tag:theconversation.com,2011:/ca/topics/r18-206/articlesR18 – The Conversation2023-11-13T00:12:23Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2160042023-11-13T00:12:23Z2023-11-13T00:12:23ZAustralia’s media classification system is no help to parents and carers. It needs a grounding in evidence<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/557940/original/file-20231107-29-5gynl3.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C5%2C3964%2C1988&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/classic-vintage-retro-style-old-television-614643728">Commonwealth of Australia/Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>In the era of proliferating streaming platforms, choosing what to watch on family movie night can be hard.</p>
<p>Parents have a greater need than ever for good advice to help them narrow down the options, and they should be able to turn to the government’s classification system. </p>
<p>When they do, they will usually trust that if something is rated G or PG, it’s suitable for young children. </p>
<p>You might be surprised to learn, then, the current media classification system has no basis in evidence about children’s developmental needs.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/episode-choose-your-story-the-inappropriate-game-your-kids-have-probably-played-127445">Episode – Choose Your Story: the inappropriate game your kids have probably played</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Where did classifications come from?</h2>
<p>Australia’s National Classification Scheme for films, games and publications was established in 1995. The Commonwealth and the states and territories agreed to replace what was then known as the “censorship” system. </p>
<p>The scheme classifies media content based on the perceived impact (very mild, mild, moderate, and so on) of elements such as violence, sex, and themes related to social issues including crime, racism and suicide. </p>
<p>The ratings aim to give effect to four principles listed in the <a href="https://www.classification.gov.au/about-us/legislation">National Classification Code</a>. One of those is that “minors should be protected from material likely to harm or disturb them”.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/2D8qrfgcTjs?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">This film ratings promo was on many VHS and DVDs in Australia in the 2000s.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Initially there was no R18+ classification for games. </p>
<p>After <a href="https://theconversation.com/r18-classification-for-videogames-the-quest-continues-2835">intense debate</a> in the late 2000s, the adults-only classification was introduced in 2013.</p>
<h2>Flawed attempts at reform</h2>
<p>The Commonwealth referred classification law to the Australian Law Reform Commission for review in 2011. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.alrc.gov.au/inquiry/national-classification-scheme-review/">2012 report</a> revealed little about the efficacy of the scheme for families. </p>
<p>The review led to <a href="https://www.alrc.gov.au/inquiry/national-classification-scheme-review/implementation-13/">very few changes</a>. None were of any real significance for consumers.</p>
<p>Recommendations from the <a href="https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/review-of-australian-classification-regulation--may2020.pdf">latest review</a> of the scheme were submitted to the Morrison government in 2020. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/there-are-no-age-restrictions-for-gambling-in-video-games-despite-potential-risks-to-children-96115">There are no age restrictions for gambling in video games, despite potential risks to children</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>There was no action on those until the Albanese government, in April 2023, announced a couple of fairly significant changes, such as <a href="https://minister.infrastructure.gov.au/rowland/media-release/albanese-government-outlines-key-reforms-national-classification-scheme">mandatory minimum classifications</a> for gambling-related content.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, however, useful information for families is still hard to come by. </p>
<h2>Vague terms not based in fact</h2>
<p>The current system is based entirely on “impact”, which is undefined. </p>
<p>The efficacy of the system in protecting children from harm or disturbance is diminished because it’s not based on evidence of children’s developmental needs. </p>
<p>For example, there is strong evidence that scary content <a href="https://smallscreen.org.au/september-2023-editorial/">poses risks</a> for children’s mental wellbeing.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/557946/original/file-20231107-17-2a7znm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A child plays a video game wearing headphones" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/557946/original/file-20231107-17-2a7znm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/557946/original/file-20231107-17-2a7znm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/557946/original/file-20231107-17-2a7znm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/557946/original/file-20231107-17-2a7znm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/557946/original/file-20231107-17-2a7znm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/557946/original/file-20231107-17-2a7znm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/557946/original/file-20231107-17-2a7znm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">R18+ classifications were brought in for video games in 2013.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/little-boy-playing-video-game-dark-1587426013">Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>But unless it’s actually violent (which it isn’t always), you have to hope it will be picked up under the “themes”. </p>
