By Anthony Barich
Analysis
THE Australian Catholic Bishops Conference has put itself at odds with family and children’s welfare lobby groups by giving qualified support to the Federal Government’s draft R18+ Computer Games Guidelines.
Fr Richard Leonard SJ, director of the Australian Catholic Office for Film and Broadcasting, said that a complete ban of the material included under the R18+ classification would be “near impossible” as such material is available illegally over the internet anyway.
The ACBC argues that an R18+ classification will assist parents being informed about the content of video games and will help ensure children will not be able to access the games.
“The preferred position of the Catholic Church is that R18+ material should not be available. But if such an outcome is not achievable then the Australian National Classification Scheme should include an R18+ classification category for computer games,” said the submission which Fr Leonard helped draw up.
The ACBC recommended that the Office for Film and Literature Classification have an easier process for feedback from the public; and that a national hotline be established for people to leave a verbal report on film, DVD, computer game or literature.
While the ACBC acknowledged that the present classification system goes as far as MA15+ and thereby excludes many games that have more serious adult content, family and child welfare groups used this very fact to argue against an R18+ classification.
Thirteen WA parliamentarians, FamilyVoice Australia, the Commissioners for Children and Young People and Child Guardians (CCYPCG), Media Standards Australia, the Sporting Shooters Association of Australia and the Australian Council on Children and the Media provided research to back their claims that violence in games was a source of aggressive and anti-social behaviour among gamers.
The Catholic Women’s League, the Australian Christian Lobby and Women’s Health Victoria also opposed the R18+ classification.
The draft guidelines and submissions can be accessed and submitted online until 22 June by logging onto the Government’s Classification website, www.classification.gov.au, which said extensive public consultation in 2010 on whether there should be an R18+ category for computer games revealed “overwhelming support” for its introduction.
The ACBC said that the needs of the parents of community’s most vulnerable members – children and adolescents – must be given the highest priority in deciding the content, application and defence of the computer games classification guidelines. “In accepting an R18+ classification, no reasonable person would in any way support or promote some of those titles and the explicitly violent and sexually graphic material contained therein.
“Such support rests solely on having a uniform approach to media classification which enables parents and adults to have more information in regard to the content of some games and to make appropriate decisions about them.”
The Sydney Archdiocesan website published a story on 2 June titled “Computer Game R18+ Classifications Won’t Protect Children”, which quoted Australian Council of Children and the Media’s Prof Elizabeth Handsley extensively.
While it added three paragraphs of quotes by Fr Leonard at the end of its article, the other 16 paragraphs were devoted to condemning the Government’s new guidelines.
Prof Handlsey argued that the new classification would open the door for more violent and sexually explicit games. She said that the introduction of the R18+ category would see games previously refused classification being allowed, “drastically loosen(ing) restrictions on drug use, nudity and violence”.
“The guidelines for the proposed R18+ classification introduced by the Minister (for Home Affairs Brendan O’Connor) are little more than window dressing as far as improving protections for children,” she was quoted as saying.
Prof Handsley said there seems no way to prevent children from purchasing such video games from international outlets online and that it will be virtually impossible to prevent younger and younger children from accessing the material as there is no way to monitor what they are downloading via their phones or computers.
The Australian Bishops’ submission called for a uniform Nation-wide approach as some games are banned in some States and not in others. This will bring Australia in line with other “similar” countries around the world, it said.
It said that while some constitutional issues that prevent the Territory Governments from banning such material, “the present arrangement in regard to DVDs, where the ACT and the Northern Territory can be the point of sale and rental for X rated material not available in the States, is absurd and hypocritical.” It added that X-rated computer games and DVDs should not be available in any State or Territory in Australia.
This new National approach needs to have more categories, be more descriptive of the material and have an ongoing community education programme about its contents and meaning, the ACBC said, and recommended that the categories of G, G8+, PG, PG13+, M15, MA15+, R18 and RC be used.
The submission said the R classification for a computer game should consider the violent nature of language, religiously offensive language and offensive shorthand terms.
“‘You are a mother…!’ for example – many know what this term means even if the final word is not used,” the Bishops’ submission said.
Attention should also be paid to the soundtrack, “one of the most influential aspects of the viewing experience” which influences emotional responses.
It said a clear distinction should be made between MMORPG (massively multi-player online role playing games) and traditional video game playing, as classifiers, consumers and “especially parents” should be informed about current issues in these developing interactive games that require a vastly different level of interaction than video games.
No need for change if standards applied properly
By Anthony Barich
THE current system by which video games are being classified has proven ineffective and needs to be more stringently applied rather than introducing an R18+ classification, Media Standards Australia said.
“Current standards of regulation and classification, by the responsible government bodies, of even the worst excesses of abhorrent material are totally unacceptable,” MSA said in its Submission on the Australian Film and Literature Classification Scheme to the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee. “More and more highly objectionable material is being allowed into Australia, and being classified as acceptable.
“It is obvious that the classification guidelines are interpreted, by those responsible, in such a way as to be rendered meaningless.”
Grand Theft Auto IV, which is classified as MA15+ in Australia, is classified as ‘18+’ in the European Union, ‘18’ in the United Kingdom and ‘R18’ in New Zealand.
Before its release, Rockstar Games announced it would censor the game to ensure it would meet an MA15+ rating.
Thus, according to Australia needs an R18+ rating for video games website, the player is unable to view the simulated sexual intercourse with prostitutes in the game, nor to choose what type of sex act is performed.
Instead, the camera is locked behind the vehicle during the encounter, showing a rocking vehicle animation and accompanying soundtrack.
Also, “blood no longer pools under killed characters, nor can the player leave bloody footprints by walking through blood pools, or bloody tyre tracks by driving through them. Blood continues to splatter like normal,” r18games.com.au said. “According to current Classification Board standards, these changes were enough to warrant the game the highest possible rating of MA15+.”
In a separate submission to the Classification Review of the R18+ Classification Category for Computer Games, MSA said it suspects the Government has asked for submissions on this because of undue pressure from the gaming industry.
“It is obvious that there would be significant financial losses, at least for the industry, by being denied this highly lucrative revenue stream,” its submission said.
“When Western Australia decided against gaming machines, this same element of vested interests came into play to muddy the waters of the argument, and is also no small factor in the government balancing of budgets.”