Sony Commits to Safer Gaming Environments Alongside Xbox and Nintendo

? How is an online community unsafe? Hacking? Sending out disturbing images? Hurting people’s feelings with words?
I’m respectful if I ever come to play games online because I’m a respectful chap, but I wouldn’t expect or want a platform holder to monitor and censor thoughts or words unless someone was actually being preyed upon - such as children being groomed or something like that.

@thefourfoldroot I think we all know what the article is referring to. Online gaming can be extremely toxic, with the potential for insults and vulgarity to be thrown about. This pledge works to combat that.

@thefourfoldroot There are some toxic communities out there that probably need to be monitored and controlled. I'm all for freedom of speech, but oftentimes it crosses the line and ends up entering hate speech territory.

This again shows why fanboy wars are just silly.....

@LiamCroft
Yes, and my opinion is that a platform holder shouldn’t be responsible for words in their system. The same as a telecommunication company isn’t responsible for what someone says on their phones. Hell, even Facebook aren’t held responsible because they aren’t classified as a publisher.
The phrasing of my post was to hold at bay all the “but what about this disgusting thing” responses.

@Kidfried
This is not about what should and shouldn’t be illegal, this is about who has responsibility. If a complaint is made to the police I believe platform holders should be legally required to open their records to the law, and that person can be appropriately punished.

It would seem to now be illegal to have a bad sense of humour.
Society now seems it necessary to pander to the most fragile of people.
With there necessity to make everything inclusive and fine and dandy. I'm being excluded.
Your playing a game where you simulate killing a vast amount of people. And there worried about people being upset by a few naughty words.
Let's face it, online that's all it is. Nasty words that I find offensive because of my own insecuritys.

@scarecrowknife Why shouldn't online gaming be open and inclusive for all? This is a rather worrying post.

@3MonthBeef
It’s not flawed at all. It’s about liability and responsibility for what someone does using your network.

I changed telephone operator to telecommunication company, to avoid any potential confusion.

@editors: Why do 3 people of Nlife write separate, but almost identical articles for Nintendo Life, Push Square and Pure Xbox? Why not sharing the capacities for general video game news and multi-plattform games, and using the saved manpower for a wider coverage of games etc.? The review for Cyberpunk could easily done by PJ or Robert alone, with only a small extra amount of work for short performance and graphics tests on the other platforms. You can still keep the unique flavours of your different websites, with Alex „Hello there“ for Nintendo Life etc. I guess you are all professional enough to overcome fanboy-ism even if you are fanboys in your hearts.

@SaikoWaifu2003
And this is the problem. They would like to be free places, but they are scared of being held liable for any hurt feelings and getting bad PR. Someone being offended is basically akin to proof of transgression, which is ridiculous. All these platforms should be seen, not as publishers or editors responsible for the discourse on their platform, but as open forums, where people can show themselves for who they are and be punished as appropriate by the proper authorities if they go beyond the legal bounds (such as abusive or threatening behaviour, hate speech, etc).

@thefourfoldroot In the US, the company that owns the platform is by and large not legally responsible for what gets published on their site. Platform holders are protected through the same bit of legal jiujitsu that keeps them from being treated as publishers, which in turn protects them from libel suits. What this is, and what most folks complain about, is self regulation by the platform owners themselves, which they are perfectly within their rights to do. It makes business sense to appeal to the broadest range of people, and to stop your platform from devolving into a cesspool.

Also, the analogy to mobile carriers is interesting, but misses the difference between broadcast speech and personal speech.

@thefourfoldroot Paradox of Tolerance dude. It's not about "hurting people with words". I'm black and I've avoided online gaming for years because people fling the n-word constantly when they even suspect that I'm black or even if they don't suspect it and just feel like flinging around racial slurs cause apparently that's just a thing.

To gain the most freedom of speech and the most accessible gaming platform, you aim to reduce access to people who aim to make the platform less accessible and/or less welcoming. Similar to real life. You can't wander the streets saying whatever you want because, "free speech bro". There are consequences if, for example, you threaten to stab someone in the middle of the night. Even if it's just an edgy joke cause you want to watch them freak out (as an extreme example).

And it's not just about "hurt feelings", it's also just good business practice. If you want to sell online-only multiplayer games, you want to sell as many games to as many people as possible, but women and minority groups definitely tend to avoid these platforms. Hence why whenever people hear a woman on voice chat it's like a spectacle and everyone drops everything to tell her to make sandwiches and etc.

It seems some here lack the ability to understand how bad online abuse can be. It can be a very hostile place gaming online.

Imagine walking through a supermarket and every fifth person shouts abuse at you or swears at you.