<p>If we had an evidence-based system, scariness would be established as a separate criterion during the classification process.</p>
<p>Regarding violent content, <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1529-1006.2003.pspi_1433.x">there is evidence</a> as to which kinds pose greater risks than others.</p>
<p>But <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/13218719.2021.1904446">a study</a> of the Classification Review Board’s thought processes around violence shows these are often at odds with the evidence.</p>
<p>For example, they tend to downplay “superhero violence”. </p>
<p>However, <a href="https://doi.org/10.12987/yale/9780300218879.001.0001">research</a> shows appealing perpetrators whose violence is justified are more likely to foster an attitude in viewers that violence is an appropriate way to resolve conflict.</p>
<p>The most recent review of the scheme recognised the need for an evidence-based system, but stopped short of recommending it. </p>
<h2>Overhaul needed to better guide parents</h2>
<p>Parents need reliable information to judge the suitability of content for children of different ages. </p>
<p>The G and PG ratings, for example, effectively lump everyone under 15 into a single age group. This means they don’t provide any guidance about whether or not content is suitable for any particular age group under that threshold. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/review-of-australian-classification-regulation--may2020.pdf">2020 review</a> suggested an additional category (PG13) could be appropriate. </p>
<p>This may help address the vast range of content lumped in the current PG category, but only if it was based on evidence about the developmental needs of children under 13. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/557944/original/file-20231107-22-2d6qf0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A mother, father and young boy sit on the couch eating popcorn" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/557944/original/file-20231107-22-2d6qf0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/557944/original/file-20231107-22-2d6qf0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/557944/original/file-20231107-22-2d6qf0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/557944/original/file-20231107-22-2d6qf0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/557944/original/file-20231107-22-2d6qf0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/557944/original/file-20231107-22-2d6qf0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/557944/original/file-20231107-22-2d6qf0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Parents should have more of a say to make the Australian classification system more user-friendly.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/family-leisure-people-concept-happy-smiling-1658483641">Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>And even if PG13 was introduced, the system would still fail to address the differing developmental stages of children aged 1 to 12 years.</p>
<p>An overhaul of the system is needed, including a move away from “impact” to a test based on children’s developmental needs.</p>
<p>This could help support parents to make well-informed decisions for their children. The Commonwealth is obliged to do this under article 18 of the UN’s <a href="https://www.unicef.org.au/united-nations-convention-on-the-rights-of-the-child">Convention on the Rights of the Child</a>.</p>
<p>Policy-makers should also be seeking the thoughts of parents, who ultimately interact with the system most. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.classification.gov.au/about-us/research-and-publications/classification-usage-and-attitudes-2022">Previous government research</a> hasn’t focused on parents enough.</p>
<p>A 2022 report found 74% broad agreement with the statement “classification categories do not need to change”. But participants, only 30% of whom were parents or carers, were not given an alternative model for comparison. </p>
<p>We cannot know what participants would have said if they had been asked to consider other options, such as an age-based set of categories.</p>
<p>Research we are currently undertaking fills this gap. </p>
<p><a href="https://unisasurveys.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_cV1sFcIAgFXa1gy">Our survey</a> informs parents and carers about the current Australian system and asks them to rate content using an evidence-informed framework.</p>
<p>It will provide important information about the usability of the scheme. Then, we can propose a model of classification that better reflects the needs of its primary users – one that is actually based on evidence.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/216004/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Elizabeth Handsley is President of Children and Media Australia, the national peak non-profit organisation representing children's rights and interests as media users. In this capacity she made submissions and representations to the Stevens review of the National Classification Scheme. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Fae Heaselgrave is conducting research with Children and Media Australia about the usability of the Australian Classifications Scheme for parents and carers. </span></em></p>We’re all familiar with a green ‘G’ or a red ‘MA’ on a movie poster, but those ratings don’t have any basis in what we know about child development. They’d be much more useful for parents if they did.Elizabeth Handsley, Adjunct Professor of Law, Western Sydney UniversityFae Heaselgrave, Lecturer in Communication and Media, University of South AustraliaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/97162012-09-25T02:25:44Z2012-09-25T02:25:44ZR18+ rating added for videogames … but are children protected?