Chicago Transit Authority caves to minimal pressure, pulls Grand Theft Auto IV ads
by Xav de Matos 
{ Apr 23rd 2008 at 1:00PM }
According to a report on Monday from GamePolitics, the Chicago Transit Authority (CTA) has caved to minimal pressure from FOX News regarding the use of advertisements promoting the latest installment of Grand Theft Auto IV on public transportation throughout the city. The local Chicago affiliate of the controversial news desk questioned the city's use of the ads, stating, "With so much focus on kids and violence these days, we wondered why ads for a violent video game have begun popping up again on CTA buses and train stations." Days later the ads were pulled.
This isn't the first time public Grand Theft Auto ads have been pulled, previously similar instances have occurred in Portland, Denver and Boston, the latter of which saw Massachusetts transit chief justify the decision by issuing a policy which equated M-rated games to pornographic films.
While the title is known for liberal helpings of violence the ads themselves have never depicted the content of the game (as seen above). We're used to certain politicians, lawyers and family groups blaming our industry for every violent incident that happens, but when an entire city sides with the issue we can't help but feel a little shafted.
[via Joystiq]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Perno @ Apr 23rd 2008 1:09PM
Well there goes most Chicagoland purchases of GTA IV. I hope they can find another way to get the word out. /sarcasm
Josh @ Apr 23rd 2008 1:12PM
...to pornographic films?
How about R rated films. If they don't allow advertising of R rated films, then fine - don't advertise GTA IV. If they do allow R rated film advertisements, then this is an unfair bias against video games and a clear lack of understanding from the ultraconservatives.
Neuromancer @ Apr 23rd 2008 2:27PM
You took the words out of my mouth. I'd be OK with this if they don't advertise R rated movies either, somehow I have a feeling they do though.
Also more city buses advertising porn would probably be OK in my book, as long as it was tasteful. ;)
shottyd @ Apr 23rd 2008 1:15PM
Wow... portland too? I really like that city and typically there very liberal with things... guess even liberal politicians believe they should impose their beliefs on us. I hate when they talk about what is right... even if VG's were on the same level as porno... it wouldn't be bad. Because everyone watches porn too... this fag ass politician can hide behind his home beating off to gay porn, then turn around and condemn GTA all he wants. I don't care, because I know his wife and kids are a sham to cover up his own homoerotic insecurities. And this isn't a slam on gay people, this is a slam on gay politicians that place themselves up on a pedestal but are too insecure to flip it over and get some real satisfaction for themselves. Fucking uptight POS's.
ZEBRA NINER @ Apr 23rd 2008 1:15PM
Geez... Fox news sucks. People are so touchy about things.
xenocidic @ Apr 23rd 2008 1:56PM
Seriously, there's not even any sideboob in GTA IV.
James @ Apr 23rd 2008 4:10PM
As someone who actually watches more Fox News than any other news network (since they can usually manage to spend at least 5 minutes of every hour *not* talking about how the Bush administration is driving the country straight down the shitter), this makes me sad. It sucks when otherwise-reasonable people latch on to crazies like Jack Thompson or whoever started this cluster-fuck.
anthonyjh @ Apr 23rd 2008 5:46PM
Ah yes, fox news. I loved the piece they had about a year back, "Bush: Great president, or greatest president."
Gotta love that fair and balanced news.
ZEBRA NINER @ Apr 24th 2008 11:33AM
Well... yeah, I mean... it's OBVIOUS that Bush is the GREATEST President.
Steffen @ Apr 23rd 2008 1:16PM
This ticks me off, because Faux News has now run three separate stories on "girl fights" these last few days and their network is being pumped into places like the YMCA here in Burbank, where its mostly teenage kids and the like, being exposed to this "glorification" of violence, while lifting weights and running in place. What a load of b.s.
Gemini Ace @ Apr 23rd 2008 1:17PM
More negative press for the gaming industry thanks to Rockstar.
TORO @ Apr 23rd 2008 1:45PM
So are you buying the game? Are they not allowed to advertise?
Gemini Ace @ Apr 23rd 2008 1:52PM
I'm not buying it.
TORO @ Apr 23rd 2008 2:42PM
Well it sounds like your interested in the "gaming industry", but I think you'll agree that GTA IV is revolutionizing the sandbox genre :)
Gemini Ace @ Apr 23rd 2008 6:35PM
The only thing they're doing is bringing heat from the media and the senate.