The people doing that would be kicked out of the store. Some would even get criminal records. Yet we allow it on line because it is “only a bit of banter”. Nope, it’s abuse.

I’m glad the big three are putting their weight behind this. We should be making online communities less toxic and more welcoming.

@Amnesiac
Exactly. It’s self regulation, and that’s the problem. When every available, practical, useful and often essential platform panders to the “do not offend me” brigade there is nothing that can be done. We already, rightfully, have laws which punish people for online hate speech and such, just as we have censorship laws that rightfully ban damaging material, but when rightful public policing is replaced with private company enforcement of standards designed purely to avoid litigation or bad PR, this is a net negative.

@brydontk
Nobody is saying people should be able to call you the N word, or have a go at me in the current climate because I have a Chinese surname, but luckily they already cannot due to the law. Whether we feel it’s too much hassle, or we wouldn’t be high priority if we went a legal route, is a completely different (yet valid) question.

@scarecrowknife Your interactions with the video game settings are not reality, somebody verbally harassing you is.

Online gaming really is a cesspool of hate and bigotry. Any attempt to combat that is a good thing.

@deathaxe
Which is precisely why they should be regarded as open forums, not just where the platform holders don’t have a responsibility to be the police but, crucially, where they don’t have the right to be the police. Then their liability issues go away. Plus people will not risk being denied what is, effectively at this point, a public utility. And I’m talking about more than the few million users on Live or PSN, I’m talking about Facebook, Twitter etc.

Good, gaming chat can be really toxic sometimes. Or all the times lol. I usually mute my mic and only open it when playing coop with my friends.

@thefourfoldroot So I'm STARTING to see your position but I still largely disagree even if I feel as though it's coming from a different place than I originally assumed. Hate speech is protected under the First Amendment in America where I live, so people cannot be legally arrested for it. Plus, arresting people for what they do under private business practices goes against the free speech you vied for in your original comment and is not a rabbit hole anyone wants to go down.

I think your perspective on online gaming is misguided; it's not an open forum. If you have strong political beliefs, for example you don't go play Fortnite and talk about your thoughts on the holocaust or anti-vaxxxing or whatever to anyone who would listen. There are many many many other places to do that. When people get on the voice chat (which is mainly used to more successfully play the game, not broadcast your opinions or use it as a bullhorn for toxicity) and say hateful things or make edgy jokes or broadcast their opinions, theyre basically holding people verbally hostage.

As is obvious from the comments this is going to be a difficult line to walk. There are always going to be people thinking over censorship is happening and those who think it isn't going far enough. I'm off the belief its necessary but worry about who gets to set the line. Cyber bullying is a real thing, and anything Sony can do to help is great.

@thefourfoldroot

I couldn't agree with you more. Make no attempt to argue with the people and their "feelings"... It's a waste of time.

@Brydontk
Really? I’m not in the US (U.K.) and people can absolutely be arrested for hate speech here.

I think I’ve made too many posts, so I’ll just clarify my position, leave it, and people can disagree all they want (luckily I still have a platform until my opinion offends someone)

Letting private companies running essential infrastructure dictate what is allowable, and so who is allowable, is not a good thing. That should be the responsibility of government.

Just let people talk online as they do on the phone or in the street. If they say something or do something that can be classified as hate speech then let the authorities deal with it. I’m fine with having tech surveil, record, and pass on anything like this to the police. Not trying to let anyone get away with anything bad. Just want the law followed, not some arbitrary ethical rules decided by a private company (potentially to avoid litigation or bad PR or because they have some activist cause) that could lock people out of infrastructure or paid for products.

This is admittedly more pertinent to social media platforms than gaming platforms, but they are increasingly merging and the principle is the same.

"The internet allows us to be whoever we want to be. How interesting that so many of us choose to be a-holes."

Especially true in online gaming.

If everyone could follow one simple rule - "don't be a d*ck" - things would mostly (probably) be fine. But the current pandemic has shown us (as if proof were needed) that too many people just can't follow even the simplest of rules, and have little regard for anyone else.

@3MonthBeef
Depends, have you made a living from allowing your home to be essential to my interpersonal or work relationships like social media companies have? Have you sold me products that I am only allowed to access if I am in your home as gaming platforms have?
No? Then I guess I’d have no problem with you throwing me out.
I also have no problem if I break the law, such as doing the abusive and threatening things you describe.

So moarrrrrr censorship.

@3MonthBeef
So guilt by external perception. Lol. My eyes hurt from all the involuntary rolling. I was going to make a “blow me” joke because of your “sax harassment” typo, but you’d probably report me.