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/15829/original/ry4x833q-1348537040.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The videogame classification scheme was revised to better protect minors from inappropriate content.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Ian Muttoo</span></span></figcaption></figure><p><a href="http://www.ministerhomeaffairs.gov.au/Mediareleases/Pages/2012/Third%20Quarter/12September2012-Newcomputergameguidelinesfinalised.aspx">New guidelines</a> for the classification of videogames have been released by Federal Home Affairs Minister Jason Clare and, despite being a step in the right direction, the revisions are largely disappointing and a missed opportunity.</p>
<p>The <a href="http://www.classification.gov.au/Informationcentre/Pages/NewGuidelinesfortheClassificationofComputerGames.aspx">Guidelines for the Classification of Computer Games</a> – which were revised to account for the <a href="https://theconversation.com/r18-classification-for-videogames-the-quest-continues-2835">introduction of an R18+ classification</a> – are an important step towards the enhanced protection of minors which has been held out as a result of the reform.</p>
<p>Under the existing system, the highest legal classification a game can be given is MA15+. This year the Parliament has amended the law to allow an R18+ classification, in response to community concerns that the strong, contextually justified violence available in MA15+ was not suitable for anybody under 18. However it was necessary to change the guidelines to ensure that level of violence would no longer be available at MA15+.</p>
<p>While the revised guidelines show an obvious intent to meet community expectations about enhanced protection for minors – by tightening up the level of violence permissible at MA15+ – there was a disappointing lack of public consultation during their creation.</p>
<p>Instead the draft guidelines were simply <a href="http://www.classification.gov.au/Informationcentre/Pages/NewGuidelinesfortheClassificationofComputerGames.aspx">placed on a website</a>, with no proper call for public comment. As the guidelines are more important to the policy aim than the introduction of the new classification, consultation on them should have been at least as widely publicised.</p>
<p>Nor does there appear to have been any proper legislative drafting process; rather the guidelines were passed around for individual ministers to make their own changes and additions.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/15830/original/8hp3dy99-1348537137.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/15830/original/8hp3dy99-1348537137.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=395&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/15830/original/8hp3dy99-1348537137.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=395&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/15830/original/8hp3dy99-1348537137.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=395&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/15830/original/8hp3dy99-1348537137.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=497&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/15830/original/8hp3dy99-1348537137.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=497&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/15830/original/8hp3dy99-1348537137.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=497&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP Image/Tracey Nearmy</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The result is a patch-up job with minimal substantive changes. Worse, some of the wording is awkward and unclear.</p>
<p>The test for sexual violence at the R18+ level, for instance, stretches logic by distinguishing between “implied sexual violence” which is “visually depicted”, and that which is not visually depicted.</p>
<p>The guidelines go on to state that the classification does not permit implied sexual violence that is visually depicted if it is “interactive, not justified by context or related to incentives or rewards”. I doubt any self-respecting legislative drafter would have mixed up positives and negatives in this way.</p>
<p>The new guidelines also contain a restriction on depictions of “actual” sexual activity, thereby failing to recognise that nothing in a game is “actual”. The word, I imagine, was chosen to make a distinction from depictions of “implied” sexual activity, but if this was the case, a drafter would have known that the appropriate word would have been “explicit”.</p>
<p>Perhaps more importantly, the new guidelines contain more changes on sexual activity, nudity and drug use than they do on violence. It was violence driving the push for an R18+ classification in the first place and violence should have been central to the changes.</p>
