Brussels, 21/01/2009 (Agence Europe) - Parents remain the essential barrier in protecting children from excessively violent content in videogames. This was the conclusion reached by those taking part in a public hearing held in the context of the draft report by Toine Manders (ADLE, Netherlands) on consumer protection in the field of videogames. The objective of the hearing was to determine the social impact of videogames on the youngest members of society and to consider the correct political response to protect young consumers from particularly violent games. MEP Manders asked attendees whether videogames were directly responsible for violent behaviour in children and adolescents and whether more resources should be poured into prevention campaigns targeting schools. He feels that there are paths of action to control the use of violent games by the youngest children, such as checks on the identity of credit card holders when videogames are being purchased online.
According to Professor Jeffrey Goldstein of the University of Utrecht, videogames are an excellent socialisation resource and have many positive benefits for the development of memory, cognitive ability and intellect in young children, as long as they have access to appropriate games. In the view of Professor Goldstein, violence in videogames should not be demonised because expressing aggression at play, in videogames or any other kind of games, is a "biological necessity" in the development of young adolescents. There are no reliable studies establishing any correlation between violent behaviour in real life and aggression deployed in videogames, he stressed. The parents are the first to notice signs that their children are over-using videogames, to prevent their use and educate them to help them to make the right choices, he noted. The director of Denmark's Media Council, Susanne Boe, quoted the example of a Danish national prevention campaign. She stated that one of the essential objectives was to make parents aware of the problem, because they are ideally placed to limit children's use of videogames. Laurent Baup, a lawyer with responsibility for cases relating to the protection of minors and cyber crime, listed the advantages and limitations of the PEGI Pan European Game Information system, which puts an age category on leisure software and which was developed by the industry with the support of the European Union (see EUROPE 9461). The system works well and is widely used, but parents do not yet know enough about its existence, he said. Additionally, PEGI needs to be improved and further developed (it does not yet include all games in its repertoire). The verification system should also be more specific: should only age be verified, or the global identity of the consumer to establish a list of consumers, he asked. PEGI is a first step in the right direction, but the industry cannot resolve everything by itself and it will take the cooperation of the entire Internet industry, Mr Baup concluded. This view was shared by Alexander Scheuer, director general of the Institute of European media law (EMR) of Saarbrücken, who added that existing self-regulation initiatives should be extended to bring in a minimum level of standardisation and promote a stable legal framework. Patrice Chazerand, secretary general of the ISFE (Interactive Software Federation Europe), spoke of the problems for the industry of defining categories of videogames, as these are becoming increasingly interactive (the player can decide on how the game unfolds). He feels that prevention should be achieved by means of prevention campaigns in schools, which are the best place to inform parents of the dangers to which their children may be exposed.
The draft report by Toine Manders was being discussed at the IMCO committee this Wednesday 21 January ahead of the vote scheduled for 11 February. (I.L./trans.fl)