Game Politics ([info]gamepolitics) wrote,
@ 2006-09-15 06:11:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend  Next Entry
Entry tags:camra, cdc, dick durbin, evan bayh, hillary clinton, joe lieberman, michael enzi, nas, research, rick santorum, sam brownback, studies

Senate Passes CAMRA; Bill Funds Research Into Kids & Media

The United States Senate yesterday passed S1902, the Children and Media Research Advancement Act (CAMRA).

The bi-partisan legislation was proposed last October by Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-CT) along with Sens. Clinton (D-NY), Brownback (R-KS), Santorum (R-PA), Bayh (D-IN), Enzi (R-WY) and Durbin (D-IL).

As reported by AdWeek, CAMRA mandates the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and National Academy of Sciences to establish a research program that will examine the impact of media on the social, cognitive and physical development of children.

"No one is looking out, in a systematic way," said Lieberman, "for the cumulative impact of today's newer electronic media on our children. The questions about the effects - positive or negative - of media on our children's health, education and development are too important to go unasked and unanswered."

CAMRA-funded research will focus on the effects of electronic media including T.V., computers, video games and the Internet. Studies would examine factors such as the media format, length of exposure, age of users, degree of parental involvement, and the venue in which media is used.

A 2005 report issued by the Kaiser Family Foundation found that, especially in regard to very young children, there is no solid research data concerning the effects of media consumption. CAMRA enjoys support from child advocacy groups such as the Children's Digital Media Center, the Center for Media and Child Health at Harvard University Medical School, Children Now, the American Psychological Association, Common Sense Media and the Parents Television Council.

As previously reported by GamePolitics, Marv Johnson, legislative counsel to the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) expressed concern that study results might be used to justify media content legislation. "Down the road when - if there is some sort of finding that there is harm in this - then we're going to see calls to regulate speech because of the potential harm. That's where there's going to be a problem."

A similar House bill introduced by Rep. Edward Markey, (D-MA) has yet to pass.

GP: It's hard to argue with the scientific quest for knowledge. Hopefully, CAMRA-funded research will resolve some of the hotly-debated issues surrounding children and video games.




(33 comments) - (Post a new comment)

Well, heres my take
[info]yukimurasanada
2006-09-15 11:15 am UTC (link)
I like the idea of a comprehensive research act that will really get down and answer some questions, but I for one hope the entertainment industries try to force this to be done by a none bias, thrid party group and not a hand picked government lacky group looking for a buck. IF the industry does not push for a certain level of fairness and objectivty in this research, it's basicly letting Censorcrat fear mongers bribe researchers into saying what they want to hear.

Hopefully the ESA and others will put some pressure on this to make sure it's fair and just, or gets it' quashed alltogether.

We'll see.

BTW, dennis, I found this on the FLA bar website.


http://www.floridabar.org/TFB/TFBCon...6?OpenDocument

Is that the document you used to file your complaint?

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: Well, heres my take
[info]gamepolitics
2006-09-15 11:39 am UTC (link)
Yuki, I may have more to say at some future point about the Bar issue. I'm not going to be discussing it here in comments, however.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: Well, heres my take
[info]nightwng2000
2006-09-15 12:30 pm UTC (link)
(That's strange, I just tried to "cut & paste" a phrase from your post and couldn't do it.)

"...comprehensive research..."
I have serious doubts that they will include ALL genres of media in the research. Special protection for select types (religious, news, education, even political) will probably keep such material from being included in the research. Any number of items within those genres could have both positive and negative impacts on individuals.

Also, I doubt that they will research the possibility that what appears to be a negative impact will result in a positive action. (Making someone so outraged that they appear to want to be violent but instead take positive action regarding the issue for example).

To be honest, I don't see it being researched in a non-bias setting as the very creation of this bill was biased and based on misinformation, such as the claims that various media stimuli are the sole stimuli in any individual's life. No true complete study could actually research the effect of media on any individual as the lives are individual's are extremely complex and different from each other. Therefore, findings for one individual will not match the findings possible of any other individual.

It's just simpler to admit that everyone is an individual and no single event, small or large, can be singled out as the driving force of our lives. Humans are far too complex in our design and development for such research to be of any value. Certainly, that would save a lot of time, money, and effort rather than fund research that has no purpose other than political agenda grandstanding.

nightwng2000
NW2K Software
P.S. Linky no worky. :)
Yeah, I see GP's reply. That's ok too. Just letting ya know the link doesn't work. No big deal to me anyway.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: Well, heres my take
[info]gamepolitics
2006-09-15 12:37 pm UTC (link)
LJ switched to a new back-end sometime yesterday and I can't easily select text, either.

