Video Games Don’t Cause Children to be Violent

The myth that video games cause violent behavior is undermined by scientific research and common sense.

By Michael D. GallagherMay 10, 2010 | 1:43 p.m. EDT+ More
Michael D. Gallagher is the president and CEO of the Entertainment Software Association.

The Supreme Court recently decided to review a California law that would regulate the sale and rental of computer and video games to minors. We can all agree that parents are the best arbiters of determining what is right for their children. The issue at hand though is how best to support those parents. We believe that with parental controls, ratings awareness and retailer support, proposals like this are a solution in search of a problem. In addition, there are numerous legal reasons why 12 courts have already rejected proposals similar to this one, and we believe there are sound constitutional reasons why we hope the Supreme Court will concur.

A few facts to consider: The average video game player is 35 years old and has been playing for 12 years. Forty percent of gamers are women, and one out of every four gamers is over age 50. Video games are a mass medium form of entertainment that are enjoyed today in a majority of homes by players of all ages.

The myth that video games cause violent behavior is undermined by scientific research and common sense. According to FBI statistics, youth violence has declined in recent years as computer and video game popularity soared. We do not claim that the increased popularity of games caused the decline, but the evidence makes a mockery of the suggestion that video games cause violent behavior. Indeed, as the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals declared: “The state has not produced substantial evidence that … violent video games cause psychological or neurological harm to minors.” 

In fact, addressing critics’ claims that games are somehow different than other forms of art, the Hon. Robin Cauthron of the United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma wrote in a permanent injunction against that state’s attempt to regulate the sale of games to minors that, “the presence of increased viewer control and interactivity does not remove these games from the release of the First Amendment protection.”

The industry also has an independent rating system, similar to the movie rating system, that informs and empowers parents. Watchdog groups and government agencies, like the Federal Trade Commission, praise it as a system that works. A 2009 study by the FTC found that 87 percent of parents were satisfied with the computer and video game ratings. Last year, the FTC said the computer and video game industry “outpaces” other entertainment industries in restricting marketing of mature-rated products to children, clearly and prominently displaying rating information and restricting children’s access to mature-rated products.

Retailers are supportive of the ratings system and are playing a critical role in keeping mature-themed video games out of the wrong hands. Virtually all major U.S. retailers are working to help parents keep control of the games children play by enforcing age restrictions.

Parental controls are also built into all current-generation game consoles, enabling parents to block video games they do not want their children to play. This ensures that parents’ standards are enforced, even when they are not at home.

As a medium, computer and video games are entitled to the same protections as the best of literature, music, movies, and art. In the end, Americans’ rights to speech and expression are sacred and inviolate—and millions across the political spectrum agree with us.

The Government Should Stop Kids From Buying Violent Video Games

The industry’s arguments are logically and morally bankrupt.

By Timothy F. WinterMay 10, 2010 | 1:28 p.m. EDT+ More
Timothy F. Winter is the president of the Parents Television Council.

Ultraviolent video games are harmful to children, and children should not be able to purchase them without a parent involved in the sales transaction. Unfortunately, the very industry that profits from selling such adult entertainment products to children has successfully waged legal battles across the country. The industry’s arguments are logically and morally bankrupt. Hopefully, the U.S. Supreme Court will see through the smokescreens and uphold a carefully worded California statute prohibiting the sale of ultraviolent video games to unaccompanied minor children.

For parents and grandparents, most of whom have never seen or played one of these explicit games, the notion of video game violence is likely to conjure up an image akin to a Tom & Jerry or Road Runner cartoon. That is not what we’re talking about. What we are talking about is a video game where the child is able to:

Shoot a police officer and urinate on him as he tries to crawl away;

The courts have repeatedly held that such speech is constitutionally protected. That’s why the California Legislature, led by San Francisco Bay Area Democrat Leland Yee, set out to craft a state measure that would not interfere with the creation of violent video games, nor interfere with adults who wanted to play or purchase a violent video game for themselves or for their child. The legislation would only prevent a video game retailer from selling an ultraviolent game to an unaccompanied child.

The overwhelming weight of scientific research suggests that these games can be harmful to children. The Parents Television Council has found more than 3,000 studies linking a child’s consumption of violent media to a child’s behavior, yet we’ve found less than two dozen that conclude differently.

Video games are uniquely problematic in that the viewer isn’t simply sitting back and watching the violence. Rather, he or she is actively engaged in the undertaking of the violence, choosing whom to kill, beat, rape, maim, or urinate on. Yet opponents say they’re not convinced that there is any harm, much like the tobacco industry executives who testified to Congress that they weren’t convinced their products were unhealthy.