Rob @ Apr 23rd 2008 11:06PM
"Thanks to Rockstar"? You make it sound negative. What are they suppose to do? No longer create any games that "push it" because people will get mad? These games are no worse than anything else you can watch in a movie theater, GIVE me a BREAK! "Well, lets throw our 'freedoms' out the window because Mr. Thompson is mad his son got a copy of GTA IV." Maybe if parents would fucking watch their god damned kids like they are SUPPOSE to this wouldn't be an issue. Like I said, No worse than movies.. blame the retailers, the ESRB, and the parents when 7 year olds are playing this game.
Gemini Ace @ Apr 24th 2008 7:40AM
I blame Rockstar. A blight on the industry.
BuckWIlde420 @ Apr 23rd 2008 1:18PM
Something to consider folks... There has been an upward spike of gun related violent crimes in and around Chicago in the last couple of weeks. 9 people killed in 36 separate shootings IN ONE WEEKEND! See for yourself:
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iDjMOLSNXltH3_3ACdJgHr0ivfNgD90741H00
Thus, the reason behind their madness.
I cant wait to buy GTA IV and shoot some @#^%$'s though.
Mark @ Apr 23rd 2008 2:33PM
Yeah, and I bet Fox put all that up on their news feed. So it's OK for them to report on violence, but to advertise a videogame is wrong because it's violent? Does Fox want a monopoly on violence?
shottyd @ Apr 23rd 2008 1:20PM
Josh, I have to argue the idea behind ultraconservatives... I believe it is just politicians thinking they know what is right. I am an educated 27 y/o who is quick to think for himself... I get excited when I see the ads. (I'm an advertiser) It builds excitement, but some clown comes in and tells me I can't see the ads because he/she (Tipper "Fat Fuck" Gore) think they know what is best for the country. If EA doesn't take over gaming, the pol's will... help us all!
refinedsugar @ Apr 23rd 2008 1:19PM
FOX News dictating moral and upright marketing policy. Right.
Tony @ Apr 23rd 2008 1:26PM
I think it's worth noting that despite their obvious connections, it's not exactly fair to completely equate Fox News on cable to the Chicago affiliate. Chicago is a fairly liberal city and I would say, in many cases, the affiliate here backs that up.
I live in Chicago so I saw commercials for this and eventually got around to watching the video on their site (I wrote some of my thoughts on it on my site if anyone gives a crap: http://tinyurl.com/6xwj2l).
What's so odd about this is that it comes off like a staffer hit piece. They don't mention a single advocacy group that got worked up about these ads. They make efforts to tie these ads to completely unrelated violence in the city.
I can agree that given recent events these might seem "insensitive", but go on the L platforms and witness the ability of advertisements for gruesome R-rated horror films to be absolutely everywhere with no complaints. These ads are relatively new, did they somehow affect the increase in violence near schools this entire year so far? It's specious reasoning.
Tony @ Apr 23rd 2008 1:29PM
It's also worth noting that the platform ad they show is NOWHERE near a school aside from a few colleges downtown. I don't know what random children are going to see it, but by that logic they can't advertise this game anywhere. There's not one place they can put this that some kid isn't going to see. That doesn't mean kids are targeted whatsoever, like this piece makes it seem. You think they'd try to pick an area that backs up their claims.
I can't tell what line that bus is unfortunately. They may have more of a point there. At the same time, the CTA has approved both sets of ads under totally different presidents. Advertisers and the CTA can target certain areas and lines. I imagine some effort was made to not put these 10 feet away from the local kindergarten.
Tom @ Apr 23rd 2008 1:28PM
I wonder how many alcohol related deaths there were in Chicago over the past week. I wonder if they'll pull those ads off the buses as well. Probably not. :)
Tony @ Apr 23rd 2008 1:30PM
Chicago doesn't allow alcohol advertising on public transit.
RudyHuxtable @ Apr 23rd 2008 1:46PM
It's this kind of ignorance that gave us 8 years of George Bush.
Milly @ Apr 23rd 2008 1:53PM
How ironic, Fox news thinks it's unethical to promote GTA and give it bad press but in doing so they generate more buzz about the game and probably encourage more people to buy it by admonishing the game.