Thought it was just me, but... Anyway, this works until they fix it: put your cursor at the beginning of the block (well, click there, anyway, you probably won't see your cursor) then hold SHIFT and click at the end of the block of text you want. That seems to work for me.

LiveJournal... grrrrr....

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: Well, heres my take
[info]dagrak
2006-09-15 12:43 pm UTC (link)
It just takes me to a "No page displayed" screen

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: Well, heres my take
[info]ayvah
2006-09-15 09:14 pm UTC (link)
There has already been a huge amount of research into media effects. A bunch of scientists in Sydney learned that in the short-term, games can make you more aggressive. However, that's because games make you more aroused (adrenaline, etc). They declared that video games can make people more violent. However, they would be more aroused and therefore more violent after taking a jog.

Here's a whole page listing the ways research can go wrong.

The problem is that this is psychological research, and it's far too difficult to create a controlled testing environment. There's no such thing as a video game placebo.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: Well, heres my take
[info]nightwng2000
2006-09-15 11:09 pm UTC (link)
"...games can make you more aggressive."

There are many types of aggression. But those studies, designed for misinformation spreading, don't point that out.

After all, aggression from a competitive attitude is not the same aggression cause strong debates which is not the same aggression felt when one is angry from an atrocity.

Yet, these studies say you're playing a game that contains violence and therefore, if you're feeling aggressive, it must be from the violence rather than the competitive aspect. And of course, the agenda seekers suck that up and spread it around.

Nor do these studies take into account the overall life experiences of the individual and every single experience in their lives and how each of those experiences may play a part on the overall individual. Nor does it take into account the various genetic predispositions that are a part of the indivdiual and how they can or may affect the experiences of their lives.

But all these studies do is say "oh, look, they're playing a violent video game and they are showing signs of general aggressive behavior. Therefore, violent video games make you aggressive, hence they make you violent, hence they make you dangerous."

Frankly, I could get the same kind of general results from exposing certain religious individuals to certain stimuli and say "oh, look, religion makes you aggressive, hence violent, hence dangerous. Let's keep religion away from children. Must protect the children from religion." But, of course, we know that there is little chance of the religious genre being researched.

But, as you say, this is psychological research. It's not simply difficult, it's impossible to show how one stimuli actually affects a group of individuals because each individual is too complex and has had too many experiences throughout their lives to single out one stimuli as being a driving force over any single individual.

nightwng2000
NW2K Software

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]dagrak
2006-09-15 12:09 pm UTC (link)
I'm all for research...provided its done with the intent to understand and not to find something to attack

(Reply to this)

With Liberman and Clinton on board CARMA.
[info]terminator44
2006-09-15 12:49 pm UTC (link)
You just KNOW this study is going to focus mainly on video games and how evil they are.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: With Liberman and Clinton on board CARMA.
[info]gamepolitics
2006-09-15 12:55 pm UTC (link)
I wouldn't assume that. The CDC is well-respected.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: With Liberman and Clinton on board CARMA.
[info]terminator44
2006-09-15 08:36 pm UTC (link)
But not incorruptible. Hilary and Joe have an obvious motivation to get CDC to focus on the video game angle. I wouldn't put it past them to lean on the CDC to get what they want.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: With Liberman and Clinton on board CARMA.
[info]aerothorn
2006-09-15 11:18 pm UTC (link)
Possibly, but in the past these studies have often no resulted in what the founders wanted. When the federal government did that study of pornography, for instance (I think they might have done two - one in the 70s and one recently) the goal of the senators who pushed it was to try and get pornography revealed as the corrupting influence it really was...and then the result of the study was that there was no evidence that pornography led to sex crimes or anything else.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]jahbulon
2006-09-15 01:05 pm UTC (link)
We have gamers and the industry on one side and fear-mongering politicians on the other.. Why isn't someone standing up for games and gamers?

I'd like to see a public service announcement wherein an old cowboy type sits America down and explains a few salient points, in a real grandaddy layin-down-the-law kinda way.

"You know folks, before video games were invented, we had a little thing called the second world war. It's a long story, but basically this guy called Hitler - who had never played a video game in his life - wanted to kill every last Jew on the planet. Well, there was a lot of hootin and hollerin, a lot of people were killed and the whole thing was quite violent. Now, you may be surprised to hear it, but no-one there had played video games! Not even Goebbels!"

(Reply to this)

I do have a problem with this
[info]blitzfitness
2006-09-15 01:09 pm UTC (link)
The CDC used to be an ally of the personal training and fitness community, but about 2 or 3 years ago they stopped listening to us and have come up with some bizarre research methods and campaigns. Probably the most significant to the nation as a whole was replaceing the original Food Pyramid with a new Quote Improved Unquote multi pyramid system. I was one of the people on board to stop the change, our primary concern being it would add confusion to a well known system that American's didn't do a proper job of following to begin with, and that money would be best spent elsewhere before revamping the pyramid. Obviously, that didn't work, and now we have a new pyramid system that people don't use.

