A hard-headed decision
It must have been a surprise for Mali-born kora player Toumani Diabate to discover that one of his songs has forced corporate giant Sony Computer Entertainment to tear up the timetable for the launch of its newest video game.
Toumani is a devout Muslim with a prayer room next to his office. He describes his songs as "my way to attract and inspire people towards Islam". But such is the fear of causing offence that Sony has withdrawn all copies of its LittleBigPlanet game after discovering a background music track by the Grammy-award winning world musician includes two lines from the Koran.
Political correctness gone mad or refreshing corporate sensitivity? Probably neither. This is almost certainly a hard-headed business decision. Sony don't want to take unnecessary risks with a product seen as vital in reversing the flagging fortunes of its PlayStation console.
It will cost millions to recall but billions are at stake. And the last thing Sony needs right now is for the product to be labelled 'offensive to Muslims'.
However, I note that the same company did not withdraw the ultra-violent game 'Resistance: The Fall of Man' last year despite Christian church leaders objection to the use of Manchester Cathedral as the setting.
The difference in attitude seems telling. Sony took a corporate risk to ride out any offence they might cause to Christians in juxtaposing a holy site with acts of extreme violence.
But before a single Muslim has even complained, the company tears up its launch timetable, recalls and destroys all copies of a game frankly dripping in syrupy family values.
Can we imagine Sony executives giving the green light to a shoot-em-up set in a mosque?
In a global market it makes sense not to alienate great chunks of your market by offending their religious beliefs. This is particularly true if the offence might trigger an angry global response.
Are there double standards here? Offending a religious group is fine so long as you can be confident they won't burn your corporate flag?
I'm 
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~41~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
Credit where it's due Mark, I don't see one statistic in this blog entry!
Regarding the issue at hand though, it's a tricky one. As I understand it, the copyright for distribution of Toumani Diabate's track will belong to his record label (though I'm guessing and have no insight into his specific contract - however, I do co-run a record label) although decent labels will not deliberately go against the wishes of the artist when it comes to licensing rights. However, it should be pointed to that licensing rights are one of the few places left where artists can receive a good royalty in these days of bittorrents and P2P.
Sony's reaction is more than likely a corporate one, as you state, given that there is an undeniable wave of influence in the muslim world when compared to, say, the Christian world, and your comparision to Resistance: Fall Of Man is a good one. However, Sony have probably done research which shows that their target market (I suspect males aged 13-35) will probably contain more devout Muslims than devout Christians, and I suspect this is the real reason for their actions.
I don't want to delve into shaky generalisation territory by suggesting that Muslim reactions to percieved offence might differ to Christian reactions, but Sony aren't stupid and I doubt they'll have taken such drastic measures in haste - whether or not the decision was effective remains to be seen.
Complain about this comment
This im afraid realy funny. You can have drugs wholesale death and destruction in a game. But inject a bit of faith and the world comes craching to an end. Some of the most popular gamesplayed at this point in time are First Person Shooters taking out islamic millitants etc or a few natzi's. Most sport some form of duty to kill.
I wonder if this song will feature in the full game with a few edits to the sound track to remove the supposed offensive lines or will the song be droped alltogether.
Complain about this comment
Always amusing to hear those who bleat on about their faith, not being confident enough in the strength of their faith.
Surely that faith is enough in itself to deal with the slings and arrows of modern life.
With refusal even to countenance such simple issues as songs containing Koranic verse, Islam puts itself in the position of being a weak religion followed by those of little faith.
And I'm a muslim, just for the record.
Complain about this comment
Just because one faith are more vocal about their beliefs and how things may offend them does not make them fanatics. If Christians collectively shared the same beliefs with regards to the issue of the Cathedral than I am sure Sony may have done something. The simple fact is that only Church leaders complained whereas if they retained the lines from the Qu-ran in the song it would have been most of the Muslim world.
Complain about this comment
Well, the question should be why do corporations feel they can cause offence to people of any faith by appropriating things of that faith in their consumer products? Would Sony allow their brand to be used by anyone and linked with negative or violent images? I severely doubt it, most of the multinationals have a extreme sensitivity to their brands and trademarks being infringed and going into litigation hyperdrive when even the slightest intimation that it is happening comes to their ears.
