Trapped in the Matrix Of Unreal Ratings Systems
By
Daphne White
Sunday,
May 25, 2003; Page B05
I recently spent half an hour watching a teenage
boy play the current No. 1-selling
video game in the world. As I looked on, he cheerfully killed six police
officers by
shooting them in the stomach with a shotgun, broke the necks of four others,
stabbed two
people with a stake and participated in several drive-by shootings. The
game's statistics
page showed that in less than four hours, he had fired 9,662 shots and scored
574 "kills." All done to an exciting cinematic score
and enhanced sound effects for
the machine guns, martial arts kicks and explosions. "I
know you are out there. You possess great skills. Follow the white
rabbit," a disembodied voice on the game's soundtrack encouraged
the teen. "
'Follow the white rabbit' -- that's a line from the first movie!"
the boy exclaimed
happily, and prepared for his next murderous mission. And
what is the name of this thrilling game? Enter the Matrix -- a "companion"
game to the recent blockbuster movie "The Matrix
Reloaded." This game sold a record 1 million copies in North America
and Europe in
the first week following its release. Now, follow
the white rabbit. Look at the rating proudly displayed on the front of the
game. You're thinking, M for "mature," right? As in, appropriate
for players 17
or older? After all, the movie itself is rated R. Well -- wrong. The game
is rated T. For "teen." As in anyone 13 or older.
The teenager I watched is 15. How, I want to know,
is this possible? This game actually shows more violence per
minute than the film. Could this be a random mistake, a hole in the Matrix?
Not! According
to the copy on the video game box, the movie and video game together constitute
"the
most integrated entertainment experience to date." The game includes
one hour of
exclusive film footage, and this seamless interface "redefines
the relationship
between Hollywood and video gaming," also according to the game's
box. The hype
continues: "There is only one way to enter The Matrix. Larry and
Andy Wachowski,
creators of the Matrix trilogy, invite you to enter an alternate reality."
The actual "alternate reality"
being sold here is a reality in which an
ultra-violent, adult-rated movie like "Matrix Reloaded"
can be marketed to a
younger audience through a companion video game -- and no harm is done.
Don't succumb to
that reality. We're not talking fairy-tale violence here, or mild cartoon
violence. The
intensity, gruesomeness and morbid nature of these games makes them comparable
to a form
of obscenity. "It would be an odd conception of the First Amendment
. . . that would
allow a state to prevent a boy from purchasing a magazine containing topless
women in
provocative poses . . . but give the same boy a constitutional right to
train to become a
sniper at the local arcade without his parent's permission," wrote
U.S. District
Judge David F. Hamilton in upholding an Indianapolis video game ordinance
that would have
allowed the city to fine retailers who sell or rent explicit video games
to minors. The
video game industry successfully overturned the ruling on appeal, but Washington
state
just passed a first-in-the-nation bill to limit sales or rentals of video
games depicting
violence against police to minors, and a similar bill is pending in Congress.
As a parent, what I want to know is this: Who comes up with these
ratings systems that
allow obscene levels of violence to be marketed to children and teens? For
the answer to
this question, pay no attention to the two men behind the screen: Jack Valenti
of the
Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), representing the movie industry,
and Doug
Lowenstein of the Interactive Digital Software Association (IDSA), representing
the video
game industry. They tell you their ratings boards are "independent,"
but they
themselves created the boards, they hire the boards' directors and their
industries pay
the raters' salaries. Neither industry has been
willing to make public the criteria used to arrive at the
ratings. From what I've been able to determine, there are few written guidelines
for
either system. The ratings form a moving target, as each game and movie
pushes the
envelope further. Movies that would have received an R rating 10 years ago
now often
receive a PG-13 or even a PG rating. I'm thinking of movies like "Austin
Powers in
Goldmember," "The Hot Chick" (one reviewer said
the content of this PG-13
movie is "closer to NC-17"), and "Kangaroo Jack,"
which Nell Minow,
the Movie Mom, says was originally made as an R-rated movie -- but ended
up, with a few
judicious cuts, and through the miracle of the MPAA ratings, as a PG film
advertised to
tots. I once asked an MPAA spokesman whether there
were any child psychologists, teachers or
early childhood experts on the ratings board. "We used to have
them," he replied
patiently, "but they didn't work out." The only qualifications
for serving on
the MPAA ratings board is being a parent and living within commuting distance
of
Hollywood. The names and identities of the actual raters are Top Secret.
