backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 38 comment(s) - last by winterspan.. on May 9 at 5:34 AM

GTA IV on the side of a bus  (Source: Joystiq)
Take-Two not happy about what CTA did to GTA

Grand Theft Auto IV advertising is visible everywhere on television, websites, magazines and even outdoor signage. Although there doesn’t seem to be any escaping the marketing barrage, the Chicago Transit Authority (CTA) decided to remove any ads for the game from its busses, train system and other spaces.

As a result, Take-Two Interactive sued the CTA and sales agent Titan Outdoor LLC, accusing it of pulling ads without an explanation and violating contract and free speech rights. Take-Two is seeking monetary damages of $300,000 – the value of the original campaign agreement – and that the ads be reinstated.

According to Reuters’ reading of the suit, the transit advertisements were removed following a report by Fox News that questioned the ads in light of a recent wave of violent crimes in Chicago.

This is not the first time that Chicago Transit Authority has advertised for the Grand Theft Auto series. In 2004, the CTA ran ads for Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas, recalled a Chicago Tribune blog. At the time, Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich criticized the CTA for the ads, resulting in the removal of all posters.

Gov. Blagojevich has been a long-time opponent of the accessibility of M-rated video games to the public. In August 2005, the Illinois State Legislature enacted the Sexually Explicit Video Game Law (SEVGL) which required all retailers take specific measures for its mature games.

More than a year later, U.S. District Judge Matthew F. Kennelly ruled the law as unconstitutional. Judge Kennelly also ordered Gov. Blagojevich to pay the legal costs of the video-game industry, which at the time amounted to over $510,260.

After nearly a month of non-payment, Gov. Blagojevich was ordered by the courts to pay the amount of $520,000, which included interested.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
In my opinion
By FITCamaro on 5/7/2008 9:06:22 AM , Rating: 5
They should at least get their money back. Not allowing advertising for the game is ridiculous. Any kid that wants the game already knows about it anyway. Its up to the parents to whether he/she gets it. If they choose to buy it for him/her, thats their decision and their responsibility.




RE: In my opinion
By novacthall on 5/7/2008 9:34:08 AM , Rating: 5
Giving modern parenting quite a bit of credit, there, don't you think? I mean, you even went so far as to suggest that they're responsible for their children.

Apologies in advance for breaking anyone's Sarcasm Detector (TM).


RE: In my opinion
By FITCamaro on 5/7/2008 9:36:21 AM , Rating: 5
Its not sarcasm when its the truth.


RE: In my opinion
By GaryJohnson on 5/7/2008 9:40:45 AM , Rating: 2
Unless the kid saves his allowance or lunch money, or has money from a summer job. At least, that's how I used to buy (or more often rent) NES, SEGA, & SNES games when I was a kid.


RE: In my opinion
By FITCamaro on 5/7/2008 10:26:57 AM , Rating: 2
Stores still aren't allowed to sell the kid the game. And if the kid is 17, it becomes a parenting issue even more. As a parent you set what is allowed to be done in your house. Even if they're 17, you still can tell them what to do. They might not like you for it, but thats part of being a parent.


RE: In my opinion
By Polynikes on 5/7/2008 11:23:36 AM , Rating: 4
The problem is many parents aren't even aware of the games their kids play, or that they have ratings.

Not that any of it matters. I've been playing M-rated games since the Wolfenstein days (I'm 24 now) and I didn't turn into a crazy psycho killer. It's not like the same kinds of shit aren't shown on TV, anyways.

There were boobs in Titanic, boobs , NAKED BOOBS, OMFG, and that movie was only PG-13! The kids can't take it! They're all gonna turn into sexual deviants! Get that shit off the silver screen!


RE: In my opinion
By theapparition on 5/7/2008 1:03:44 PM , Rating: 4
It's the same old debate. You can kill anyone you want in GTA, but the minute you see some simulated sex(hot coffee mod), the game becomes AO and gets pulled off the shelf.

The NY Post showed the bloody picture of a murdered teen on the cover, but instead.....the country got up-in-arms about .5sec of Janet J's flash.

And we wonder what kind of message were sending when all the signals are mixed up.