<p>Rather, the violence-related changes come across as an afterthought; for example, all classification levels contain changes relating to sex, drugs and nudity but the criteria for non-sexual violence change only at G and MA15+. The dominance of the sex-related changes, in my view, further entrenches the classification system as one based on moralistic concerns rather than the clear evidence about what can influence children’s development in detrimental ways.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/15729/original/tffy232t-1348191375.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/15729/original/tffy232t-1348191375.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=213&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/15729/original/tffy232t-1348191375.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=213&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/15729/original/tffy232t-1348191375.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=213&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/15729/original/tffy232t-1348191375.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=268&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/15729/original/tffy232t-1348191375.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=268&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/15729/original/tffy232t-1348191375.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=268&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Australian Classification Board</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>I have been disappointed (but not surprised) to see a renewal of <a href="http://www.igea.net/2012/09/video-games-industry-response-to-release-of-new-guidelines-for-the-classification-of-computer-games/">claims by the gaming industry</a> of an absence of evidence violent interactive games (by demanding active engagement) can have a stronger influence on users than film (which demands only passive engagement).</p>
<p>Interactive games may not have been around long enough for there to be conclusive evidence about enhanced impact through interactivity, but as this <a href="http://www.unicef.org/teachers/learner/exp.htm">UNICEF Multigrade Teacher’s Handbook</a> reminds us, we do have plenty of evidence that children learn better by doing than by watching, especially through repetition and rewards. </p>
<p>The analogy to interactive and passive media experiences is powerful enough to justify a different approach to the classification of games.</p>
<p>Of course the comments sections of articles and online forums are still full of pundits protesting about an alleged lack of evidence that violent media of <em>any</em> kind can have an influence on its users. </p>
<p>These claims sound strange coming at the end of a lengthy campaign for an R18+ classification that was driven by hand-wringing about all the inappropriate material currently available to minors at MA15+.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/15828/original/ztqmy7qd-1348536683.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/15828/original/ztqmy7qd-1348536683.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=423&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/15828/original/ztqmy7qd-1348536683.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=423&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/15828/original/ztqmy7qd-1348536683.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=423&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/15828/original/ztqmy7qd-1348536683.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=532&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/15828/original/ztqmy7qd-1348536683.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=532&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/15828/original/ztqmy7qd-1348536683.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=532&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">pawpaw76</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>I’ve yet to meet anyone who disagrees some games are inappropriate for minors – the problem is that some people are happy to reach that conclusion based on a moralistic assessment of the material, or on gut-feeling and guesswork, or on the intent of the developer, rather than on the weight of the <a href="http://www.israsociety.com/pdfs/Media%20Violence%20Commission%20final%20report.pdf">scientific evidence</a> that exists as to how violent media can influence people’s thoughts, attitudes and behaviour.</p>
<p>People who weigh in to the debate over the appropriate role of this evidence in policy formation nearly always presume that the main, or only, question is whether violent media begets violent behaviour. In doing so they overlook the more subtle but potentially widespread influences on thoughts and especially attitudes.</p>
<p>Desensitisation to violence is at least as big a concern for the future of our society as increased tendencies to aggressive behaviour. Possibly more so because, while parents and carers have some opportunity to notice and address behavioural changes, attitudinal ones might go unnoticed and unchecked until it is too late.</p>
<p>The revised guidelines for videogames are another lost opportunity for a root-and-branch, considered review to base the classification system on the science, rather than on guesswork and moral judgment.</p>
<p>If we are going to have a classification system based on the wide recognition that media content can be harmful to minors, it’s imperative that we take seriously the evidence about what is harmful, and build the criteria around that.</p>
<p><strong>Further reading:</strong></p>
<ul>
<li><a href="http://www.classification.gov.au/Informationcentre/Pages/NewGuidelinesfortheClassificationofComputerGames.aspx">New Guidelines for the Classification of Computer Games</a> – Australian Government</li>
