The most biased TV video game debate ever

Now for our next ‘expert’. Come on in Julie Peasgood, renowned TV personality who regularly doles out sex advice on dinner time TV. The morally incorruptible sort, Julie says with absolute authority that games “promote racism” and “cause low self-esteem and depression”. Uh… huh, and all these facts are apparently from a US report that you can’t remember the name of, you say? Riiiigggghhhttt.

Above: Maybe if I wave my hands about loads no one will notice I have no idea what I'm talking about

Still, who cares about quibbling little facts, right? As long as you make definitive, self-righteous statements in front of a crowd (which seems to be baying for Tim Ingham’s blood like he’s a serial love rat on Jerry Springer), all’s right with the world. Peasgood then states: “I am categorically against violence for entertainment”… until the cheque clears. Woah, better step off that moral soapbox, sister. Especially seeing as you voiced one of the characters in 2000 horror game Martian Gothic: Unification. A game that primarily revolves around the decidedly non violent pastime of feasting on flesh.

Above: Nothing to see here, folks. Martian Gothic is as family friendly as they come

Combine this with the fact that former celebrity gardener Titchmarsh can’t seem to grasp the complicated concept of how video games are rated and regulated exactly the same as films, and we have quite the bunch of well-informed, impartial bastions of debate. Oh, and let’s just gloss over Tim’s main argument about how kids can’t buy games because of the ratings and that the responsibility should rest on parents, shall we? Good, good.

For the record, the broadcaster of the chat show issued the following response, after the ITV forums were bombarded with complaints over how one-sided the segment was - reproduced in part below.

'It is never the intention of the production company or the presenters to cause offence to viewers.

... on this occasion we were satisfied that although strong opinions were expressed it was a balanced debate overall.

We cannot, [therefore], censor contributor's opinions, but can take steps to ensure that other contributors are present to challenge and debate the issues in question.

Again, I am sorry that you were upset by the views expressed. '

To read the entire statement click here - you'll find it in the third last comments field.

We’d let our blood pressure further escalate to heart attack-baiting levels, but we can’t say we were surprised by any of the comments made on the show. Rather than further condemn the likes of the host, Peasgood and MacKenzie, we’d simply suggest that the show’s makers do a little more preparation when they’re putting together a panel. Namely, in making sure all members of the panel have done a reasonable amount of research. That way, the whole show wouldn’t devolve into a bad episode of the Ricky Lake show, with the one informed guest being reduced to the part of pantomime villain.

Above: Tim Ingham is evil we tells ya! That or he just knows what he's talking about

Anyway, that’s our ranting two cents over. Why not share your views in the comments below.

Mar 24, 2010