I need help defending Modern Warfare 2

[Tiburcio Zapata]

Our library recently got two emails criticizing us for running a
program that is using Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 for the X-Box
360. This is the first time someone has written to us about using a
specific video game (We have run Halo 3 and Call of Duty: Modern
Warfare 1 programs before).

I want to point out to them that it is a game of teamwork. If someone
were to play the game at home, then they are probably playing on Xbox
Live with a lot of random strangers. Playing in a library setting
gives us a more controlled environment also.

That is just off the top of my head at the moment, but I will be doing
some research today to help with my point. If you could offer some
suggestions, I would greatly appreciate it.

Thank you,
Tiburcio Zapata
Rossford Public Library

[George Bergstrom]

Tiburcio,

If your user is complaining because of the military nature of the
game you might not want to use this specific example... but I have
recently written a review of a book about the connections between the
military and gaming. One of the authors points is how the military
has been using games for training for years:

From Sun Tzu to Xbox: War and Video Games, Ed Halter (2006, 1st edition.)
New York, NY: Thunder’s Mouth Press, (400 pp.) ISBN: 978-1-56025-681-6
paperback, $16.95 (USD.)


My review will be in the Journal of Gaming and Virtual Worlds
(http://www.intellectbooks.co.uk/journals/view-Journal,id=164/) volume
1 Issue 2 (it's not out yet...)

-George

> --
>
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "LibGaming" group.
> To post to this group, send email to libg...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to libgaming+...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/libgaming?hl=en.
>
>
>



--
George C. A. Bergstrom
Business Reference Librarian
Management & Economics Library
Purdue University
Lafayette, IN 47907

(765) 494 - 2918

[Danielle Dungey]

Hi,

You probably know this already, but this game is rated Mature 17+. You don't mention it in your email, but are you offering the program for adults only? If you are offering the program to patrons under the age of 17, you may be able to eliminate the complaints by making it an adult only program or by requiring patrons under 17 to have parental consent.

-Danielle

[BWS Johnson]

Salvete!

>
>You probably know this already, but this game is rated Mature 17+. You don't mention it in your email,
>but are you offering the program for adults only? If you are offering the program to patrons under the age
>of 17, you may be able to eliminate the complaints by making it an adult only program or by requiring
>patrons under 17 to have parental consent.
>

As much as ALA stinks, they have the age issue right in the Freedom to Read statement.

http://www.ala.org/ala/aboutala/offices/oif/statementspols/ftrstatement/freedomreadstatement.cfm

If you are an ALA member, your Library's collection development policy cites Freedom to Read, or if you live in Massachusetts, this is not an appropriate way to address the issue since you're now at odds with either the law or other policy. Keep in mind that I am not an ALA member, so I advocate differently from that body.

Whoever highlighted the group dynamics side of things is on the right track in my opinion. I loved the old Call of Duty WWII series since it brought the old iron to life. Group dynamics are as they are in the military; if you don't work as one, you will die repeatedly, though in a far more fun fashion than America's Army, which was just a trash game.

I'd tie in honour flights to the process. It's a search you might not see or hear about.

Since it ties in to the old series so readily, and our new military so graphically, I'd run with that. Ask why other militaria is okay on your shelves? I guarantee you that it's there. It's not meant to be the right approach in theory, but it will vividly illustrate the slippery slope.

Players are out to save the world from terrorists in this installment, which would seem to promote positive conservative values if you ask me.

Ratings are a horrible way to go at any point in time. Check out this Film is Not Yet Rated for the movie version, and I'd hop on over to that other school in Boston for the gaming equivalent:

http://www.kidsrisk.harvard.edu/researchandnews.html

(Having positive conservative values always tends to stick something in the craw of the censors. My perennial favourite when I defended my DVD collection was "Oh, so I should go by the ratings system and take The Passion of the Christ off of the shelves..." Not technically the correct way to handle things in theory, but always worked in practice. )

Collection composition is meant to rest with your community, not your Duhrector or Board, even though steps of defence might include the Duhrector or Board.

Cheers,
Brooke

[Liz Danforth]

I agree with points above.

A small addition to your arsenal of answers: Brandon Robbins' note in
his Top Five Games for Libraries article in LJ (http://bit.ly/5oQb4n)
may help. In a library setting you are presumably doing multiplayer
events and the controversial episode is not only embedded in the
single player game but optional in any case. If the objectionists are
targetting that element while having no issues with other military
games rated M, that may be part of your answer.

Liz

[Scott Nicholson]

>> Our library recently got two emails criticizing us for running a
>> program that is using Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 for the X-Box
>> 360. This is the first time someone has written to us about using a
>> specific video game (We have run Halo 3 and Call of Duty: Modern
>> Warfare 1 programs before).

Do you have the policies that led you to selecting these games?
Just like there are policies as to why libraries select other types of
content for collections and programs, there should be policies to
guide you in selection of these games. These policies, just like
other policies, can be drafted with the help of the Board of the
libraries.

Then, when you select games, if you follow the library policy, you
have something to point back to when you run into this.

If you don't have a policy, do you have a justification that starts
with the goals of the libraries, leads to why gaming was chosen as the
choice to meet those goals, and then out of all of the games out
there, why these games were selected as the activity to meet library
goals?

And then.. you can develop an assessment to demonstrate how the
activity meets those goals.


Too many times, library staff pick gaming activities based upon the
games they personally enjoy. This causes the same problems as library
staff selecting books that they like to read. Just as with other
services in the library, gaming should be based upon library policy
and should match up with the goals of the library, and then should be
assessed so that you can demonstrated that the events match up with
goals. There should also be a reconsideration policy that allows
members of the public to present concerns about what goes on in the
library.


I realize I'm sounding pedantic here, but I'm a professor, so that's
what I do - the reality is that when you are dealing with topics that
can be sensitive (like violent games in the library), you need to take
care to ensure you are using the appropriate policies and supporting
the mission in justifiable ways.

Skipping any of these steps opens you up to complaints for which you
don't have a good answer (and can be elevated to the front page of the
paper).



Just because they are games doesn't mean we should be any less serious
about them than we are about other aspects of the library.

[D]

I've managed to get round concerns about Assassin's Creed 2 but I'm
afraid I wouldn't even try with MW2. The terrorist scenes are not
defensible in my view and trying to defend them could undermine
support for more valuable titles/ promoting gaming to families. Not
particularly a moral position, just pragmatic.