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
The author's conclusion that the game industry requires an independent body to oversee the industry and companies that knowingly violate the rating system be prohibited from releasing a game for two years will solve the inadequacies of the electronic game rating system is flawed.
Firstly, the comparison between rating electronic games and movies is like comparing apples to oranges; in the sense that although both produce a display and engage the consumers. However, they both target different audiences which although can sometimes overlap. For instance there are different genres of movies and different popular actors and actresses for these different genres a consumer might actually use the stars in the movies to determine its rating and not necessarily follow the industry rating system. So the whole rating system in fact might be ineffective but not easily noticed since the comparison is between two different industries. To strengthen this argument it might be safe to say that both industries are in fact 100% similar and that the rating system as been seen as the important factor in the success of consumer movie choices.
Secondly, if we assume that this rating indeed works for the movie industry and it is the sole indicator of consumer movie choices and that an independent body be put in place to regulate the industry as well as fines of not releasing a game for two years for companies that violate the system. It can be argued that two yrs is an insufficient time to be used as a fine especially if it usually takes electronic game producers about three to four years to release another electronic game. This could be strengthened if it is a known fact that new electronic games are usually released in about three to six months or even a year and that the fine will in fact have an effect on these companies bottom line.
In conclusion, however, as it stands the argument in the essay is flawed
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
The author's conclusion that the game industry requires an independent body to oversee the industry and companies that knowingly violate the rating system be prohibited from releasing a game for two years will solve the inadequacies of the electronic game rating system is flawed.
Firstly, the comparison between rating electronic games and movies is like comparing apples to oranges; in the sense that although both produce a display and engage the consumers. However, they both target different audiences which although can sometimes overlap. For instance there are different genres of movies and different popular actors and actresses for these different genres a consumer might actually use the stars in the movies to determine its rating and not necessarily follow the industry rating system. So the whole rating system in fact might be ineffective but not easily noticed since the comparison is between two different industries. To strengthen this argument it might be safe to say that both industries are in fact 100% similar and that the rating system as been seen as the important factor in the success of consumer movie choices.
Secondly, if we assume that this rating indeed works for the movie industry and it is the sole indicator of consumer movie choices and that an independent body be put in place to regulate the industry as well as fines of not releasing a game for two years for companies that violate the system. It can be argued that two yrs is an insufficient time to be used as a fine especially if it usually takes electronic game producers about three to four years to release another electronic game. This could be strengthened if it is a known fact that new electronic games are usually released in about three to six months or even a year and that the fine will in fact have an effect on these companies bottom line.
In conclusion, however, as it stands the argument in the essay is flawed