RE: In my opinion
By Polynikes on 5/8/2008 1:43:56 AM , Rating: 2
Yep. It's a strange world we live in.


RE: In my opinion
By winterspan on 5/9/2008 5:34:42 AM , Rating: 2
It's not a strangle world, it's a strange country we live in.

It's an odd and twisted synthesis of hypocritical, self-righteous christian politics, the conservative demonization of sexuality, the violence obsessed/immune society, and modern media's sensationalism all rolled into one giant cluster*uck.


RE: In my opinion
By GaryJohnson on 5/7/2008 11:25:01 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Stores still aren't allowed to sell the kid the game.


AO games usually yes, but M games not always. Some states/municipalities have laws & some retailers have policies against it, but some don't.


RE: In my opinion
By afkrotch on 5/7/2008 3:59:52 PM , Rating: 2
Shoot, sometimes it's harder for a kid to get model paint, than it is to get an AO rated game.


RE: In my opinion
By lightfoot on 5/7/2008 4:58:37 PM , Rating: 2
Name just one AO game that kids can get their hands on, and the re-rated version of San Andreas (that was packaged as M) doesn't count. I can't even think of an AO game - major retailers won't even carry AO games.


RE: In my opinion
By FaceMaster on 5/8/2008 4:40:57 AM , Rating: 2
...Or they could steal it


RE: In my opinion
By callmeroy on 5/7/2008 9:49:39 AM , Rating: 2
Agreed they should get their money back hands down.

I'm on the side of any of you that think its messed up how games are blamed for the cause of violence, however it does seem quirky to me that a city government agency would sponsor a game that includes possible violence against law enforcement. That logic is strange to me -- its like a vegatarian offering gift certificates to the local steak house as long as you attend their speech.


RE: In my opinion
By tubalcain on 5/7/2008 10:06:58 AM , Rating: 2
I see your point but its no different than seeing an ad for Die Hard where cops die all the time or any other movie which depicts violence as they love too run full size ads on buses,subways,etc. especially in New York.


RE: In my opinion
By KristopherKubicki (blog) on 5/7/2008 10:17:59 AM , Rating: 2
The CTA would run ads for cocaine if the laws let them -- they really don't care where they get their funding from. This was all a move by the governor to undermine the city's efforts to fund its transportation, and push his agenda at the same time.


RE: In my opinion
By phatboye on 5/7/2008 10:06:03 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
Not allowing advertising for the game is ridiculous. Any kid that wants the game already knows about it anyway. Its up to the parents to whether he/she gets it. If they choose to buy it for him/her, thats their decision and their responsibility.

I could use that same logic to argue why the tobacco companies should be allowed to advertise cigarettes to children. Agreed they should receive a refund if they haven't received it by now, but your logic is flawed.


RE: In my opinion
By SavagePotato on 5/7/2008 10:23:08 AM , Rating: 5
Apparently both your logic and your reading comprehension is flawed. The article states that they pulled the ads based on local crime statistics, no doubt falsely attributing the game to those statistics. Not because they believed children were committing those crimes.

Furthermore the ads are in no way specifically directed at children. You are guilty of falling into the same stupidity that organizations like fox news does in the assumption that video game = children only. No it is a mature rated game 17+ and that is perfectly appropriate. Comparing it to advertising cigarettes is ludicrous. Comparing it to advertising mature movies would be more on par, but I guess we mustn't do that because a child might see the ad.

People need to pull their head out of the sand and then bang it on a wall. Sheltering kids from reality does nothing to help raise them properly. Teaching them values and doing your job as a parent on the other hand does, but hey that's alot to ask I know, for people to take f-ing responsibility when they decide to exercise their god given right to spread their legs and start spitting out kids because some biological imperative told them to.

Here is a better suggestion. If you don't think responsibility and hard work is involved in raising kids do the world a favor and don't have them. Just because you can do something doesn't mean it's a good idea if you are an irresponsible moron that shouldn't be raising a cat much less a child.


RE: In my opinion
By FITCamaro on 5/7/08, Rating: 0
RE: In my opinion
By FITCamaro on 5/7/2008 10:33:07 AM , Rating: 2
And I was in no way advocating waiting until you're married for sex. I sure as hell didn't.


RE: In my opinion
By deeznuts on 5/7/2008 7:26:24 PM , Rating: 2
Hey those dolls the White Sox got in trouble for don't count!


RE: In my opinion
By Omega215D on 5/7/2008 4:19:34 PM , Rating: 2
Well said.... especially coming from someone called SavagePotato... =P

The sad thing is that morons breed faster than smarter people. Soon you'll be hard pressed to find someone who is not an inconsiderate bum.


RE: In my opinion
By KristopherKubicki (blog) on 5/7/2008 10:16:24 AM , Rating: 5
The entire motivation for this thing is an ongoing political battle between the state government and the City of Chicago / Cook County that has been going on for years.

Chicago is a surprisingly progressive city. The bus drivers, cops, everyone I talk to loves the game, and the ads were very tastefully done.

The problem is our governor is pretty much a backwater hack that got elected based on the other 50+ counties of farmers. He's been indicted twice since he took office for fraud, has less than a 30% approval rating and is currently under impeachment too. He pulls stuff like this all the time -- less than two months ago he yanked the state's CTA funding because Chicago wouldn't let him put a casino downtown.

He's omitting a war of attrition: how dare you find alternative, lucrative ways to fund your public transportation.


RE: In my opinion
By GhandiInstinct on 5/7/2008 12:57:44 PM , Rating: 2
I live in Chicago and I can vouch that Kristopher is right on the money regarding our corrupted little Governor.


Link to the Fox News Report?
By VahnTitrio on 5/7/2008 10:37:52 AM , Rating: 2
Maybe I just wasn't looking in the right places but does anyone have it? I would love to see how they could directly correlate the increased violent crime to the game.

It seems to me they are picking on an easy target here. I'm sure the increase in crime has a lot more to do with a struggling economy shortening tempers and driving people to desperation than it does a video game.




RE: Link to the Fox News Report?
By KristopherKubicki (blog) on 5/7/2008 10:59:42 AM , Rating: 2
Added the Fox link for you.

The increase in crime (Chicago is once again the murder capital in the US again), is actually due to a pretty massive turf war under way in the city. Over the last few years the city took down all of its housing projects in the northern half of the city. This displaced the very aggressive project gangs into sleepier neighborhoods -- hundreds of blocks of low-rise, low-income loosely held corners.

It happens every spring like clockwork since the towers came down: they're fighting for turf. It's probably going to get worse too until some of the gentrification cools down and the gangs stabilize.


RE: Link to the Fox News Report?
By Ashrac on 5/7/2008 12:43:29 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
It happens every spring like clockwork since the towers came down: they're fighting for turf. It's probably going to get worse too until some of the gentrification cools down and the gangs stabilize.


Thought I was watching The Wire for a second.
That show actually did a very good job of showing what happened when you start tearing down one section of low-income housing and displacing people that live there onto a different section of streets with the Barksdale vs Stansfield war.


By KristopherKubicki (blog) on 5/7/2008 12:48:11 PM , Rating: 2
Fun trivia fact: Barksdale and Stanfield were real gangsters in Chicago. The series was based on the Chicago drug wars in the 90s. They moved the location to Baltimore, but you can Google on the Chicago project wars and then go watch the same thing on The Wire.


RE: Link to the Fox News Report?
By fic2 on 5/7/2008 11:40:35 AM , Rating: 2
Well, since the game has only been out a few days I doubt that there could be much of a crime wave attributed to it.


Off-topic Concern
By rainwalker on 5/7/08, Rating: 0
RE: Off-topic Concern
By lightfoot on 5/7/2008 5:22:02 PM , Rating: 2
That was perhaps the dumbest post I have ever read.

First off, 10 year-olds shouldn't be playing the game. If they are that's fine so long as they have their parents there to provide context. The game is a fairly accurate representation of the real world - the shady sides may be emphasized, but the real world is in fact the inspiration.

You seem to imply that GTA doesn't contribute anything to society, but having actually played the game I have to SERIOUSLY disagree. I won't argue the whole game as art perspective; that has already been done. What the game provides is social commentary. Are the jokes crude and rude? Yes they are. Do they provoke critical thought on real world issues? Yes they do. It is hardly the game maker's fault that they are commenting on a genuinely messed-up world, but that is in fact the world that we live in. Blame society for the art, not the art for the society.

Everyone focuses on the violence of the game, but it is critical to note that the frequently referenced evils of the game are NOT part of the main story. Killing cops, hiring prostitutes, and running down pedestrians are just a side effect of creating a living virtual world that responds to the player in a realistic manner.

If video games did some how CAUSE real world violence, then there would be a clear increase in violent crime as video games have increased in popularity. In fact the correlation is exactly the opposite. Violent crime is at historical lows in the United States - it dropped dramatically in the 90's. Also teens and tweens who are sitting on their couch glued to their video game console aren't likely to be the same kids on the street corner selling drugs and killing other kids.

The GTA series has ALWAYS had a very strong anti-drug/anti-violence theme. Anyone who has played or seen the games would know that. A depiction of violence is not the same as an endorsement of violence. You have to depict something in order to comment on it.

Get a clue.


RE: Off-topic Concern
By rainwalker on 5/8/2008 4:33:11 PM , Rating: 2
That was perhaps the dumbest response I have ever read.

First off, I never said that 10 year olds should be playing the game. What was implied in my post was that young kids are going to be playing the game and that those same kids are probably going to be negatively influenced - whether minimally or maximally - by the game. Is that so hard to understand?

As for art and social commentary, I'm not sure why you would believe that all art and commentary are productive. You might regard your previous post as an example of a useless and cognitively-impairing commentary. And, although GTA certainly pushes modern boundaries of virtual reality, the point I intended to push was that - in spite of whatever good it may offer - GTA's legacy won't have been an ethical or morally "good" one. I can do without pushing the boundaries of real-world-like video games if it means even 10 less acts of youth violence. Don't be so naive as to think that this "art" doesn't affect the society - both, of which, I am blaming.

The reasons why video game violence cannot always be clearly correlated with real-world violence are pretty well summarized here:

http://www.apa.org/science/psa/sb-anderson.html

In fact, I recommend reading the entire article. It should be easy for you, since most of your education probably comes from the internet.

I'm not going to waste our time with detailed responses to the rest of your arguments. I have played the GTA games and much enjoyed them. Still, I don't think the little pleasure I get from them is worth the little damage done to society. You shouldn't, either.

Get an education (preferably in sociology or psychology).


And who foots the bill?
By Azzr34l on 5/7/2008 7:19:38 PM , Rating: 2
Nobody's irritated Gov. Activist just stuck his city's taxpayers with a half million dollar bill? What an A-hole.




By KristopherKubicki (blog) on 5/8/2008 11:01:13 AM , Rating: 2
It's sort of par for the course for this guy. He does stuff like this often.


Fair weather fans of crime
By Fracture on 5/7/2008 12:25:49 PM , Rating: 2
I live in a northern suburb and know that the real reason for the crime wave in Chicago is the recent weather changes. Crime has proven to be tightly correlated with weather across the world.

It's pretty clear that after an abnormally long winter, people are eager to get their shooting and killing in as soon as possible.




Obviously....
By UppityMatt on 5/7/2008 12:52:14 PM , Rating: 2
Everyone knows that when Gang Members aren't out killing each other, selling drugs, and robbing people...they are at home playing video games to influence their behavior. Makes total sense to use that as an excuse to pull the adds.




Amazing
By MrHanson on 5/7/08, Rating: -1
RE: Amazing
By jeff834 on 5/7/2008 2:16:32 PM , Rating: 2
Inappropriate how? No different than adverstising an R rated movie, and they do that all the time. You can see the ad in a picture here and it doesn't look in the least bit inappropriate to me. And regardless of whether they are inappropriate or not if you pay for someone to advertise your product and they pull that advertising that's a violation of your contract and you deserve to get every cent you paid back.


"When an individual makes a copy of a song for himself, I suppose we can say he stole a song." -- Sony BMG attorney Jennifer Pariser











botimage
Copyright 2009 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki