games).

One group that will not join is the National PTA, as they publicly embarrassed Walsh by distancing themselves from him and his bogus organization.

(Reply to this)

	Protestors ahoy! dclam 2006-09-12 03:22 am UTC (link)
	I can totally crash this summit. I live rather close to the Conference Center listed, and it's on a weekend. However, I'm not totally sure what the best plan of action is. I could show up with a picket sign, and then all the people in the summit would walk past me into the building. Sounds really effective (not). Ideas are welcome. (Reply to this) (Thread)

	Re: Protestors ahoy! gamepolitics 2006-09-12 09:47 am UTC (link)
	well, what would be your point? If you want to protest, fine, but they're certainly well within their rights to hold this conference. (Reply to this) (Parent)

Username:		Create an Account Forgot your login or password? Login w/ OpenID
Password:
	Remember Me
	English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…