What gives me the right to insult a Buddhist or a Christian or a Muslim or a Mormon or even an atheist? While I might have a right to enjoy my own views and freedoms, my rights do not allow me to go out and cause distress to others. In the old fashioned world, it was called manners and respect. Seems that these days, there are some who feel it is their right to cause as much offence as they want.
Complain about this comment
What Veritablemonster suggests is a little wide of the actuality - It is not to my view the tolerant majority of the Muslim faith that could find two lines objectionable - It is those who hid behind this maligned faith as a scpegoat to perpetuate violence at various levels. And it is not only Islam that is being used in this manner either as the BBCs news showed yesterday. Are Sony right in recalling these games - well yes, they are. Should they have done the same thing with the Manchester Cathedral game - yes, but the caveat is that extreme Muslims seem prepared to protest at an entirely different level - so how lucky do you "corporately" feel? - Obviously not enough.
Complain about this comment
Sony allow their brand to be used by anyone and linked with negative or violent images? I severely doubt it.
Saints Row 2 GameSpot Score
8.0
great Release Date: Oct 14, 2008 The sequel to Saints Row will bring open world thug-driven action to the 360, PS3, and PC.
Grand Theft Auto IV GameSpot Score
10
Editors' Choice Release Date: Apr 29, 2008 Grand Theft Auto IV casts players as Niko Bellic, a recent immigrant to Liberty City who, finding himself immersed in a world of crime, tries to make the best of it.
SOCOM: U.S. Navy SEALs Confrontation Release Date: Oct 14, 2008 The first SOCOM game for the PS3 will feature up to 32-player matches and destructible environments.
Genre: Modern Shooter
A few of the most negative and violent images from the game industries they all are bound for the PS3. So again this has just been a lot of free advertising for SONY's latest digital star. We say were adverting a social outcry and get our product plugged world wide, when in reality they have used a religion card to make a sale.
Should Christians make a fuss over anything related to the games or film industry were the bible may be referanced or a character from the bible referanced in slang.
Complain about this comment
Honestly, is this where we are in the early 21st century? Are there really people, human beings, out there who will lose sleep because some video game contains a tiny reference to a religion?
I think it's time we all grew up a little.
Complain about this comment
The phrase "squeaky wheel gets the oil"
Sony know Muslims would take terrible offence to the smallest thing and react in a very vocal and sometimes violent matter.
The last thing Sony wants is TV images of Muslims burning down Sony shops or setting fire to the Sony logo.
To me the words of the song are pretty dodgy - quite violent and a ban justified on that reason.
However with Islam it feels like the bullies have won. If they don't like something a few violent protests gets us stepping in to line.
Complain about this comment
#5
Actually, HovellingHermit, you SHOULD have the right to go out and offend just about anyone you want
Freedom of speech for all means freedom to be offended by all
Due to the actions of a tiny minority of Muslims, who do not support the idea of freedom of speech, we all must suffer
Why?
Complain about this comment
I think the important point to note from this article is its place atop the ever growing pile of hacks using a half-baked understanding of video games to get their names on the front page. Please, Mr. Easton, make this article considered and factually correct and then maybe it will hold the weight it deserves.
Firstly - Resistance: Fall of Man is not, by any standards, an "ultra-violent" game. It is a first person shooter, granted, but not any more violent than most hollywood "action" films.
Secondly - Mr Easton accuses Sony of bending over so as not to offend Muslim beliefs, but quite happily offending Christians. You haven't considered the crucial other factors in both of these decisions -
Little Big Planet (LBP) was still pre-release so a recall was possible, Resistance was already a well established title before anybody noticed the in-game setting was Manchester Cathedral so there was no way of bringing those copies that had already been sold back in and destroying them.
The offending article in LBP is a song on the soundtrack which is simple to remove (the games' developer, Media Molecule had a patch ready within 12 hours to automatically remove this content from the game upon insertion of the disc (http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/recalled-copies-of-littlebigplanet-selling-on-ebay-for-up-to-249)), whereas the offending content in Resistance was a significant portion of the game (a large set-piece) whose removal would have wrecked the flow of the game entirely and would be impossible to fix on any sort of sensible timescale.
Thirdly - I think your point about it being a hard-headed business decision is absolutely correct, however it is inevitably corporate good-will as well as a desire not to offend your consumers that has driven this decision - it is not favouritism of one religion who are perceived to react more violently, it is just a good idea not to offend any of your potential customers.
