Last week I told you about the ESRB's response to the National Institute for Media and Family's scathing "report card" on video game ratings. That response was provisional, and now the ESRB has released a longer reply to the NIMF, outlining even more questionable aspects of the organization and their report. The rather lengthy response (
PDF) attacks the report and organization on the following points: honesty, integrity, and objectivity. The NIMF fails miserably in each instance. To begin, the NIMF claimed that they were receiving support from the National PTA, and that they would be meeting with them to discuss what they characterized as a bad situation. As it turns out, the National PTA, upon learning more about the NIMF' shortcomings, has cut off relations with them, and has reiterated their support for the ESRB.
As to the claim that parents repeatedly find the ESRB ratings to be inaccurate, and softly rated, the ESRB states:
Each year the ESRB commissions a leading public opinion research firm, Peter D. Hart Research Associates, to measure parental agreement with the ratings. Its most recent study conducted this past October (with a sample size of 400 parents with children between the ages of 3 and 17 who play video games) found that parents agree with the ESRB ratings 82% of the time, and find them to be "too strict" an additional 5% of the time. (emphasis modified by Ars Technica.)
_________________
Read More / Source:
Ars Technica
Dec 7, 2005, 10:33 PM