I’m not even sure you understand what you are arguing against. I’m merely saying the government and not private companies should set policy on what can exclude someone from what are fast becoming essential utilities, but presumably you just feel the free market should be able to dictate however it wants and rob someone of their paid for property in the process.

I just don't understand why the block or mute function isn't enough for people. What you find offensive is subjective, it should be down to your own responsibility to block and mute someone you don't like. It shouldn't be down to Sony to decide what's offensive for everyone. We've seen how they handle censoring certain games against the artists intent because they deemed it offensive.

Block and mute, that's enough. There's a lot of mini tyrants on here that seem to think their speech is the only correct speech.

@Abeedo hate speech? Define it. You're either in favour of free speech, or you're not.

@thefourfoldroot I ordered a printer, so why am I getting fax?

@oldschool1987 Blocking or muting someone doesn't solve the overall problem. There should be punishments for spouting blatant racism, sexism etc.

@LiamCroft except it does solve it, entirely in fact. You won't hear from that person again.

What about the intent? I'm a red head, people make jokes about us all the time, I find it hilarious. But to another red head they'd probably get offended and class it as "hate speech". See the problem? It's subjective. Intent matters.

@oldschool1987 It doesn't stop them from continuing to spread insults though and attacking other players. There should be consequences for your actions, just like there are in real life.

@LiamCroft then they can block them... Simple.

You have someone banned then there's always another player out there who will offend you, that you'll have to try and get banned, when you can simply mute. You'll never make a utopian gaming platform.

Consequences in real life? Sounds like you want people jailed for words they say. That's all I needed to hear tbh. I know where you stand. I think what you're suggesting is highly offensive, as a libertarian it's chilling hearing your views, but you're entitled to your world view and I'd still defend it.

@deathaxe doesn't define it well at all, it doesn't take into account context or intent. In fact it's "perceived" offense. In other words, it's only if you personally "perceive" it to be hate speech, which is open to abuse, and has been abused in the past. What you perceive is also subjective. It's an awful law that many want repealed.

Oh because I have a different world view to you, one built on allowing free speech, you make the assumption I go around and insult people? Grow up. Try and debate the points instead of making stupid accusations. You should read 1984, you'll see a lot of similarities to yourself.

@oldschool1987 Yes, people should absolutely be jailed for racism and sexism. Are you seriously trying to suggest they shouldn't be?

@LiamCroft yes, I think people shouldn't be jailed for words said, absolutely. I've been the victim of racism myself. My father was murdered due to racism, but those were actions taken.

You're advocating for people being jailed for words said... Wow, that's authoritarian as hell. What if someone is offended by a sexist joke? There's countless sexist memes out there... Do you want those people jailed? One person's joke is taken as offense by someone else. I'm sorry you can't understand the problem. Ricky Gervais and David Chapelle should be scared if this is the future you want.

You're advocating for the end of free speech. The only speech that requires defending is speech you do not like.

"I might hate what you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it".

The Soviet Union did what you're advocating for, all in the goal of being "politically correct". A term they coined. History doesn't repeat, but it rhymes and you're on the wrong side of it.

@oldschool1987 There's no "joking" around racism. I'm pretty sure I'm on the right side as far as that's concerned.

@LiamCroft oh, so ALL jokes about race should be banned? I'll tell all the fijians and Jamaicans I serve with they can no longer make racial jokes, otherwise you'll send them to the Gulag.

Wrong side of history. You want to control speech you personally do not like. There's a word for that.

To have any sense of order and organization there need to be rules. Rules are meaningless without enforcement. I view engaging any organized online space roughly the same as entering private property. The rules must be followed, if not then I’m giving up my right to be there. If I don’t like the rules, then I have every right to not go there and they have every right to make and enforce their rules. As it stands, the thought of my kids entering any online space is frightening, and that’s a shame.

@scarecrowknife Being a racist, homophobe or other terrible conduct isnt being funny.

Cool, I’m all for it. People who want to talk toxic, racist, sexist stuff aren’t tough enough to do it in front of people’s faces so they think they can get away with it playing online.

@LiamCroft Would not go for jailed but their should be big problems for the people who act like that. And its quite easy for MS, Sony, Nintendo too reinforce that.

As much as i hate racism, homophobia, sexism it is not something i would send someone too jail for its disgusting and people should be removed and should lose their steppingstone to do so.

Trying too harm or threathen should be punishable with jailtime in any form.

Gaming is for everyone if you are straight, gay, bi, transgender every religion. Gaming should be for everyone.

@badbob001 Thats what racist, homophobe and all that kind off people hide behind what a joke.

