In this blog post, we analyze from various perspectives whether South Korea’s shutdown system is actually effective in protecting young people or whether it is causing side effects.
What is the shutdown system?
The shutdown system is a technical measure implemented by the Ministry of Gender Equality and Family of South Korea that restricts internet game access for youth under the age of 16 from midnight to 6 a.m. based on South Korean Standard Time. There are two main ways in which the shutdown system is implemented. The first is an indirect method that gives advantages to users who do not play games for a certain period of time when they reconnect. The second is a direct method that blocks games when users play for more than a certain period of time or when a certain time period is reached. In October 2004, the “Forum for Measures to Secure Sleep Rights for Youth” urged its introduction, and related bills were continuously proposed. On April 29, 2011, the current shutdown system was passed at a plenary session of the National Assembly and officially implemented on November 20, 2011.
Korea was not the first country to introduce a shutdown system. Thailand was the first country to introduce a game shutdown system, blocking teenagers from accessing online games from 10 p.m. to 6 a.m. Even adults were required to obtain a game account after 10 p.m. under the strict regulations, but Thailand’s shutdown system was a failure. The original intention of preventing young people from playing games was not realized due to an increase in the number of accounts created with stolen personal information, and the system was abolished as ineffective due to side effects. Not only Thailand, but also Vietnam and some regions of the United States attempted to implement a similar system, but they were unsuccessful and disappeared without leaving a trace. Currently, South Korea is the only country where an online game shutdown system is enforced by law. The reason for the failure in other countries is that they failed to restrict online games because they were unable to prevent illegal access. Korea seems to be repeating the same mistake by attempting to implement the shutdown system without applying methodological changes to resolve its contradictions. Therefore, I oppose the implementation of the shutdown system in Korea and would like to present my reasons.
First, the evidence of the harmful effects of online games on young people is unclear!
One of the arguments against online games is the “copycat crime theory.” This theory claims that young people who are exposed to violence in online games are more likely to commit crimes by imitating what they see in the games. However, it is a leap to conclude that the violence in games alone increases the likelihood of crime among young people. Many studies have examined the correlation between games and crime rates, but the opinion that games contribute to an increase in crime rates has not been supported by significant research results. In April 2011, a study led by the European Economic Research Center and researchers in Texas concluded that crime rates decreased as more people played games at home. In addition, it is unreasonable to blame online games for the increase in crime rates, as there are many factors that stimulate violence, such as sports such as martial arts and sexually explicit movies.
Next, there is the “social loss theory,” which argues that excessive gaming causes young people to become immersed in virtual worlds, leading to social isolation and fragmentation. However, there are also counterarguments to this theory. In particular, research has shown that online games, which require communication with others, actually help improve social skills and teamwork. Online games are also sometimes developed and used as programs to improve teamwork. The phenomenon of socially isolated young people becoming obsessed with online games as an escape is sometimes mistakenly identified as a cause of social isolation.
Second, there is a problem with the shutdown system itself!
Rather than protecting young people who are addicted to games, as intended, the shutdown system is more likely to cause other side effects. The identity verification process required to create an online game account consists only of name, resident registration number, and mobile phone number. Such restrictions are not very effective in preventing young people from playing games. The security of information such as names and resident registration numbers is not guaranteed as personal identification information. According to the results of the “Survey on the Actual Status of Healthy Internet Game Use by Youth” conducted by the Ministry of Gender Equality and Family to evaluate the implementation of the shutdown system, the use of online games by youth during late night hours decreased by only 0.3% after the implementation of the shutdown system.
So, can we restrict game use by requiring more information for personal authentication? The expected results are not positive. For users who are not subject to sanctions, there will be various problems, ranging from inconveniences in use to potential personal information leaks that may occur when important information is distributed. For young people, there is a high possibility that illegal game servers will emerge that allow access without authentication in exchange for monetary compensation. In fact, even now, free servers that allow users to play licensed games without paying are rampant. In other words, this will result in creating a revenue structure for illegal server operators, rather than game companies that need to earn revenue for their services while restricting the use of their games by minors. Attempts to forcibly prevent minors from accessing games late at night are likely to become useless measures that only produce side effects.
The intention behind the shutdown system is not worthy of criticism!
The intention behind the shutdown system to protect young people from potential harm is desirable. In reality, there are many cases where young people become addicted to online games, which hinders their emotional development. However, in order to improve this situation, a system that goes one step further than the short-sighted shutdown system is necessary.
According to one study, communication with parents, parental expectations for academic performance, and parental affection are significantly negatively correlated with computer game addiction among young people. In other words, rather than preventing the use of online games, a more fundamental measure against the harmful effects of online games would be to provide guidance based on continuous affection and attention from parents and teachers at home and at school.
Instead of the current primary system of blocking online game use, it is necessary to establish youth centers for the prevention and treatment of game addiction and expand mandatory emotional education not only for youth but also for parents. Rather than imposing mandatory restrictions on online game companies, a certain percentage of their profits should be taxed to ensure that they fulfill their social responsibility for online game businesses targeting youth in Korea. In order to spread a healthy online game culture, companies should be encouraged to carry out image campaigns, such as including warning messages in games. In particular, it is necessary to invest capital to improve the environment of centers so that compulsory education can be provided to socially marginalized groups that are vulnerable to online game addiction, such as youth who have broken family relationships with their parents.
