Video Game Industry PAC

[BaRRaKID]

Capitalizing on its improved respectability, the video game industry intends to establish a political action committee to donate money to game-friendly politicians and candidates.
Michael D. Gallagher, chief executive of the Entertainment Software Association, the industry’s lobbying arm in Washington, said last week that the group’s board approved the PAC’s creation last fall and that the committee would be up and running by the end of March. The association represents major game publishers including the Walt Disney Company, Electronic Arts, Microsoft, Nintendo and Sony.

Read the entire thing here

Although i don't like this kind of actions (since it's basically a bribe), i have to admit that after all the things that the Industry had to put up with, this is one of the best strategies to guarantee a bright future for game development. Things are getting to a point where Video Games are blamed for all the evil on earth, and the art is discriminated when comparing to other forms of entertainment.
One of the political repercussions from this move is that one of the candidates for the United States presidency (Hillary "Too Much Botox" Clinton) defends the anti-games movements, so if the industry gives enough support to one of her rivals (ie: Barack Obama) they can pretty much guarantee him the victory since a big part of the voters are gammers.
Games now have a change to actually change the course of world history... soon they will rule the world

[SlappyBag]

This is very interesting and I highly support it. As you say, it will put gamers and gaming into more positive light and hopefully make it a force for politicians to actually take seriously.

[Zipfinator]

Maybe it will put an end to all this bullshit like blaming the school shootings on video games! And I hope that bitch Hilary doesn't win, I bet she's never even played a video game but she still discriminates against them.

[Ryder2394]

Kid: (comes to school with a gun and kills everybody)
Idiot Parents and or Faculty and staff: Let's just blame the whole thing on rock music and videogames and call it a day and not consider the fact that we are to blame for not taking steps to make public places more safe and fun for everyone.

[Mango]

Business is business.

[Ryder2394]

Maybe it will put an end to all this bullshit like blaming the school shootings on video games! And I hope that bitch Hilary doesn't win, I bet she's never even played a video game but she still discriminates against them.

If Hillary becomes president a dimensional rift will open in the universe and Half-Life 2 will come true

If Obama becomes president the earth will implode.

If Brush stays president we will be in iraq until they are all destroyed i mean liberated

If any president dare attempt to take away videogames or any other form of entertainment or connectivity America will go down the shitter and before we know it Britain will come to the rescue and liberate i mean destroy us all.

[zombie@computer]

non-mainstream stuff is always been blamed for what the youngsters of that time do. Your parents were destroyed by rocknroll n hippy crap, your grandparents by protestantism etc. etc. etc. This crap wont change a thing, thats bullocks.

[Ryder2394]

We need to stop blaming material things for human stupidity and just take the blame ourselves.

[srredfire]

We need to stop blaming material things for human stupidity and just take the blame ourselves.

QFTMFT

[BaRRaKID]

Your parents were destroyed by rocknroll n hippy crap, your grandparents by protestantism etc. etc. etc. This crap wont change a thing, thats bullocks.

Have you read the article? if so, then why do you say that? If you're talking about the mentality (or stupidity) of people, then yes, this won't change a thing, but that's because every people on earth has their own opinions and prejudices regarding almost every topic you can think off. But that's not the point of this. The objective is to get some political backup for the game industry to rely on when things start to look bad. If you've politicians on your side, then it would be harder for a law to forbid violence in games (for example) to be approved, or for companies to be sued because of having sexual content (even if it is almost no existent), so this means that legally and on paper (which at the end of the day its what is really important for the companies) game companies will have a safe net to save them from all this crap, and that can only mean that better things will come out from the game industry in the near future.

[zombie@computer]

Your parents were destroyed by rocknroll n hippy crap, your grandparents by protestantism etc. etc. etc. This crap wont change a thing, thats bullocks.

Have you read the article? if so, then why do you say that? If you're talking about the mentality (or stupidity) of people, then yes, this won't change a thing, but that's because every people on earth has their own opinions and prejudices regarding almost every topic you can think off. But that's not the point of this. The objective is to get some political backup for the game industry to rely on when things start to look bad. If you've politicians on your side, then it would be harder for a law to forbid violence in games (for example) to be approved, or for companies to be sued because of having sexual content (even if it is almost no existent), so this means that legally and on paper (which at the end of the day its what is really important for the companies) game companies will have a safe net to save them from all this crap, and that can only mean that better things will come out from the game industry in the near future.

yea, like i said, there are always dumb people who will come up with their own theories. For every politician you gain, you will also gain one against you. Its how politics work.

[RobQ]

since a big part of the voters are gamers.

I wish.

[RawMeat3000]

"The high-water mark of political dudgeon about games came in 2005 when scenes of mild sexual provocation were discovered hidden with the code for the game Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas. In the wake of the controversy Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton proposed legislation to increase federal regulation of the game industry."

God I hope she doesn't get elected... Not even because of the fact that a simple Google search reveals thousands of times more explicit content than that whimpy little softcore action (and is a thousand times easier), but because she has the balls to suggest that more government is the answer.

And while I don't like what lobbyists do to our government, I love the fact that the gaming industry has elevated itself to this level. And that Jack Thompson can do nothing to stop it.

[Mangopork]

I'm against it.

Too much possibility of corruption and its based on the faulty assumption that people only have power when they band together.

Individuals have voting and donation power already.

A committee I am against. A CAMPAIGN with a specific objective and goal, I am all for.

Why?

The problem with committee's is that once they've outlived their usefulness they rarely disband. Instead, they get filled up with greedy suits, bigwigs, and old dinosaurs who only care about power and money.

Also a committee ends up becoming another washington lobbyist which means EVERY agenda gets screwed up. I have yet to meet, see, or hear of a lobbyist who EVER accomplished anything good.

So that's bad.

A campaign, however, has a LOT Of force behind it, has a clear objective, and works tirelessly untill the goal is accomplished.

Then the goal is typically reached or come close to being so.

Then it disbands.

Its pure, its fast, it works in a way that empowers individuals and minimizes corruption.

Do a campaign for a specific objective instead.

[Mr-Jigsaw]

But the presence of lobbyists is a boon to government. Lobbyists are specialists in their field of interest, albeit somewhat biased, but can enlighten legislators thoroughly about their topic. The problem is that most things we hear of lobbyists ring of corruption, the extreme cases. Whether or not this action commitee is created, many other PACs still function, benefitting their supporters and the people they represent. This demographic has the right, just as all the others, to be represented.

Lobbyists aren't all that bad, there's a need for them. If a legislator knows little of an impending subject, a lobbyist from a pertinent group can tell that legislator what he or she needs to know. It's hardly as if they can just load up wikipedia and have their mind decided. You need insiders, from both sides, to truly know an issue. A PAC of this sort would be a benefit, seeing the great impact others have had in the recent elections.