Stephen King defends games

By Robert Purchese Published 7 April, 2008

Author sets shining example.

American author Stephen King has spoken out against politicians trying to ban videogames with violent content.

Writing as a columnist on Entertainment Weekly, King declared this "surrogate parent" role of the rule makers as one that usually has "disastrous" and "undemocratic" results.

"What really makes me insane is how eager politicians are to use the pop culture - not just videogames but TV, movies, even Harry Potter - as a whipping boy," wrote King. "It's easy for them, even sort of fun, because the pop-cult always hollers nice and loud. Also, it allows legislators to ignore the elephants in the living room.

"Elephant One is the ever-deepening divide between the haves and have-nots in this country, a situation guys like Fiddy and Snoop have been indirectly rapping about for years. Elephant Two is America's almost pathological love of guns," King continued.

"It was too easy for critics to claim - falsely, it turned out - that Cho Seung-Hui (the Virginia Tech killer) was a fan of Counter-Strike; I just wish to God that legislators were as eager to point out that this nutball had no problem obtaining a 9mm semiautomatic handgun. Cho used it in a rampage that resulted in the murder of 32 people. If he'd been stuck with nothing but a plastic videogame gun, he wouldn't even have been able to kill himself."

Stephen King, like many sensible people, believes the responsibility of monitoring what children are playing or watching lies with the parents. But this, as the Byron report pointed out recently, means educating Mum and Dad.

"Parents need to have the guts to forbid material they find objectionable... And then explain why it's being forbidden. They also need to monitor their children's lives in the pop culture - which means a lot more than seeing what games they're renting down the street," argued King.

Picture of Robert.

About Robert Purchese

Bertie is Eurogamer's Senior Staff Writer. When he's not hunting down news stories he's often found playing with his kids or gabbling about fantasy games and strange online worlds.

Read more articles from Robert by visiting the Robert Purchese archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (30) Latest comment 4 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • 3william56 #1 4 years ago

    Brrr... middle aged yank says "Fiddy" to seem down wif da kidz... creeeepy...

  • PlugMonkey #2 4 years ago

    All a bit too sensible to get too many column inches in the Daily Mail, I fear.

    Elephant No. 3, in my opinion, is the increasing attitude of parents that raising their children is somehow someone else's responsibility.

  • space_ace #3 4 years ago

    author takes a stand.

  • space_ace #4 4 years ago

    charlton heston couldn't be pleased with anything anymore... rip

  • tomkuryakin #5 4 years ago

    Yes, now someone can take Charlton Heston's gun from his "cold, dead hands."

    Well done Stephen King for speaking out intelligently. More of this sort of thing.

  • The-Bodybuilder #6 4 years ago

    With someone with the fame like stephen king, you would expect america to listen, wouldn't you?

    HA.

  • The_Inquisitor #7 4 years ago

    I've always enjoyed his books so it's good to know he's a sensible chap too.

  • mikew1985 #8 4 years ago

    @ 3william56

    Yes because that is the point of this article.

    Well done for picking up on and criticising something so inane in an otherwise intelligently written piece.
    I suppose some people always have to find something wrong with everything.

  • JohnnyWashnGo #9 4 years ago

    While I appluad King for his well thought out and sensible critique of the demonisation of video games in modern media, I fear that even a voice as respected as his will not be enough.

    It is very, very hard to say to people that their love of the right to bear arms is causing this problem and that they should give up this 'right' in order to make their world a better place. It is even harder still to tell parents that they are not doing their job right and that they should exercise more control over what their children do in their spare time or pay more attention to their children in order to make them feel loved.

    The easy choice, and the choice most often taken by media outlets in search of a short, snappy soundbite, is to blame the latest and greatest boogeyman. As King points out, everything has been fingered as the suspect for the decline of western civilisation from the Waltz, to Zombie movies and now video games. I sometimes wonder if they hand out these giant, opaque blinkers to people when they become parents, to enable them to miss the bleedin' obvious.

  • mr_ruberfon #10 4 years ago

    "Yes, now someone can take Charlton Heston's gun from his "cold, dead hands."

    well done tomkuryakin, more of this!

  • Olemak #11 4 years ago

    Video games also cause wars, like the war in Irak. I mean, that's like right out of CoD or C&C or something.

    I'm convinced that Bush and his buddies spent a lot of time playing Halo or whatever before deciding it would be fun to invade a real country, for real.

    And see where it's gotten the US and the Coalition of the Willing (which is a lame guild name, even for an Alliance side guild).

  • GamesConnoisseur #12 4 years ago

    space ace: author takes a stand.

    Lol

  • Mindstorm #13 4 years ago

    I love Mr King.

    By the way, I ORDER you to read his Dark Tower books and organise a petition to turn them into a series games: a pure goldmine!

  • Svecke #14 4 years ago

    @Mindstorms

    Your ideas are compelling to me, and I wish to join your cult. :D

  • Bertie Verified Senior Staff Writer, Eurogamer.net #15 4 years ago

    I'd love to see Dark Tower adapted into a game. J.J. Abrams has been linked with a making a film based around the series.

