Microsoft responds to Obama's "put away the Xbox" comment

Posted Jul 18, 2009 at 10:58PM by Glenn M. Listed in: Xbox 360 Tags: Barack Obama, Excel, Microsoft
Ó


In a speech delivered in the event celebrating the 100th Anniversary of the NAACP, President Barack Obama calls upon parents to "put away the Xbox," so the kids can hit the sack at a reasonable hour. This won't certainly be the first time that Obama throws a metaphorical sidewinder against gaming, but this time, his comment gets a formal reply.



Here's what Obama said:

To parents, we canÂ’t tell our kids to do well in school and fail to support them when they get home. For our kids to excel, we must accept our own responsibilities. That means putting away the Xbox and putting our kids to bed at a reasonable hour. It means attending those parent-teacher conferences, reading to our kids, and helping them with their homework...


Here's what Microsoft said:

We agree with President Obama that itÂ’s a time for families to work together so that kids use media in ways that are safe, healthy and balanced. Xbox 360 is the only console gaming system that has a timer feature allowing parents to set time limits for their kids, as well as parent controls to enable parents to set limits on what their kids are playing and watching.


Nothing like turning a comment into an advertising opportunity, and I have to give them points for not sounding like Dan Greenwalt when talking about Forza Motorsport 3. As for US president, at least he switches consoles to name drop with every speech.



Obama and video games:


Via Gamekicker

 
 
 

Comments [refresh]

by Silver-Tiger - 2009-07-18 19:42
» ...

"Xbox 360 is the only console gaming system that has a timer feature allowing parents to set time limits for their kids, as well as parent controls to enable parents to set limits on what their kids are playing and watching."



Well, normally parents should be able to tell their kids when to shut down the console. and WTF, the second sentence is a pure lie, every console and even the PSP have parent controls now.

by gogeta85 - 2009-07-18 21:45
» read it right

He said "as well as parent controls to enable parents to set limits on what their kids are playing and watching." He did not say the only "console" to have the controls, just the timer only.

by Solid Snicker - 2009-07-18 22:47
» .

i hit my sack at a reasonable hour.

by Silver-Tiger - 2009-07-18 23:35
» ...

youre right, I overead that part with the timer feature. Still it's a typical Micosoft comment, totally arrogant and they express it like their console has the "longest".

by hypercoyote360 - 2009-07-19 01:32
» It's all in the wording

Well, if you take the whole comment, which says a timer AND parental controls, then yes, it is true that they are the only console with BOTH those features. Tricky tricky word wizards.....

by Navani - 2009-07-19 02:08
» lol

Obama should have said "Put down the Xbox and pick up a Wii for fun family entertainment" .. lmao. Honestly, though, besides Rock Band on my 360, if I want to play a game with my friends who are terrible at games in general, I'll bring out Mario Party or Mario Kart or MadWorld or something.

by FearEvil19 - 2009-07-19 05:14
» the PS3

also has timer AND parental controls

by Metal Jody - 2009-07-19 08:20
» .

Xbox 360 has a timer?! thats g@y. Can you still save ur game when the time is up?

by FelisCatusLover - 2009-07-19 08:24
» ...

To Obama: I wont be voting for you for re election.

To Microsoft: Thank God I sold my crap 360 and have a PS3.

by Specht - 2009-07-19 09:01
» Nope.

PS3/Wii only have parental control features. They don't have a timer that turns off the console at a certain time automatically.

by xXxZEROxXx - 2009-07-19 15:45
» wtf

This man is hungry for power 24/7.



But what do you expect from a socialist.

by rollypoly - 2009-07-19 15:46
» hmm

that's a good question...



never used it with my ex's kids as you have to be a pretty lame parent to not have someone available to make sure the kids go to bed.

by fearlubu - 2009-07-19 18:59
» buuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuut

he did pull a little bit of a funny at the end, like other parents beating their kids....



ahh, reminds me of Russell Peters!

by Retrohelix - 2009-07-19 19:29
» .

Somebody gonna get a hurt real baad!



btw QJ.....could you please keep users on the same article instead of re-directing them back to the homepage after they log-in to post a comment?

by tobyo1 - 2009-07-20 03:05
» Obama

Obama is cheap, celebrity president, who will take credit for everything and responsibility for nothing. And no, I don't really have any massive problem with this comment. I live in the UK, so obviously I didn't vote, but if I was a citizen I'd have voted for Ron Paul. Hilary and Obama are just liberals who don't quite live in the real world, none of the other Democrats appealed to me, while some seemed a little or moderare which is good. I liked McCain in some ways, but he has just another neocon, similar to Bush. A lot of the other GOP candidates seemed like that as well. But I liked Ron Paul with has libertarian and constitutional values (and in some ways conservative) , that are really what the Republican Party is meant to be about. Really, America needs another Ronald Reagan, and Great Britain needs another Margaret Thatcher, and fast before it's too late.

by tobyo1 - 2009-07-20 03:15
» Corrections

*but he is just another neocon



*I liked McCain in some ways, but he was just another neocon



Also, I'd like to add that it's pretty ridiculous that Obama won the election on the basis of promising 'change'. Yes, we all need change, but change is anything different. Is Obama really suggesting that the country COULD NOT be in a worse state than it was in the Bush years? Nazism or communism would be 'change'. The kind of fundamentalist Islamic society Al Qaeda and the Taliban want would be 'change', but these are awful, dystopian, oppressive societies which would make people suddenly want Bush back. I'm not suggesting Obama is any of these things, but the notion of 'change' should not be enough to win an election. And, I don't think Obama had any good convictions that made his change the right kind of change. All he had was getting out of the War on Terror (OK, good), and fundamentally flawed Keynesian economic stimulus ideas. Honestly, in 2012, be careful who you choose, it affects the entire world.

by chraky - 2009-07-20 04:39
» Well...

Obama no longer deserves to be president.

The only reason he won the election is because he is black.

Obama has done a pretty good job wrecking the economy more than it already was.

I don´t think that we should pay any more attention to his dumba·· comments.

Oh yeah and obama··· you should stop putting so much effort into trying to help with kids future because in the future, the kids are going to be paying for all of the money you WASTED.

by tobyo1 - 2009-07-20 05:09
» I think...

this also describes Gordon Brown here in Britain. Although, without the 'him being black' thing lol.

by xXxZEROxXx - 2009-07-20 09:56
» Well

He has lied to us from day 1, telling us we'll be able to keep our private healthcare..

When infact in this healthcare bill it states: "Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day" of the year the legislation becomes law.



So we can all keep our coverage, just as promised %u2014 with, of course, exceptions: Those who currently have private individual coverage won't be able to change it. Nor will those who leave a company to work for themselves be free to buy individual plans from private carriers.



Obama you LIAR

Add comment

Security code
Refresh

Add QJ.NET
Add to My Yahoo!
Google Reader Subscribe with Bloglines
Add  to your Kinja digest Subscribe in NewsGator Online
Subscribe with Pluck RSS reader Add 'www.qj.net' to Newsburst from CNET News.com
Subscribe with SearchFox RSS del.icio.us www.qj.net
Add to Technorati Favorite! Add to My AOL
furl! it Stumble for Treehugger!