According to this article from the Times Online:

Video games will be forced to carry cigarette-style health warnings under proposals to protect children from unsuitable digital material.

The report, commissioned by the Prime Minister in response to a growing moral panic about video games, will conclude that they can harm the development of children’s beliefs and value systems and desensitise them to violence. It will also recommend that retailers who sell video games to anyone under the age rating on the box should face a hefty fine or up to five years in prison, The Times has learnt.

Oh, yeah, sure. That makes complete sense. Why should parents be responsible for the development of their children? Let’s have the government take care of everything and make sure that the precious little ones don’t ever see anything that could ever possibly be damaging or weird in any way shape or form.

Or, as one commenter put it:

I agree that there should be better labelling. Look at this label on Grand Theft Auto IV:

‘BBFC Rating: 18. Suitable for 18 years and over. Suitable for 18 years and over. Not for sale to persons under age 18. By placing an order for this product, you declare that you are 18 years of age or over.’

It’s baffling. It’s like it’s written in Sanskrit. Is this game suitable for my nine year old nephew or not?

Orwell is rolling in his grave.

UPDATE: GamePolitics.com has a more in-depth look at the report and the reaction. It would seem as though the Times Online piece is just sensationalist – something one doesn’t usually say about the Times Online.

In fact, the Byron report is basically saying there should be some minor overhauls of the ratings-system and that parents should be more involved in terms of the entertainment their kids gets their hands on.

It is not, repeat not, cause for alarm.

And it isn’t really that interesting or new, either.