Even regulators
at the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), who have written several reports
on the marketing
of violent entertainment to children, were not allowed to interview these
"independent" raters -- not even from behind the safety
of a privacy screen. Top
government spies and informers can testify in Congress from behind a screen
-- but these "independent" raters cannot.
The reason for the secrecy is clear: The purpose of these "independent"
industry-controlled ratings boards is to sell as much product to as many
people as
possible. Teenage boys are a particularly desirable demographic, since 95
percent of them
play video games every month and see their favorite movies three or four
times. So a
T-rated video game or a PG-13 rated movie can theoretically be marketed
to more people
than adult-rated products. But follow the white rabbit.
In a landmark September 2000 report, the FTC found a "pervasive
and aggressive marketing" of adult-rated violent movies and video
games to children, undermining the industries' own ratings systems. Unfortunately,
things
have only gotten worse in the past three years. Both industries are still
marketing
adult-level violence to minors. The financial success of "Matrix
Reloaded" has
emboldened Joel Silver, the movie's producer, to express the hope that it
will prompt
changes in MPAA ratings. "Obviously, people aren't bothered by
violence that isn't
gratuitous," Silver told USA Today. "The MPAA shouldn't
be, either." The
hope is that "Matrix Reloaded" will open the door to the
marketing of other
R-rated films to minors -- perhaps with their own T-rated video game tie-ins.
Why should this matter, you ask? These are just make-believe movies
and video games,
right? And children know the difference between fantasy and reality, don't
they? Well, new brain research indicates that teenagers'
brains -- not just children's brains
-- are still developing, and that they may store violent images as real
memories. The
consensus of the public health community, based on more than 30 years of
research, is that "viewing entertainment violence can lead
to increases in aggressive attitudes, values
and behavior, particularly in children." This conclusion was presented
to Congress in
July 2000 in a joint statement signed by six public health groups.
The merchants of violence market their products directly to children,
mostly bypassing
the parents. Have you seen ads for Grand Theft Auto: Vice City or Outlaw
Golf in any
magazine that you normally read? By and large, video games are promoted
in gaming
magazines and on specialty Web sites that are avidly followed by kids. In
Grand Theft
Auto, players hijack police cars, gun down pedestrians, kill policemen,
pick up
prostitutes to get "health points" -- and then kill the
prostitutes to get their
money back. This game and its predecessor each sold a whopping 8 million
copies. In the
T-rated Outlaw Golf, "the best way to regain your composure is
to give your loyal
caddy a good punch in the stomach," says a review in happypuppy.com.
Yet the reassuring face of Tiger Woods is still on the home page of the
video game ratings
board -- the Entertainment Software Review Board -- offering a public service
announcement
that urges parents to trust the ratings. The cult
of the Matrix pretends that there is deep spiritual meaning to the story.
Yet
the driving theme of the trilogy involves the Mother of All Battles (to
save the Earth, of
course), and "Matrix Reloaded" just treads water with
vacuous dialogue and
highly choreographed martial arts scenes. I shudder to think what kind of
understanding of
life kids will take into adulthood if we allow Tinseltown to market the
ultra-violent "Matrix" to them as a spiritual epic.
Americans have decided not to market cigarettes, alcohol or pornography
to minors. It's
time we took the same public health position regarding children and media
violence.
Ultra-violent video games and movies should be marketed to adults only.
Parents need clear
labels on these "entertainment" products so that they
know exactly what their
content is. Labels could include information such as: "This game
includes
decapitations, eviscerations, shootings, bombings and other illegal acts."
Unlike the grim vision of reality offered to teens in "The
Matrix" -- where
pronouncements like "there is no choice" abound -- I believe
we do have a
choice. We can see these "murder simulators" for what
they are, and we can urge
our legislators to require truth-in-labeling for these products.
Daphne White is the founder and executive director of
The Lion & Lamb Project, a
national parents' organization that seeks to stop the marketing of violent
entertainment
to children.
© 2003 The Washington Post Company
|