@oldschool1987 As far as public chat in games goes, I do think there should be rules followed. It’s not a private party or PMs, it’s an open ground where there should be rules and consequences just like this cite. It’s not an open-platform. However, legally, and private parties among friends are a different thing altogether. Someone has the right to hate me for any reason they deem fit without being jailed.
Freedom of speech is very important, but not all places are the same.

@Jaz007 you're not wrong. I just think the easiest and best option is the block and mute option. We shouldn't have Sony decide what they deem to be offensive, they've shown a poor track record trying to judge that. Context and intent is never taken injury consideration when snippets of audio is sent for review.

It'll be easier for people to just mute and block. This is all performative, it's just Sony trying to look good, nothing more.

@LiamCroft

Eh do what I’ve done since Halo 3 multiplayer.

Use the mute players option that every game includes.

It's never easy to comment on something like this.

To me personally, the report feature should be enough. Anything else would just potentially go into the big brother type crap everyone regardless of political alignment despises. In my experience, most of the people saying the isms are typically trolls wanting people to get riled up, kids who shouldn't be playing some of the games that have online functionality, or edgelords who think it's hilarious. Neither of which should be taken seriously, but are because of the heightened debate about the isms.

I've been on the internet long enough to know thick skin is essentially a requirement, which is why I tend to be pretty blasé when people insult me. That said, I don't partake in internet tomfoolery, and I know not everyone has that same, we'll call it "resistance", as I do. Yes, there are bad people on the internet. It's a given when there's billions of people on the planet and the internet is as widespread as it is. But only punish the offending party rather than making things potentially difficult for everyone in general.

Also, can I get off my chest that I'm disgusted that the words "gamer" and "free speech" are now tainted because of this? It's terrible that in 2020 I can't talk about my main hobby without getting side-eyed by people because there's still a negative connotation attached to it. I've seen a good amount of bad people online playing games, but I've also met good friends that way, and refuse to let my hobby be generalized as a bad example of human behavior. As for free speech, I can't help but get upset at how it's now seen as a defense to say all the isms. It's the primary reason why Americans can criticize the government. It doesn't mean you can say as you please.

@LiamCroft

Why?

People keep defending hate speech because free speech is important, and in using that as your basis, you just said that it is important that I get to say some purposefully negative things to or about someone. Like some overly entitled douchebags that should have to come across a comment about their character flaws, because it is important that I say that your need to feel protected while you preach hate makes you similar to a brat, whining about what they think they deserve. At some point you have to mature and realize that life isn't there to cater to whatever you want.

The flawed reasoning of how it is important to say what comes to your mind based off of the supreme court is similar to those that would have defended slavery because it was part of the American economy and legal.

The idea that you are speaking your mind means that your experiences in life are hate filled and focused on negative things. Constantly needing to regard the ***** you are going through, leaving you as someone with little value. Instead of pursuing greater understanding and greater circumstances, you need to feel protected while you engage in your life, which amounts to very little when it is to regard the weaknesses of others. I place you in the same regards as you place others.

Now I'm in the same place as you and instead of defending my actions, I will accept my faults, and if possible, change.

@LiamCroft I think the problem (for many) is that there is no definitive definition (an exhaustive list if you will) of what exactly is racist, or sexist, or homophobic, etc... (just concepts) There are the extremely obvious instances, certainly (that anyone can point to), but then there are a lot of grey areas, a lot of things that one person may consider in that category, but another might not.

As a parent and a gamer I struggle with both sides of that coin. I don't want my kids exposed to that kind of nonsense and vitrol; but I also don't want them to have to walk on egg shells for fear of offending someone.

Considering a large percent of the games are for adults, the question needs to be what is Sony & Microsoft doing to keep children off adult games? This is after all child safety, considering in the UK your teacher say finds out a child has been playing GTA/adults games they'll get in touch with Social services.

Regardless of what you say or do. Someone out there will be offended

@3MonthBeef so you're advocating for violence in response to words? Interesting. Respond to mean comments with physical assault.

Just block and move on, it's not your job to punish, and assault people for verbal insults.

A lot of mini tyrants here.

If they really care about my safety, they should send me a new gaming chair.

@3MonthBeef sure it is, and I bet you will...

@oldschool1987 😶-I agree with you totally. Like Larry Flint said when he won with the U.S Supreme Court's decision.
If the Constitution protects a scumbag like me, then we're ALL protected. These other people are well intended, but they don't grasp the slippery slope there on, that's why the saying "The Road to Hell is Paved with good Intentions".
Like Larry Flint also said, if you don't like my magazines, don't buy or Condone it, it's YOUR CHOICE.
Tyranny isn't allowed to survive in a civilized Society that doesn't allow censorship, especially because of different people's feelings and interpretations of what is right and wrong.

@LiamCroft

Dude I’m half black, half white and live in the American deep south. I’ve been the victim of racism and prejudice by individuals before.

But what you’re suggesting is ridiculous. You can’t jail people for speech, even appalling and disgusting speech.

@TheRedComet that shocked me as well.

Sorry to hear you've been victimised for your race, that's always awful and sad to hear.

Oh amazing! More censorship!
I am so glad big company is here to be my protector.

@LiamCroft You sir, are a complete idiot.

Big tech companies have been profiting off of their lack of accountability for decades. They don't want to lose money from bigots so they allow their crap on their privately-owned forums. If you own an online space and you hesitate to ban hate speech then this is simply evidence of greed and cowardice.

@Makina the irony is strong with this one.

@3MonthBeef you ok? You seem a little upset. Maybe it's because you're unable to assault me because I have a different opinion to you.

Bet you keep replying, even though you keep saying you'll leave me to it 😂

@oldschool1987 Free speech is saying an opinion in a manner that is respectful, even if it's conflicting. It shows that even if you don't agree with the opposition, you still respect them and see them as a human being. If you are trying to get a point across, this is the perfect way.
Hate speech is when you actively attack and insult a particular party, largely for reasons of race or lifestyle. Saying that hate speech should count as free speech shouldn't be an argument that is made.
I know Hitler comparisons are work out but this one seems good enough for the situation
If Hitler wasn't allowed to publicly insult, attack and hate on people of Jewish faith due to hate speech laws, then a large portion of his influence would've been taken away and the Holocaust possibly avoided.
If we're talking about online video gaming, before blocking them you still hear them insulting you. And even if they get blocked they can always go to someone else. Not everyone has thick skin and can withstand slurs directed at them. People in vulnerable positions mentally would be affected a lot more.
Besides if people aren't prosecuted for things like hate speech, then as time progresses other things will be ok to them. But if they're not allowed to spread discriminatory ideals, then it becomes harder for them to feel like attacks or more extreme forms of discrimination is justified.
Also your argument on cracking down on hate speech meaning there won't be racist jokes anymore seems a bit faulty. I know shows like South Park normalized these jokes in a satirical way, and even if they're funny a lot of the time they still hurt the targeted group. Jokes are likely the core way discrimination becomes normalized in this generation. Why is it that we can't make jokes without hurting some other party? In a school in the country I live in a child came out so all of his classmates started singing a song saying "So Who's a Jolly Good Fa***t!". With your logic this is just free speech as they were joking. These kids shouldn't be in trouble for bullying right?
Even if a lot of the matter is subjective, there are many cases when a clear line can be drawn. If a statement passes this line into hate speech territory, then it shouldn't be allowed. End of story.

@Abeedo wrong. You either support free speech, or do not and dismiss speech you do not like as "hate speech" and want the law to punish people for it.

The Hitler comparison? 😂 OK. "if we don't ban speech we don't like we'll get a new Hitler!"... Sure.

"Not everyone has thick skin". Then mute and block. Simple. Better than trying to destroy someone's life legally because your feelings are hurt.

"Also your argument on cracking down on hate speech meaning there won't be racist jokes anymore seems a bit faulty." Erm, I never said that, at all 😂 got another strawman you wanna build?

Who said those kids shouldn't be in trouble? They should be disciplined with detention, or extra homework, suspension, etc. But you're saying they should be arrested. Unfortunately you can't mute and block in person so the school has rules in place for bullying. I'm sure you knew this already. I'm sorry, I'm just not a fascist and don't think people should be arrested for words said, unless you're calling for action.

I mean I'm getting the impression you're saying jokes can be ways to hide malicious insults, so legally ban jokes 😂absolutely insane.

End of story? Not even close. You're just wrong. Demonstrably so. But your mind is made up, you want gulags for people with jokes you personally find offensive. We're not going to agree on anything at all. You should move to China though, they have the society you're advocating for.

No point going round in circles on this, some people, like you, who's views are so extreme and anti Liberal that it's borderline satire. So I'll let you have the final reply, I won't read it though, I've wasted enough time on this. I just hope the world you're advocating for isn't suddenly turned against you. The pendulum always swings the other way eventually.

@oldschool1987 very well said, your one of the very few in this thread with any sense 👍

@Papasears No not you just can get a ban. You go on a platform that has rules if you dont like it go somewhere else. As a company thet probably want too have a safe environment toowards all colors, sexes and religions. Without the dangers and without being a hatespeech platform. The biggest defenders of saying whatever are mostly the people who cant understand you can say everything.