What a lot of commenters here are forgetting is that they are not the only kind of gamer out there. Some people want to finish a game, experience the story, and move on to the next one in a reasonable amount of time. I don't have 40+ hours to devote to a single game anymore, especially when a good chunk of those hours are spent repeating a section I suck at. And the ability to put show-stopping difficult sections of a game on autopilot for a bit, just enough to get past those parts, would make me willing to try a lot of games that I otherwise wouldn't.
'literacy' is really a very generic term. One can be book literate, computer literate, health literate, etc. Gaming is just another on the list.
I know my own sense of rhythm has been enhanced by 'button mashing' through Guitar Hero/Rock Band. I listen to music a lot differently now than I did before playing those games.
This news report also leaves out another big part of the gaming in libraries initiative: board games. Complicated board games can very easily require a ton of critical thinking skills.
And from the definition you cited, "printed and written materials" needs to be expanded to include media of the modern world - including games.
And lastly, from a more practical standpoint: libraries have circulated movies on VHS & DVD for years now. I don't see that those belong on library shelves any less or more than games do.
I'm very disappointed with this article overall. The Dark Knight ARG did so much more than get people to dress up in costumes - the plot and world built by the game made the movie even more fulfilling than it would have been otherwise.
I also don't think many people want them to stay permanently tied to commercial products. The independent ARGs which exist now are a good start, and are growing.
Books can be ads. Movies can be ads. TV shows can be ads (pick almost any cartoon from the 80s). ARGs as a medium aren't any different.
[gregmaletic.wordpress.com]