ESSAY QUESTION:
The following appeared in the editorial section of a national news magazine:
"The rating system for electronic games is similar to the movie rating system in that it provides consumers with a quick reference so that they can determine if the subject matter and contents are appropriate. This electronic game rating system is not working because it is self regulated and the fines for violating the rating system are nominal. As a result an independent body should oversee the game industry and companies that knowingly violate the rating system should be prohibited from releasing a game for two years."
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. Point out flaws in the argument's logic and analyze the argument's underlying assumptions. In addition, evaluate how supporting evidence is used and what evidence might counter the argument's conclusion. You may also discuss what additional evidence could be used to strengthen the argument or what changes would make the argument more logically sound.
===
My Response :
According to the argument, the author cites that the rating system for electronic games, like movie rating system, helps the consumers whereby they can check the content and subject matter's appropriateness. Since rating system is not working because companies regulate it on their own and moreover, fines for violating the rating system are nominal, the author stresses the need of an independent body which can monitor the game industry and the companies which violate the rating system. At first sight, the argument made by author seems convincing, but after deeper introspection, one can discover certain flaws which doesn't augur well with the author's intentions.
Firstly, the argument opens up a question about the electronic game rating system used by the game industry in general and companies in particular. It is not clear whether the same rating system is used across the industry and all the game companies. If not, whether each company has it's own rating system or is there a common rating system among a set of game companies. Once, there is clarity about the usage characteristics of the rating system used by all the game companies, we can come to the conclusion about the validity of the rating. If each company uses it's own rating system, then it's obvious that the ratings would be skewed in favor of the company and the consumers would be presented with glossy ratings .
Secondly, the author states that the electronic game rating system is self regulated. It would be interesting to know about the regulatory checks each game company follows before the ratings are awarded for the game. Also, questions such as who created the regulatory mechanism ? Who will collect the fines ? would arise . If there is already some organisation/body already which does this, then there is no requirement of a new independent body to further regulate the industry or impose hefty punishment to the game companies. Instead, the existing body can be empowered to tackle such mishaps in the industry.
Thirdly, assuming there is no independent body, careful thought needs to be put into before forming a new independent body. Is there a standard rating system in place ? Whether the regulations and fines mentioned in the argument can create a positive impact for the ratings of the games ? What powers should be given to the new body which monitors ? Who would chair the body ? It should not be the case where unfair decisions by the independent body kill the competitiveness of the game company. Such issues should be addressed before forming the new body.
In sum, I concur with author's argument that an independent body should be created,if not already existing and award severe punishments to the violating game companies, if and only if , the aforementioned points are considered and addressed.
The following appeared in the editorial section of a national news magazine:
"The rating system for electronic games is similar to the movie rating system in that it provides consumers with a quick reference so that they can determine if the subject matter and contents are appropriate. This electronic game rating system is not working because it is self regulated and the fines for violating the rating system are nominal. As a result an independent body should oversee the game industry and companies that knowingly violate the rating system should be prohibited from releasing a game for two years."
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. Point out flaws in the argument's logic and analyze the argument's underlying assumptions. In addition, evaluate how supporting evidence is used and what evidence might counter the argument's conclusion. You may also discuss what additional evidence could be used to strengthen the argument or what changes would make the argument more logically sound.
===
My Response :
According to the argument, the author cites that the rating system for electronic games, like movie rating system, helps the consumers whereby they can check the content and subject matter's appropriateness. Since rating system is not working because companies regulate it on their own and moreover, fines for violating the rating system are nominal, the author stresses the need of an independent body which can monitor the game industry and the companies which violate the rating system. At first sight, the argument made by author seems convincing, but after deeper introspection, one can discover certain flaws which doesn't augur well with the author's intentions.
Firstly, the argument opens up a question about the electronic game rating system used by the game industry in general and companies in particular. It is not clear whether the same rating system is used across the industry and all the game companies. If not, whether each company has it's own rating system or is there a common rating system among a set of game companies. Once, there is clarity about the usage characteristics of the rating system used by all the game companies, we can come to the conclusion about the validity of the rating. If each company uses it's own rating system, then it's obvious that the ratings would be skewed in favor of the company and the consumers would be presented with glossy ratings .
Secondly, the author states that the electronic game rating system is self regulated. It would be interesting to know about the regulatory checks each game company follows before the ratings are awarded for the game. Also, questions such as who created the regulatory mechanism ? Who will collect the fines ? would arise . If there is already some organisation/body already which does this, then there is no requirement of a new independent body to further regulate the industry or impose hefty punishment to the game companies. Instead, the existing body can be empowered to tackle such mishaps in the industry.
Thirdly, assuming there is no independent body, careful thought needs to be put into before forming a new independent body. Is there a standard rating system in place ? Whether the regulations and fines mentioned in the argument can create a positive impact for the ratings of the games ? What powers should be given to the new body which monitors ? Who would chair the body ? It should not be the case where unfair decisions by the independent body kill the competitiveness of the game company. Such issues should be addressed before forming the new body.
In sum, I concur with author's argument that an independent body should be created,if not already existing and award severe punishments to the violating game companies, if and only if , the aforementioned points are considered and addressed.