  • Nova5lag #16 4 years ago

    @PlugMonkey - too true... I am a parent and I wouldnt play GTA in front of my kid let alone let them play it... plus when they start going to friends houses I will inform the parents of said houses that if their children are playing GTA and Manhunt it isnt suitable. (As I invariably do when I see an obvious unknowing parent being coerced into buying such product by nine year olds in my local games stores!)

    I get sick of parents passing the buck, you have the child look after it!

  • chicknstu #17 4 years ago

    Unfortunately, "sensible people" are irellevant in the world of polotics.

  • The_Inquisitor #18 4 years ago

    I too love the Dark Tower series, so I'd rather it wasn't tarnished by sub standard games. You can't blame me for my scepticism if you know anything about game history.....but I digress.

  • Lexx87 #19 4 years ago

    I love you people who love The Dark Tower series, best series of books EVER in the history of books EVER.

  • PlugMonkey #20 4 years ago

    Good for you, Nova!

    I also once accosted a parent in Game buying their 9 year old son GTA:SA on the grounds that it was "ok because he knows not to repeat any of the words he hears".

    I told her she was very liberal to let her son play a game where he can have sex with a prostitute and then beat her to death with a giant purple dildo to get his money back. She went a very funny colour.

  • ZuluHero #21 4 years ago

    I told her she was very liberal to let her son play a game where he can have sex with a prostitute and then beat her to death with a giant purple dildo to get his money back. She went a very funny colour.

    lol - i must remember that one :)

  • Les #22 4 years ago

    "Parents need to have the guts to forbid material they find objectionable... And then explain why it's being forbidden."

    Don't agree with this. Forbidding stuff only makes it more attractive. Kids will get to it anyway. You have to explain why it's stupid, wrong or not suited for them and hope they've got the sense to understand and accept that. If not, they're lost anyway.

    /edit: punctuation...
    Edited by 1 at 07/04/08 @ 17:07

  • Agent_Llama #23 4 years ago

    @PlugMonkey: "Elephant No. 3, in my opinion, is the increasing attitude of parents that raising their children is somehow someone else's responsibility."

    Precisely, and the biggest elephant of them all.

  • jamie_fear #24 4 years ago

    @ Nova5lag

    Yes, I agree. I'm glad to hear you're monitoring your children's gaming like I was when I was a kid. For instance, I wasn't allowed to play Mortal Kombat as my parents deemed that too violent for me (10 year old or so at the time). Even with Carmageddon I had to play with the zombies turned off. I guess I'll be doing the same as yourself and my parents did if i ever have children.

  • Bitkari #25 4 years ago

    Can I please make a Carrie Burn-em-up now?

  • sneetch #26 4 years ago

    That was the best Stephen King that I've ever read.

  • AOFanboi #27 4 years ago

    It's charming how most of the 2nd Amendment defenders haven't read the Federalist Papers which discuss WHY they have the amendment: The founding Fathers (peace be upon them) decided that having a professional army was too expensive and that it would be cheaper to arm the citizenry to resist an invasion (the idea that America itself would be invading anyone was preposterous; note this was a few years before the war against Mexico).

    But look at what America has these days... professional army, the occasional draft, biggest atta... defense spending in the West...

  • yagisencho #28 4 years ago

    Quote:
    "Parents need to have the guts to forbid material they find objectionable... And then explain why it's being forbidden."

    Don't agree with this. Forbidding stuff only makes it more attractive. Kids will get to it anyway. You have to explain why it's stupid, wrong or not suited for them and hope they've got the sense to understand and accept that. If not, they're lost anyway.
    /end Quote

    Les, Les, Les. By this logic, we shouldn't forbid our children from wiping feces on strangers or from smoking crack cocaine.

    In fact, it's a parent's duty to set and enforce rules for their household. Yes, a child can still go behind their parent's back, but forbidding something does not automatically ensure its consumption. You seem to underestimate both parties in this case.

    I enjoy some games that can be considered 'ultra-violent'. I don't play these around my children, and wouldn't allow my children to play them in our household until at least their mid-teens. Each family can set their own rules on this type of issue. Thank goodness.

  • Les #29 4 years ago

    "Les, Les, Les. By this logic, we shouldn't forbid our children from wiping feces on strangers or from smoking crack cocaine."

    Exactly. I don't think people in general aren't doing those things because they are forbidden but because they understand that those are not good habbits. I even think that less people would be smoking crack cocaine if it were not forbidden. Let alone that society as a whole would be a much better place if the ridiculous and arbitrary laws that make drug use criminal were removed. Not because everyone would turn into a peace-loving hippie (with the occasional psychotic killing spree here and there) but because criminals wouldn't make money on it anymore and therefore disappear. Tax payer's money wouldn't be thrown away just to create heftier profit margins for the drug lords (risk/reward) and could be spent usefully.

    Rules should be used sparingly and in general are only useful if the people that should live to them are either convinced of their usefulness (which is why people are less strict with following traffic rules when there's nobody around at night) or there's a substantial chance that they will be punished if they don't abide them while the benefit of ignoring the rule isn't big enough.

  • Fusey #30 4 years ago

    He talks sense!