</ul><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/9716/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>In addition to her role as Professor of Law at Flinders University, Elizabeth Handsley is the President of the Australian Council on Children and the Media.</span></em></p>New guidelines for the classification of videogames have been released by Federal Home Affairs Minister Jason Clare and, despite being a step in the right direction, the revisions are largely disappointing…Elizabeth Handsley, Professor of Law, Flinders UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/28352012-02-20T03:29:53Z2012-02-20T03:29:53ZR18+ classification for videogames … the quest continues<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/7784/original/zsnh8q73-1329447234.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The gaming industry's decade-long journey might soon be over.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Bethesda Softworks</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Late last week Federal Home Affairs Minister Jason Clare <a href="http://www.aph.gov.au/hansard/reps/dailys/dr150212.pdf">introduced a bill to parliament</a> that takes Australia one step closer to an R18+ classification for videogames. No sooner had the classification bill been introduced than the Coalition responded by <a href="http://www.kotaku.com.au/2012/02/the-coalition-push-the-r18-bill-to-an-inquiry/">calling for an inquiry</a> into the bill.</p>
<p>These are just the latest developments in a saga that’s been running for the best part of a decade. But if everything goes to plan, we could see R18+ games on Australian shelves by January 2013.</p>
<p>So <a href="https://theconversation.com/fair-game-why-we-should-back-an-r18-classification-732">why do we even need an R18+ classification for video games</a>? Well as it stands, the highest rating that can be applied to a videogame in Australia is <a href="http://www.classification.gov.au/www/cob/classification.nsf/Page/ClassificationMarkings_ClassificationMarkingsonFilmandComputerGames_ClassificationMarkingsonFilmandComputerGames">MA15+</a>. Games with content exceeding the <a href="http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/F2008C00126">MA15+ definition</a> must be “refused classification”. And any game that is refused classification cannot legally be sold or played in Australia (of course this doesn’t stop players <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/games/blogs/screenplay/split-screen-strange-customs-20110318-1bz93.html">ordering such games from overseas</a>).</p>
<p>In an <a href="https://theconversation.com/video-gamers-kill-cinema-box-office-suspects-young-old-male-female-1711">increasingly sophisticated game market</a>, Australia’s lack of an R18+ rating has led to <a href="http://refused-classification.com/censorship/games/a-to-z-listing.html">a number of games being refused classification</a>. </p>
<p>Most of these are mainstream releases that are readily available to adults in other countries. One such game is Syndicate, which was <a href="http://refused-classification.com/censorship/games/s.html#syndicate">refused classification in Australia in December 2011</a> because of “violence that was high in impact”. This first-person shooter is readily available to adults in other jurisdictions – it’s <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/feb/16/synicate-games-review?cat=technology&type=article">available in the UK</a>, for instance, with an <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/18_certificate%20%E2%80%93%20for%20people%2018-years-old%20and%20above">“18 certificate”</a>.</p>
<p>Publishers who want to sell games that have been refused classification in Australia are then forced to modify the games to make them suitable for an MA15+ audience.</p>
<p>Imagine if there was no R18+ classification for film. Well-known titles such as <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirty_Harry">Dirty Harry</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulp_Fiction">Pulp Fiction</a> and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fight_Club">Fight Club</a> would be banned in Australia, or shoe-horned into a lower classification because they fall outside the MA15+ category guidelines. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ewwtznVkSxA?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Syndicate was refused classification in Australia due to violence that’s “high in impact”.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>It’s been a long and bumpy road for people who want to see a change to Australia’s videogame classification laws.</p>
<p>As Jason Clare commented while <a href="http://www.aph.gov.au/hansard/reps/latesthansard/rhansard.pdf">introducing the bill to parliament</a>, a campaign to introduce an R18+ rating for games has been underway for ten years.</p>
<p>The <a href="https://theconversation.com/video-game-classification-its-time-we-all-grew-up-1822">back-and-forth debates</a> between the pro- and anti-R18+ camps has been going on for just as long, leaving much of the games industry with a real sense of <a href="http://blogs.crikey.com.au/game-on/2012/02/16/behind-the-rhetoric-of-the-r18-debate/">R18+ fatigue</a>.</p>
<p>But in December 2009 <a href="http://palgn.com.au/15721/r18-discussion-paper-released/">a discussion paper</a> was released by then Home Affairs Minister Brendan O'Connor, which opened the issue to public consultation. </p>
<p>Almost a year later, in November 2010, <a href="http://www.ema.gov.au/www/ministers/RWPAttach.nsf/VAP/(689F2CCBD6DC263C912FB74B15BE8285)%7EFINAL+REPORT.pdf/$file/FINAL+REPORT.pdf">a report</a> about the consultation showed that of the 58,437 submissions, 98% were in support of introducing an R18+ rating.</p>
<p>Despite this, and despite <a href="http://www.igea.net/2010/12/government-poll-supports-an-r18-classification/">a telephone poll</a> showing 80% of respondents in support of the new classification, the then South Australian Attorney-General Michael Atkinson continued to oppose the changes. (Changes to the classification scheme can only be made if there is a consensus among all state and territory attorneys-general.)</p>
