Sony Pulls Killzone 2 Ads From Toronto
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
Seeing as that "God of War III" is coming up too, I think this is more like the tip of the iceberg for "Violent and Scary".needausername said:
I don't see the problem. I object to signs in foreign languages. I believe that sends a bad message.
I don't object to scary signs.
Annoying signs though. Like weightloss products. I hate those signs.
I don't object to scary signs.
Annoying signs though. Like weightloss products. I hate those signs.
That we did, but we struck from the then-British "Dominion of Canada"!orannis62 said:
What an awesome name it had back then, eh? Canada Day used to be called Dominion Day. Now THAT would make an interesting game... the war of 1812! Play as the Americans and drive back the Imperialists, or bring to bear your full forces on your wayward colony!
Certainly would be more imaginative than "Gears of Killzone War World at Arms 2" or whatever the next generic FPS happens to be.
News at 10: An epidemic of "refusing to go to bed" sweeps Canada, one distraught child we spoke to managed to stammer a few words between fits of blubbering: "demon robot space nazis are hiding in my cupboard". More on this later.
...damn, I should've known that...thanks for the correction.Frank_Sinatra_ said:
Anyway, I agree with your point. I hate large billboards telling me that I can save money, actually, I dislike all billboards, I don't care if I'm in a city, I wanna look at the damn buildings, not some shaving ad...
There seems to be a wave of pro-censorship in the developed World.
You don't have a right to not be afraid of things and you don't have a right not to be offended by things. This is because it is a small price to pay for freedom and more practically, fear and offence are so subjective that you cannot hope to avoid them in all circumstances.
This is similar to the case with the disabled presenter on a BBC children's channel where parent complained she was freighening their children:
[link]http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/7906507.stm[/link]
I find people who want to cover the world in cotton wool for their children offensive. The world is scary, fear is an important part of social development, you're going to have to learn to deal with it sooner or later to manage in the world.
What's next, are they going to banish death because people are afraid of dying?
You don't have a right to not be afraid of things and you don't have a right not to be offended by things. This is because it is a small price to pay for freedom and more practically, fear and offence are so subjective that you cannot hope to avoid them in all circumstances.
This is similar to the case with the disabled presenter on a BBC children's channel where parent complained she was freighening their children:
[link]http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/7906507.stm[/link]
I find people who want to cover the world in cotton wool for their children offensive. The world is scary, fear is an important part of social development, you're going to have to learn to deal with it sooner or later to manage in the world.
What's next, are they going to banish death because people are afraid of dying?
This isn't censorship, Sony is doing this willingly because they don't want to freak out any more kids and seem likebeddo said:
All of these excuses like "they need to know fear to grow up!" and "it's just a silly poster" are all stupid and pointless excuses.
Here's the basic gist; Sony put up posters of Killzone 2, people did not appreciate them, not wanting to make things worse for both them, the game, and the rest of the world, they take the posters down. What a story!
It seems that no matter what happens, if it involves a game (preferably violent/M rated) and if anything gets pulled down because of it, it automatically means that "OF COURSE they're censoring us! Down with them, fuck them for trying to censor video games!" Is it that hard to believe that maybe some kids from violent backgrounds didn't want to get even more shit in their pants, and that Sony didn't want to hurt anyone emotionally/physicallly/
No, of course not, because it's all censorship no matter what.
I agree with Jumplion. Maybe your gamer sensibility is easily hurt and maybe you are a bit quick to jump on the defence.
Hey, we still have them in Montreal.Aardvark said:
I am aware that this wasn't official censorship. This is self censorship based on a few complaints.Jumplion said:
My point was that many people of late seem to be encouraging and pressing for censorship by public bodies and self-censorship by companies.
They're not excuses, they're opinions. Excuses are used when someone is explaining a motive for wrong doings by themselves or another party. Many of us are of the opinion that Sony has not done anything wrong.
A minority of people claimed that the posters scared their children. Sony, rather than standing up behind its product and freedom of expression decided to give in and remove the posters. It's all the little battles like this that chip away at freedom of expression for all of us. What's next? No advertising of any product for the over twelves because it may scare or confuse children?
Okay, I'm a little confused and I can't quite follow you on this one. You're obviously using sarcasm but in a weird way.
Any incident where a person, group, company, body or otherwise gives into pressure to stop displaying work which breaks no actual law is a form of censorship. It does not matter if it is self-enforced, it still falls under this categorisation.
They're not censoring the video game but the advertisements thereof. The fact is that there appears to an anti-gaming rhetoric among many parents and numerous people of older generations. From my understanding posters such as those from films like; The Terminator, The Dark Knight, Saw etc. have not given into to public pressure in this way given the content is equally foreboding.
In fact I see many advertisements on television for all types of horror films the go out during the day. They're not banned and the companies don't give into the pressure to self-censor.
I'm particularly confused where you mention children with violent background who may have been subject to abuse. This is a very bizarre incident you mention. From my understanding, good parents who would be indignant about the content in the posters are unlikely to abuse their children. In the rare cases where a child has been removed from an abusive setting and subsequently see the pictures, well, that would be distressing. However, that would be the result of a failure of the authorities to protect a child, it is the result of years if not decades of bad social development and something that Sony has nothing to do with.
If you talking about those still in danger? Well clearly society has a lot more to worry about concerning child welfare than the content of a poster at a bus stop. As I explained above, the same applies for children who have been removed from abusive situations.
Like I say, offence and fear are completely subjective. Some people are afraid of the dark, some people are afraid of spiders, some people are afraid of germs, some people are afraid of buttons and so on. You can't be expected to be shielded from the things that may scare you, they're a part of life and dealing with them is an important part of social development.
