A letter from Michael Atkinson, and a reply

Yesterday Kotaku posted an article about one of their readers who wrote to South Australia Attorney-General Michael Atkinson earlier in the year finally recieving a reply.

Here is a link to the article, where you can find a download for the entire letter.

Here are some excerpts from it:

"You may be aware that there was talk of the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General releasing a discussion paper on [the introduction of an R18+ classification for games]. I have been awaiting the release of this paper… Alas, the paper has not yet been released and, despite my inquiring, I do not know when it will be available. I want the discussion paper released as soon as possible and have done nothing to impede its release."

"‘Interactive Australia 2007', a report prepared by Bond University for the Interactive Entertainment Association of Australia, surveyed 1,606 Australian households randomly. The report found “79% of Australian households have a device for computer and video games”. Further, 62% of Australians in these gaming households “say the classification of a game has no influence on their buying decision”. Given this data, I cannot fathom what State-enforced safeguards could exist to prevent R18+ games being bought by households with children and how children can be stopped from using these games once the games are in the home. If adult gamers are so keen to have R18+ games, I expect children would be just as keen. Classification of electronic games is very different from the classification of film. In cinemas, the age of movie-goers can be regulated… Rising game and console sales make it clear that this is a growing area that needs careful regulation, even more so than cinemas and private D.V.D. hire and purchase. Access to electronic games, once in the home, cannot be policed and therefore the games are easily accesible to children."

This is possibly the most insulting argument I have seen from him. If it was the case that there are no safeguards "to prevent R18+ games being bought by households with children" then how are MA15+ games any different? He brings this point up later on, about how they are already gaining access to MA15+ material, and that proves that the R18+ rating should not be allowed.

Gamers 4 Croydon have posted up a response to the letter. The entire response is worth a read, but here is the closing paragraph:

What Mr Atkinson's letter demonstrates is little more than that he has a prejudice against violent video games. Much of the 'evidence' he provides to support his claim is dubious or patently false, and it shows a much greater interest in distracting people with emotive arguments than thoughtful consideration of available information. While he is of course entitled to dislike violence in video games (and any other media for that matter), his personal distaste is not sufficient reason to curtail the rights of responsible adults, expose minors to adult content, and ignore the opinions of an overwhelming majority of Australians.
He is, after all, supposed to be a representative.