<p>But following the 2010 South Australian election, Mr Atkinson stood down and John Rau took over as South Australian Attorney-General. Mr Rau is a supporter of an R18+ classification for videogames, <a href="http://au.gamespot.com/video/r18-classification-interview-with-john-rau-6324916/">much to the delight</a> of gamers in the pro-R18+ camp.</p>
<p>And then, in July 2011, at a Standing Committee of Attorneys-General meeting, all states except NSW voted to support <a href="http://www.ag.gov.au/www/cob/classification.nsf/Page/InformationCentre_ProposeddraftGuidelinesforR18+ComputerGames">draft guidelines</a> for an R18+ rating. The NSW attorney-general initially abstained but has since <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/technology/articles/2011/08/10/3290150.htm">indicated his support</a> for the change.</p>
<p>So with support from the states and territories, and a bill currently in the parliament, the way seems clear for the introduction of an R18+ rating for videogames. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/T53X7WXwbaE?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>But, of course, the journey is not yet over. It will take months before we see R18+ games on Australian shelves. For one, the <a href="http://www.aph.gov.au/house/info/infosheets/is07.pdf">passage of the bill through parliament</a> can be complex and involve more debate and potentially even more community consultation. The Coalition’s request of an inquiry – as announced in a <a href="https://twitter.com/#!/edhusicMP/status/169683534557102080">tweet by Labor MP Ed Husic</a> – will send the bill to a Standing Committee for further discussion.</p>
<p>Once the Bill passes the House of Representatives it must then go to the Senate, where it will follow a similar process. The bill may be sent off to a Senate Committee, with even more discussion and potentially consultation and reports.</p>
<p>This process can take weeks to months, and may be stalled by the passage of other pieces of legislation and the sitting pattern of parliament.</p>
<p>According to a spokesperson from the Attorney-General’s Department the bill is due to come into effect from January 1, 2013. Each state and territory then needs to decide whether it will allow the sale of the R18+ games in its jurisdiction. This will require the states and territories to modify their own legislation, which could take several months.</p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/7790/original/hrh567sf-1329455022.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/7790/original/hrh567sf-1329455022.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=398&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/7790/original/hrh567sf-1329455022.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=398&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/7790/original/hrh567sf-1329455022.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=398&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/7790/original/hrh567sf-1329455022.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/7790/original/hrh567sf-1329455022.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/7790/original/hrh567sf-1329455022.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">The Hamster Factor</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Existing games can be reclassified if submitted for reclassification by the publisher, the minister, or an “aggrieved person” – someone whose interest goes beyond personal or intellectual concerns.</p>
<p>Games such as <a href="http://www.l4d.com/blog/">Left 4 Dead 2</a> – which was <a href="http://www.refused-classification.com/censorship/games/left-4-dead-games-series.html#left-4-dead-2">refused classification because of violent content</a> that did not fit into the MA15+ rating – could be reclassified within a new R18+ rating – assuming they are resubmitted.</p>
<p>But there is no guarantee that all games that were refused classification will be granted an R18+ classification under the new guidelines. </p>
<p>One game, Marc Ecko’s Getting Up: Contents Under Pressure, was refused classification in 2006 after <a href="http://refused-classification.com/censorship/games/getting-up-contents-under-pressure-marc-ecko.html">the Classification Board ruled</a> the game “promotes anti-social behaviour”. Specifically, the player progressed through the game by spraying trains and walls with graffiti – an offence under Australian law.</p>
<p>The draft guidelines approved by the attorneys-general would still refuse classification to games that actively encourage drug abuse or criminal behaviour. For this reason, Getting Up would probably still be banned under a R18+ classification.</p>
<p>The battle for an R18+ classification for videogames in Australia has been something of an epic, but the journey’s not over yet. There are still plenty more rocks and potholes to navigate before we start seeing R18+ games in local stores.</p>
<p><strong>Further reading:</strong></p>
<ul>
<li><a href="http://www.r18games.com.au/">Australia needs an R18+ for video games</a></li>
<li><a href="https://theconversation.com/video-game-classification-its-time-we-all-grew-up-1822">Videogame classification? It’s time we all grew up</a></li>
