MODULE 17: Children and Violent Video Games
Core Module Issues:
• Are video game producers and sellers obligated to help keep “M” rated
games away from children?
• Are video game producers obligated to make more “kid friendly”
games?
Module Teaching Notes
Like the module on the NFL teams, this is one that can sometimes get “reluctant–to–comment” students to
speak up. I like to begin the presentation of these ideas with the question:
What video games do you play? I look for hands that rarely go up and call on those students first. After
fielding several comments, I’ll go back to the students who named games that I know to be, or suspect to
be, the most violent.
I’ll then ask, is this a game you would have enjoyed at age 11? Would you have been allowed to play at
age 11?
Another question you can ask, if you haven’t spent more time than you’d like to already, is, “What is the
most violent game you did play at age 11? Did it do you any harm? Would you let your own child play that
game at age 11?”
Studies seem to be somewhat contradictory, but it also seems to me that there is a growing consensus that
too much time spent playing violent games, especially by younger players, increases the odds of bad real
world behavior.
Some states have taken a stab at regulation. California imposes a hefty fine on sellers who allow “M” rated
games to fall into the hands of minors.
This law is under legal challenge at the time of this writing. The Supremes have granted cert., and the case
will likely have been decided by the time you are teaching your course. Google Schwarzenegger v. Video
Software Dealers Association for an update.
Regardless of how the Schwarzenegger (whew! I’m glad I don’t have to type that often) case comes out,
legal restrictions can be difficult to craft. Game makers and sellers have legal protections in the first
amendment and other places that can make court challenges viable.
It may be that industry rules that game makers and sellers voluntarily comply with, and increased parental
vigilance, and the best safeguards available. Or, it may be that the courts become more accepting of legal
restrictions.
This module has a lot of characters who are difficult to like. But who is most to blame for the unfortunate
injury on the playground?
One last time – as you go through the discussion questions, pay particular attention to calling on students
who have seldom volunteered comments before.
Discussion Points for Scenario Questions
1. Do you think there is too much marketing of violent products to kids? Do you buy the notion
that it creates or worsens any problems that would not have existed anyway?
A. NO NEW PROBLEMS – WHAT ABOUT THE CANADIAN STUDY IN THE
TEXT? DO YOU NOT BUY IT?
B. NEW PROBLEMS – ANY SPECIFIC EXAMPLES / EXPERIENCES FROM
YOUR OWN LIFE?
2. Should a state like California be permitted to pass laws that restrict the sale of violent games
to minors, or should the courts strike such laws down?
A. LAWS OK – BUT DOES THAT CREATE A “NANNY STATE”?
B. LAWS NOT OK – IS IT ALWAYS ALL UP TO THE PARENTS?
3. From the scenario, rate the relative fault of the people involved in contributing to the injury.
No Fault at All ————————→ Significantly to Blame
Game Executive 1 —– 2 —– 3 —– 4 —– 5 —– 6 —– 7
Game Box Designer 1 —– 2 —– 3 —– 4 —– 5 —– 6 —– 7
Parents 1 —– 2 —– 3 —– 4 —– 5 —– 6 —– 7
Clerk 1 —– 2 —– 3 —– 4 —– 5 —– 6 —– 7
Billy 1 —– 2 —– 3 —– 4 —– 5 —– 6 —– 7
A. WHO RECEIVED THE MOST BLAME ON YOUR SCORECARD? WHY?
B. WHO GETS THE LEAST BLAME ON YOUR SCORECARD? WHY?
4. Setting Billy aside, would it be fair for any of the adults in the scenario to face fines or other
legal sanctions for their roles in getting the game into Billy’s hands?
A. FINES – WHO? HOW MUCH?
B. NO FINES – ANY OTHER KIND OF PUNSIHMENT FOR ANYONE
INVOLVED?
5. Is there too much violence shown on TV, in the movies, on the news, or anywhere else for
your comfort level? As a consumer, do you avoid purchasing products or services from any
companies that show too many graphic images?
A. YES – GIVE A SPECIFIC EXAMPLE
B. NO – EVEN FOR KIDS?