I hope that any one reading this will in future take any video games related news with a pinch of salt - the world's largest up and coming entertainment medium does not deserve the villification it gets due to the minority of truly violent games being jumped on by the majority of ignorant journalists.
Complain about this comment
i would have thought that by now the human race might have grown up but sadly it seems a vast majority have reversed not forged ahead to enhance the planet and its peoples.
these holy books that may at one time been revered but if you look at them you will see that they have been revised over the years by men who removed what they didnt like changed passages to reflect the era or changed them just to remain in power.
christians have the bible this book has been insulted, joked about, even laughed at but does it affect the believers of the book they get mad and defend there book but not much else but other religions have no such leaniency and thus will take up arms over the slightest insult to there book.
so is it right to use violence to enforce there will and chioce on others i think not personaly and shows me the inhabitants of this planet realy have a great deal of growing up to do.
Complain about this comment
#10 - Freedom of expression does not mean freedom to insult.
There is a difference between entering into a respectful debate where you may not agree with the views of the other person and but you can debate in a frank, open yet respectful manner.
To simply go out and insult people is nothing to do with freedom of expression, it is simply the school playground tactic of name calling.
That goes for all faiths and even people of no faith, you can have a difference of opinion without being insulting to them, which is not the same as stopping peoples right to express their opinions.
Complain about this comment
The reason is simple. Offending Christians isn't likely to result in an angry Christian bombing your headquarters. Unfortunately, the same can't be said for some folk who call themselves Muslims.
Complain about this comment
#10
Freedom of speech has to have its limits. You could say that due to freedom of speech, you can go out onto the street and start swearing, call your neighbours obscene names, march up to a wheelchair bound person and poke and laugh at them, and threaten to lynch your local MP and murder his/her family. But you wouldn't (I hope) due to the respect you have for the right of other people to live quiet, peaceful lives, and live without fear of attack.
Similarly, you could go out and start yelling obsceneties about Muslims, calling them rude names and swear loudly at every Muslim you walk past. But out of respect for them and their religion, you wouldn't (I hope).
If, as you say, it also means we should have the right to be offended by anything, does that mean that people should go marching in the streets calling for the death of someone who draws someone who you worship in the newspaper? Of course not, it was all out of proportion.
It's just about being polite, and finding a balance between freedom of speech and politeness.
Complain about this comment
Incidentally, I think that this incident pales in comparison to the one of a shooting in the Church. That actually featured holy buildings, and I can understand that death in a place of worship is offensive. This however only features lines from the Koran so it is nowhere near as offensive, in my opinion.
Of course, being an aetheist, perhaps I don't have a grip on what people deem offensive or not.
Complain about this comment
It's also very interesting to note that a lot of people are now talking about this game in much wider circles than previously - you wouldn't get a blog on this sort of stuff from Mark Easton if Sony hadn't done this?
Still it's about time Computer games are more than just sub articles or vitriol from the Daily Mail.
C.
Complain about this comment
Sounds like a good decision by Sony. As mentioned above, it's far easier to edit a soundtrack than remove a building from the gameplay. And if I was a Sony exec, I wouldn't fancy the prospect of zealots getting medieval on my ass, so to speak. :o)
Complain about this comment
Ill prob get in trouble for this but here it is the lines in question.
the track titled Swinging Safari contains the following Qur’an references.
"kollo nafsin tha'iqatol mawt"
literally: 'Every soul shall have the taste of death'
and
"kollo man alaiha fan"
literally: 'All that is on earth'
They are from the early quran not sure to what part though.
Complain about this comment
Ever since Rushdie had to go into hiding and a Dutch filmmaker was stabbed to death, corporate execs are fearful and don`t want the same to happen to them.
I also guess that after the Danish cartoons furore that they want to continue doing business in many countries without fear that their offices (or sales) will be threatened in any way.
It`s a sad fact, fear works. (The C of E just threatens to be scolding on the Today program. It`s not the same.)
Complain about this comment
so is the original artist's having their song withdrawn from distribution?
Complain about this comment
I am a Muslim and I am angry that they have taken the verses out of the game and that LBP has been delayed. I want my damn game!
Complain about this comment
Speaking as a militant Anglican I hereby warn the executives of the sony corporation that .... if they carry on offending our Christian values we might.... might.... turn the other cheek and pray for them.
Of course don't underestimate the economic power of Christians... expect the price of Playstation consoles to collapse as we flood the market with second hand consoles at our jumble sales.