</ul><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/2835/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>I have no vested interest or relations with industry beyond my research interests. I do not receive any funding from the game industry.</span></em></p>Late last week Federal Home Affairs Minister Jason Clare introduced a bill to parliament that takes Australia one step closer to an R18+ classification for videogames. No sooner had the classification…Sam Hinton, Assistant Professor in Media Arts, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/18222011-06-19T21:10:25Z2011-06-19T21:10:25ZVideo game classification? It’s time we all grew up<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/1730/original/RodrigoFavera.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=44%2C125%2C919%2C658&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The average Australian gamer is now more than 30 years old.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">RodrigoFavera</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>After many years of debate and deliberation Australia might finally be about to receive an <a href="http://theconversation.com/fair-game-why-we-should-back-an-r18-classification-732">R18+ rating for video games</a>.</p>
<p>On July 21 and 22 the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General (SCAG) meeting will review
<a href="http://www.kotaku.com.au/2011/05/brendan-oconnor-releases-draft-r18-guidelines/">draft guidelines for the adults-only classification</a> proposed in May by Federal Home Affairs Minister Brendan O'Connor.</p>
<p>The proposed guidelines are loosely-worded but do give an indication of what an R18+ classification might allow:</p>
<ul>
<li>So-called “themes” (such as suicide) would face no restriction</li>
<li>“Sexual violence” would be allowed when justified by context (e.g. being part of the game’s plot)</li>
<li>Sex, nudity and drug use would be permitted</li>
<li>Violence would be allowed as long as it doesn’t offend “morality, decency and propriety generally accepted by reasonable adults” </li>
</ul>
<p>Apart from these antiquarian (and subjective) restrictions, the proposed R18+ category would bring Australia into line with global classification systems.</p>
<h2>Beyond the realms of decency</h2>
<p>Even under the new guidelines, certain games could still be <a href="http://www.refused-classification.com/">“refused classification”</a> making their sale illegal in Australia.</p>
<p>Any of the following could consign a game to the sin bin: </p>
<ul>
<li>Instructing players in matters of crime or paedophile activity, or promoting these</li>
<li>Sexual violence linked to incentives and rewards</li>
<li>Depictions of bestiality, incest fantasies or offensive fetishes</li>
<li>Detailed, realistic drug use or drug use linked to incentives and rewards</li>
</ul>
<p>Overall, the draft guidelines give the impression of the establishment attempting to come to terms with the games culture of the late 1990s, but certainly not of the contemporary gaming situation.</p>
<p>SCAG will debate the merits of the guidelines and if a unanimous agreement is reached, we might see the revisions taken to the <a href="http://www.classification.gov.au/">Classification Board</a> by September. </p>
<p>Even then, it would likely take a few months before the new ratings come into effect, meaning we wouldn’t see R18+ games on Australian shelves until early 2012. </p>
<h2>Taming the beast</h2>
<p>But even the long-awaited introduction of an R18+ classification for games is unlikely to ease anti-video game hysteria in the media today.</p>
<p>A few days after the release of the R18+ draft guidelines, Fairfax journalist Asher Moses <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/games/nintendo-child-porn-game-pg-in-australia-20110531-1fdrc.html">stoked a degree of controversy</a> by suggesting that fighting game <a href="http://teamninja-studio.com/doadimensions/us/">Dead or Alive Dimensions</a> – a launch title for the <a href="http://www.nintendo.com/3ds">Nintendo 3DS hand-held console</a> – contained child pornography.</p>
<p>Moses was quickly assailed on Twitter by numerous people <a href="http://twitter.com/#!/seamus/status/79091398896390145">calling him out for the “wowserist” piece</a> designed to generate cheap hits.</p>
<p>The ABC’s Cassie White followed suit with <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/06/01/3232865.htm">a similarly alarmist piece</a> Talk radio soon began its predictable festival of idiocy as callers were prompted to decry the game without even knowing a thing about it.</p>
<p>But while headlines such as “‘Child porn’ Nintendo game gets PG rating” were being thrown around, the truth was far less sensational.</p>
<p>Dead or Alive Dimensions – as with other games in the Dead or Alive franchise – features anime-styled, large-breasted women, some of which appear (but are not listed as being) younger than 18 years old. </p>
<p>The game allows the player to take photographs of various characters (including the apparently-underage characters) from a range of angles including the possibility of “up-skirt” photos.</p>
<p>While it could be argued that giving players this ability is both tasteless and inappropriate for the game’s PG rating, it is hardly child pornography.</p>
<p>Arguably as a result of alarmist reports (such as those of Moses and White), Dead or Alive Dimensions was pulled from shelves and has since <a href="http://www.kotaku.com.au/2011/06/dead-or-alive-dimensions-currently-being-re-rated-hoping-for-an-ma15-classification/">been resubmitted</a> for classification by Nintendo.</p>
<p>With any luck, we’re not far away from bringing Australia’s video game classification scheme in line with the rest of the developed world. If it goes through, it will be a recognition, finally, that the average Australian gamer is, in fact, a mature adult.</p>