And for the Game Politics crowd, I'm sure they will remember that the CDC already has a side regarding videogames. If anyone remembers the dirty, broken-down fields, etc., images that they created about a year ago.

Add in the fact that the primary backing of the named senators, and I'm going to have to nod my head to the ACLU's statements.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: I do have a problem with this
[info]gamepolitics
2006-09-15 02:49 pm UTC (link)
wasn't that "ad campaign" shown to be fraudulently linked to the CDC?

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: I do have a problem with this
[info]blitzfitness
2006-09-15 03:26 pm UTC (link)
Hmm, if it did, it fooled a lot more people than I would have thought. After you reported it on your site I had a convention to go to and saw somebody (NOT a rep from CDC, though) with those images on the background. When I saw that I had assumed it was really a campaign for them.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

CDC denies video game ads
[info]jabrwock
2006-09-15 04:46 pm UTC (link)
wasn't that "ad campaign" shown to be fraudulently linked to the CDC?

Supposedly

http://www.watercoolergames.org/archives/000582.shtml

Before the talk, John Anderton told me that the CDC had nothing to do with this campaign at all (he'd recently left a comment to this effect on the original thread). Apparently someone ripped off the CDC logo and put it on these ads. Weirdly, the ads do seem to trace back to ad agency Saatchi & Saatchi, who apprently did run a $125 million PR campaign for the CDC. That was back in 2002, so maybe someone took their lead and ran with it.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: I do have a problem with this
[info]philoetus
2006-09-15 03:04 pm UTC (link)
I don't know about the new system, but the old pyramid was definitely too simplistic and overly favored breads and cereals over other types of food (note: grain based foods probably belong on the bottom, but were over represented especially considering the health qualities of most breads/pastas/cereals)

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: I do have a problem with this
[info]blitzfitness
2006-09-15 03:27 pm UTC (link)
I understand what you mean, however, I just wanted to use an example that was seen as controversial and to point out that the CDC has been cutting ties with those who supported it for a long time.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Money down a hole
[info]verbinator
2006-09-15 01:30 pm UTC (link)
Call me cynical, but I find it hard to believe that the study will resolve anything, even with the CDC involved ... except to provide inconclusive or even humorous data and vague advice.

In the end, we will have once again watched massive amounts of taxpayer money poured into a hole in the ground and all we will have to show for it is the conclusion "Parents should pay attention to what their children watch and play and guide them to make better choices."

There. Study's done. Please send me 9 million dollars in small unmarked bills.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: Money down a hole
[info]gamepolitics
2006-09-15 02:49 pm UTC (link)
I think it was 90 million earmarked for this research

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: Money down a hole
[info]verbinator
2006-09-15 05:43 pm UTC (link)
My study ... which is already complete and draws the same conclusions is a bargain then! Have the government contact me as to where they can send the cash. They can even take my income tax out of it in advance.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]zewrestler
2006-09-15 02:07 pm UTC (link)
First, I find it interesting that 3 canidates are up for relection on there and beyond those 3, 3 more are presidental hopefuls.

second, as long as it is not like putting former jersey gov christine whitman in charge of the epa, then i have no problem with it. as long as it is a true unbiased science research.

(Reply to this)


[info]blackmanta
2006-09-15 02:11 pm UTC (link)
As well respected as the CDC may be, I still take this as a sign for very bad times ahead for the industry. Whenever studies like this are issued, almost nothing good comes out of them in favor of the parties investigated. And right now, the industry's back is against the wall. If some particularly damning piece of evidence comes out, I don't know what else they can do except not make certain types of games, which is pretty much what happened to the comic book industry in the wake of the Comics Code Authority, as Horror comics ceased to exist shortly therafter. :(

The bill itself is certainly biased, given the people behind it. We all know of Lieberman, Hillary, Brownback and Santorum and their stances on popular entertainment (Brownback, incidentally, also favored heavy indecency fines and wanted the likes of Howard Stern off the air). I don't know enough, though, about Bayh, Enzi and Durbin. Even the name, CAMRA, which I'm sure was not a coincidence, has Orwellian implications as it suggests spying and prying into confidential information.

And finally, Lieberman should just shut up and stop pretending like he still matters. He lost the primary, he's out and it's doubtful he'll still win even if running as a thrid party candidate. Besides, all he really cares about is staying in power anyway, and those are the kind of politicians you want to get rid of.