Ha ! You have been warned!
You wont mess with the Militant Anglican Tendancy any more were not MATs for you to wipe your feet on .... well actually, yes we are.
Cup of tea and a stale digestive any one?
Complain about this comment
I'm getting more and more annoyed about this whole 'you can't upset the religious folk' nonsense.
The Catholic church lied to millions of Africans about the effectiveness of condoms leading to HIV infection on a massive scale. The Jews in Israel lie through their teeth about their nuclear capability and wantonly steal land they don't own, killing anybody who stands in their way. Moslems in Afghanistan shoot a woman in cold blood because her God is not their God.
If I stand up and shout about these offences against humanity, against you, against me, it seems I am running the risk of offending people.
Frankly, good. I hope people of these faiths are offended. I hope that my criticism of their actions hurts deeply. My words (and certainly the words in video game) are nothing compared with the butchery that these religions have carried out in the name of something they call God.
It sickens me that such hypocrisy exists and that apparently intelligent people perpetuate the status quo and allow these monsters to go unchallenged.
Complain about this comment
What we have here is yet another illustration of the difference between freedom to think and brainwashing.
Complain about this comment
Re: #13/#15. Yes, freedom of speech has limits, but offending the sensibilities of others is *not* that limit. You may not slander others, unlawfully threaten them or speak in a way such as to knowingly cause actual harm to come to them, but you can laugh at, poke fun at, ridicule, patronise or offend them as much as you bleeding well like. Granted, it may not always be *nice* to do those things, but it's allowable, and always should be allowable.
Calling for death for cartoonists who draw religious figures is not wrong because it's out of proportion, it's wrong as a point of principle. If the protesters simply said that the cartoonists shouldn't be allowed to draw religious figures, they'd still be wrong.
What should be noted here is that the game producers were not even being offensive. What was happening was that some people were being offended. It's a crucial difference. What seems to get left behind in the "understanding other viewpoints" discussion is the idea that if someone isn't trying to be unpleasant, then to be understanding (and indeed sensible!) is to read no unpleasantness into it.
Complain about this comment
I will concede that I do not know much about the game in question, but surely the strangest aspect of Sony's decision is that the game is so benign it is described as "dripping in syrupy family values", rather than being some violence ridden shoot em up.
How, therefore, have any religous beliefs been offended? A man released a song that includes an excerpt of the Koran. He does this in order to "attract and inspire people towards Islam". Indeed, a central tenet of most religions is to spread the word of whichever God you may believe in. Muslims may therefore be grateful for the wide spread release of this song, while i'm fairly sure your average Jewish / Catholic / Hindu game player is unlikely to be particularly influenced by an excerpt of a song written in a language most non-muslims are unlikely to be able to understand.
In short, this decision means that Sony has decided that putting Muslim text (sung by a Muslim artist) in to a game released by non muslims is offensive.
Madness.
Complain about this comment
"...unlikely to be particularly influenced by an excerpt of a song written in a language most non-muslims are unlikely to be able to understand."- hoolydrooly2
Not just most non-Muslims, but most Muslims actually don't speak or know Arabic. Only 18% of Muslims in the world are Arabic!
Complain about this comment
Perhaps Sony, understanding the reactionary nature of some Muslims from past history, decided to take the safest course.
Christians might be seen as more tolerant, but this doesn't apply to all situations. Given the right topic, some Christian will go off the deep end too.
Complain about this comment
Not just non-muslims...... Only 18% of muslims in the world are Arabic!
Muzza1923.
Without being rude, you do need to do a little bit of a wider investigation into this before making a comment like this.
The Koran is taught to all muslims in it's original language - Arabic - to prevent the kind of misinterpretation we see in both the new and old testament translations.
So, all muslims will understand the words in the excerpt as it will be a familiar phrase even when sung.
Complain about this comment
Intolerance has not changed - just the things we find intolerant. In the 19th century there were intolerant christians who would make an unbelievers life a misery but were not bothered about sex equality. In the 2oth century there were radical socialists like pol pot who were quite happy to murder millions to pursue the class war.
The pity is that we listen to and report the views of the people who are prepared to use extreme violence to get their own way.
Complain about this comment
I am sick and tired of people trying to make it "right" for everyone out of fear that they may get sued otherwise.
I can't see anything offensive in using a phrase from the Koran in a game.
Have we all gone mad with the stupid PC nonsense?
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS