I think it's political as much as anything. Right now we're dominated by the left wing, and the left wing is all for censorship and greater goverment control. So is the right wing, but the left pursues it much more vehemently and tends to be smarter about it, trying to establish precedent by getting people to give up their rights "for their own protection".
People on the left like to pretend this is not true of the media (and point at like Fox as "proof" tht it's not universal), however to me, and others there definatly seems to be a connection. While the justifications are differant Obama, Clinton, and the Media are all attacking games from slightly differant directions. Irregardless of what the exact arguement is, the implication is always the same: games should be regulated by the goverment for moral reasons. Once they can do that, then the precedent exists for them to regulate ANYTHING for moral reasons, one step at a time.
Now granted, many people involved might be well intentioned (it's more of an idea held by a lot of people, rather than a direct conspiricy) but it's hardly a good thing.
I suspect articles like this have the headlines they do specifically so people will get a specific opinion by glancing over it. Hoping for cumulative effect "oh gee, it happened again, no need to actually read the article, I already know what it's going to say". You read the article and you find out the details aren't what the headline implies, but still that headline is there for a reason and I think it's written that way specifically for the "benefit" of people who will just glance over it while looking to other articles without reading it.
Simply my thoughts, I'm sure many will disagree of course. There are no easy solutions to the problem, irregardless of what you feel the cause is.
