Roger Bennet, former director general of the ELSPA, hopes the BBFC knows what it's doing by banning Manhunt 2. He's concerned that the organization is basing its decision on political pressure and influence, rather than on evidence:
Thus prejudiced and equally unjustifiable comparisons are forming [the
Government's] and the BBFC’s judgements. We know of course from other legislation in recent years, that many politicians vote for it based on their own narrow and often ignorant opinions and from media pressure –
not listening to evidence at all, even to official research reports instigated by themselves.
Bennett also takes issue with the idea that video games, being interactive, are somehow substantively different (and potentially more damaging) than other forms of entertainment:
There is no evidence for [the BBFC] to make such a flawed assumption and concerns should be apparent that through pressure from
Government, games are becoming increasingly and wholly unjustifiably separated from other forms of screen entertainment.
Debating political influence and the impact of games' interactivity is all well and good, but tangential to what Bennett feels is the real issue:
Of course the real debate in the UK should be about whether, in what is often called a ‘civilised society’, adult people should at last be given the responsibility for making informed judgements as to what they or their children do/watch/play, or whether they should continue to be told by the State what is or is not good for them.
Was the BBFC right? [MCV]