He looks particularly angry in that picture. Again, Sentator Palpatine and Lieberman: separated at birth?

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]barfo
2006-09-15 09:48 pm UTC (link)
"Lieberman should just shut up and stop pretending like he still matters. He lost the primary, he's out and it's doubtful he'll still win even if running as a thrid party candidate. Besides, all he really cares about is staying in power anyway, and those are the kind of politicians you want to get rid of."

you know that lieberman (unfortunately) is still up appx 10 points over Ned in the various polls right now? Lamont still can hopefully pull it out, by hammering the same messages that won him the primary, but the odds arent great for him. Lieberman is a spoiler and a poor loser with only his own personal intests in mind (rather thant he interests of his voters or his former party) there is no question of that, but he is unfortunately far from irrelevant, (even though of course his vg positions are hopefully pretty irrelevant to the CT electorate who hopefully are looking at things like his votign record etc ont he iraq war)

(Reply to this) (Parent)

I don't have a problem with media research BUT...
[info]bigman_k
2006-09-15 02:50 pm UTC (link)
I have no doubt that because this research will come from a source that is being funded by another source (i.e. - government money) with a biased agenda and biased beliefs that the researchers will go into the study with a certain negative bias and when you go into something like a research study with a biased agenda you're almost certain to find something that fits your beliefs no matter how weak, inconsistant, flawed, unsubstancial that finding is.
I also agree with the ACLU that this research is being done as a way to come up with evidence in court that would allow the government to further censor Free Speech under the guise of preventing a so-called "harm" or to "protect the young" and not for any sort of legitimate "well intentioned" scientific reasons of understanding human nature or behavior.
Personally i don't believe and i am totally against using scientific research as a way to support censorship. I believe that if violent games were really truely harmful to youth we would have found that out by now.

(Reply to this)

The research is needed, however
[info]ace_of_sevens
2006-09-15 02:55 pm UTC (link)
I am glad to see more research being done in this area. Most previous studies have only studied short term effects, only studied aggression, which isn't necessarily bad, rather than actual violent or criminal behavior and used a test environment that did not reflect the real world.

On the other hand, this seems to be out of the purview of the CDC. They deal with communicable disease, chemical threats, bio-weapons and injuries. Psychology is not their field. This is a rather complicated issue. I hope the CDC has someone who can study it properly and that no political pressure is put on them.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: The research is needed, however
[info]jabrwock
2006-09-15 05:12 pm UTC (link)
On the other hand, this seems to be out of the purview of the CDC.

Although the CDC doesn't have the research facilities to study such effects in detail, I believe they might have the best experience at studying any trends from any research that is done (they run the National Center for Health Statistics & the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System). So they would likely be the best for coordinating what factors and groups to study, as well as assembling all the research data at the end.

The problem is that the US Dept of Health doesn't really have a department specifically devoted to this.

SAMHSA is more for mental illness & substance abuse. NIH is for biomedical research. The Surgeon General looked at video game & media research, but didn't do it's own, merely commented on research done by others.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]beacon80
2006-09-15 03:44 pm UTC (link)
And the verdict is... violent video games make people honk horns longer! The battle is now between those advocating restricting violent video games in order to reduce noise pollution, and those who argue that such restrictions would be bad for the economy, as it would have devastating effects on the car horn industry.

(Reply to this)

This is a waste of money we don't have
[info]garbagepa1lk1d
2006-09-15 04:38 pm UTC (link)
Our country is in the red right now. How do we continue to find things to spend money on when we don't have any money?

Regardless of that, there are a million better things we could find to spend this money on. I remember Lieberman talking about children's healthcare during his presidential campaign. Why isn't he focusing on that?

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: This is a waste of money we don't have
[info]zero_beat_x
2006-09-16 07:34 pm UTC (link)
But, this IS children's health care!

Once the evil video games are eliminated, world hunger, AIDS, cancer, and poverty will just vanish!

Trust me, or else!

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]velkrin
2006-09-15 05:07 pm UTC (link)
So how long will it take the CDC to pull an FCC and destroy the result?

I do like the picture however. I'm tempted to put in "LIEBERMAN SMASH!"

(Reply to this)


[info]goodrobotus
2006-09-15 05:36 pm UTC (link)
Problem is of course, it it doesn't give the results that Senators want to hear, i.e. One they can twist to get votes, if they have to accept that computer games are free speech and that there is no causal link between them and violence (NOT aggression, even American Football promotes agression, I love the way Senators etc trip over the difference). Will Lieberman even accept the results? I certainly know people like Clinton and Yee won't, computer games are too easy a scapegoat.

(Reply to this)


(33 comments) - (Post a new comment)

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…