<p>Whether an adults-only classification will lead to maturity on the part of the media remains to be seen.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/1822/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Christian McCrea does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>After many years of debate and deliberation Australia might finally be about to receive an R18+ rating for video games. On July 21 and 22 the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General (SCAG) meeting will…Christian McCrea, Lecturer + Researcher, RMIT UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/7322011-04-19T04:03:27Z2011-04-19T04:03:27ZFair game? Why we should back an R18+ classification<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/582/original/2175939881_13736c2fa2_z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Are adult gamers being unfairly targeted by the current classification system?</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Sibeckham/Flickr</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>If you are in any way exposed to computer games on a regular basis, it won’t have escaped your attention that Australia does not have an R18+ classification for video games.</p>
<p>This is particularly strange when you consider films and DVDs <a href="http://www.classification.gov.au/">can be rated</a> anywhere from “G” to “R18+”. The highest rating a video game can attract is MA15+ (suitable for players of 15 years old and above).</p>
<p>Video games classified as “adults only” elsewhere in the world – such as <a href="http://www.r18games.com.au/gta/">Grand Theft Auto IV</a> – either sneak in as MA15+ or are <a href="http://www.refused-classification.com/">refused classification</a> entirely: banned from sale or distribution.</p>
<h2>A broken system</h2>
<p>Our classification system has failed the children of Australia. It tells them that curb-stomping, gut-mashing horrors (such as Gears of War 3) are all fine under the MA15+ category and encourages them to seek out unreleased games through illegal means (using <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BitTorrent_(protocol),%20for%20example">BitTorrent</a>.</p>
<p>Our classification system has failed adult Australians (in the sense they can’t get hold of games they might otherwise buy) by being one of the most restrictive classification schemes for games in the Western world. </p>
<h2>Driving for change</h2>
<p>For the last year, <a href="http://www.gamers4croydon.org/">a concentrated push</a> has occurred to get the classification laws changed through the various Attorneys-General around the country. </p>
<p>Popular support for the change is absurdly high – 80-90% in six separate <a href="http://www.ema.gov.au/www/agd/agd.nsf/Page/Consultationsreformsandreviews_AnR18+ClassificationforComputerGames-PublicConsultation">large sample studies</a> in that time.</p>
<p>Yet, sadly, the <a href="http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/feeding-kids-on-a-diet-of-video-game-junk/">same old arguments</a> for the failed censorship system appear time and again by pro-censorship advocates.</p>
<p>One such advocate, Barbara Biggins, CEO of the <a href="http://www.youngmedia.org.au/">Australian Council on Children and the Media</a>, wrote <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/45770.html">a piece</a> recently accusing the pro-R18+ lobby of manipulating public opinion on the issue. </p>
<p>Her point was that where previously pro-R18+ advocates made the case for adult freedoms, they were now pushing the case that the R18+ would protect children. This subtle shift of tactic, she asserted, was a manipulation of the facts for political purposes.</p>
<p>I don’t blame Biggins or hold her position in any great contempt. It’s a very familiar set of arguments from a very familiar debate. In fact, it’s the position that’s brought us to where we are. </p>
<h2>A web of violence</h2>
<p>Thanks to the internet, children and young adults now have near-unlimited access to hyper-violent media including games, pornography and recipes for all manner of mischief. </p>
<p>But games need to be viewed in some kind of context. A young adult of 15 who can film fights in the playground and upload them to YouTube is not going to be protected psychologically by missing out on a <a href="http://au.ps3.ign.com/articles/115/1152077p1.html">banned Mortal Kombat game</a>. Nor are they going to leap into a whirlpool of violence as a result of witnessing the fight.</p>
<h2>Media evolution</h2>
<p>We know a lot more about how violence in media works than we did 20 years ago: <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080418/005355882.shtml">playing violent video games does not create a functional difference in empathy in players</a> – witnessing violence does. </p>
<p>When <a href="http://vgresearcher.wordpress.com/2008/11/04/longitudinal-study-of-violent-anderson-et-al-2008/">longitudinal studies are done on video-game violence</a> they are often conducted as paid research with pre-determined outcomes, and are deeply flawed and ideological. </p>
<h2>The power of controversy</h2>
<p>We have a situation now where many games are designed to be controversial – in order to help sales – and violence is becoming a standard of pride. </p>
<p>The longer such controversial games are being created, the more the most violent and gruesome of these gain cultural power.</p>
<p>And given how capable young adults are of finding games through illegal means, continued video-game censorship is a generational timebomb. </p>
<p><em>What’s your view on video-game classification in Australia? Leave your comments below. Do you conduct research in this area? Contact <a href="mailto:pitch@theconversation.edu.au">pitch@theconversation.edu.au</a></em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/732/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Christian McCrea does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>If you are in any way exposed to computer games on a regular basis, it won’t have escaped your attention that Australia does not have an R18+ classification for video games. This is particularly strange…Christian McCrea, Lecturer + Researcher, RMIT UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.