It's like when people see Viewer Discretion Advised on TV, makes them want to see something more. Fox News tries to tell us that we shouldn't be playing GTA has same effect. Most people who game know what they are getting with GTA and will either buy it or won't. But people who aren't familiar with it see Fox News trying speak out against it and think, hmmm, maybe there's something here worth checking out.
If I were Rockstar I wouldn't be disappointed with this kind of response from media. They are probably amused by it and actually appreciate the publicity. Keep up the good work Fox News. More $$$ for Rockstar.
Edd @ Apr 23rd 2008 1:56PM
Jeeeeeez give me a fucking break with all this anti video game stuff, didn't these people see the real studies done on video games and how they improve things not make them worse. If video games do promote violence how is it that when I was in high school and my locker with all my stuff (even a couple shirts) got robbed instead of getting some friends and beating people up to find who did it. I went home played a wrestling game and beat the crap out of someone virtually and guess what 35 min later I was fine.
Chester @ Apr 23rd 2008 2:03PM
Things like this used to surprise me, now it's just sad!!
andyface @ Apr 23rd 2008 2:17PM
I can't say I know anything about US politics, living in England and all, aside from what I've seen on The West Wing (ho de ho), but from a purely outside point of view, it probably wont make too much of a difference, it's still getting publicity (on Fox News) so controversy is a great selling point. Surely the focus of their gripes should go towards outlets that sell to kids, the ratings are there for a reason (I realise there are other ways of getting games, etc.)
Furthermore it's hardly a unknown game, most people who are gamers will know it's coming out.
So yeah it's annoying that people target games, so far in my 12 (or so) years of gaming I haven't gone on a mad rampage and killed anyone, but hey it could be boosting it's sales.
andyface @ Apr 23rd 2008 2:18PM
Also... see the power of huge media companies, BOOO! lets start a revolution or something.
ryanp @ Apr 23rd 2008 2:32PM
Not to play devil's advocate, but it's the city's decision. Everybody can get hot and bothered about Fox and Bush and Right-wing conservatives, but Chicago can put on or remove whatever ads they want from their transit system. If you live in Chicago, and think removing the ads from the buses is horrible, try to get similarly-minded people to stop riding the bus so they see a decrease in fares. Don't just huff and puff about, "Grr! I hate Bush! Grr! I hate Fox news!"
James @ Apr 23rd 2008 4:30PM
See, but that's just it -- since the system is run (in part) on taxpayer money, they *can't* just do whatever they want. If it was a private corporation (actually, I'm just taking your word that it's not, and if you're wrong, this doesn't apply), I would be right there with you that they can do whatever they want.
But if the busses run even in part on tax money, which is extracted from everybody equally by force, there is an obligation to make unbiased decisions. In essence, a public-sector entity, or a private-sector entity that is paid for with public funds, must make decisions like a government -- they have to treat everybody equally; in short, be "fair". And if they run R-rated movie ads, but not M-rated game ads (assuming we can all agree that R ~= M), that's a serious failing.
guttertalk @ Apr 23rd 2008 2:36PM
I bet it was all Peter Cetera's idea.
RudyHuxtable @ Apr 23rd 2008 3:33PM
heh +1
tim @ Apr 23rd 2008 5:06PM
Couple of things to keep in mind:
- The CTA has been in a really bad spot recently with threats of cut service, underbudgeting, and a train scare last week. They don't need any more negative PR than they're already dealing with.
- There's been a rash of gun violence recently, as well as plenty of school violence in Chicago.
- Movies sometimes get delayed releases due to violence (Phonebooth comes to mind). While this is just advertisement, I can see the sensitive nature to it. It's not like they're preventing game sales here.
- Rockstar could give less of a shit. They're getting the word out without having spend the full $90k for CTA advertising. Their media blitz seems a bit over the top, considering the fact that their sales will be huge.
david @ Apr 23rd 2008 5:57PM
i think its funny, i wonder how many people that ride the bus or see those ads know what those three people standing in the add do. because im sure people don't take a second look and yelp for help that their child will be emotionally unstable for the rest of their life because this piece of paper has told them to go play a game. im sure that subliminal messaging might trigger something but if that foxnews affiliate wanted to help children, may be they could do a news story on how public school are underfunded. o ya but that would cause to much controversy that would stop there ratings. but most of all the irony, stupid *** fox news talking about what children should and shouldn't be watching/playing etc. when they are the ones on everyday all the ****ing time showing violence of people killing people.