Submissions for the R18 Classification for Computer Games Public Consultation are due NEXT FRIDAY, the 26th.
The discussion paper and submission template are available here. Please be polite, and make the strongest arguments you can on the subject, anticipating the other side’s concerns. Or just answer the questions in the template and email them to classificationreview@ag.gov.au.
This is my submission:
The fundamental issue behind the R18 rating proposal is that 15 year olds are not adults, and adults are not 15 year olds. What is appropriate for one is not necessarily appropriate for the other. We recognise this with voting, drivers’ licences, alcohol and a host of other rights and responsibilities that apply to those over 18.
The lack of an R18 rating for interactive media means that in this area, adults are being treated as children – and, in practice, it also means children are being treated as adults. Games rated R18 overseas are squeezed into the MA15 category here – sometimes with minor changes (that don’t alter the fundamentally adult content of the base game) and some without.
An R18 rating is not about bringing in more “sex and violence” – it is simply about recognising that there is content that’s appropriate for adults but not for teenagers.
The only argument that has been presented for why interactive media should be treated differently from film is the assertion that R18 games have, by nature of their interactivity, “greater impact” on viewers than films or television. Apart from the dubious nature of that assertion (there is only very, very questionable material in support) – it misses the point entirely. An R18 category for games does not mean that dangerous material will be approved any more than an R18 category for films does. The Classification Board could – and would – take into account the increased impact, if there is one, of content being interactive. It could well refuse classification to something that would’ve received an R18 rating were it not interactive.
In exactly the same way, in fact, as an incident represented on film might have more impact than a book, and the present rating system for film takes that into account. Which is why some films of books are refused classification, even though the book is widely available. The same thing could – and would – happen with an R18 rating for interactive media. The Board would simply not be classifying abusive material that is inappropriate for adults.
The “greater impact” line is a furphy, because it ignores the fact that ratings already take into account any “greater impact” by virtue of the type of media in question. It is simply not an argument for refusing to give the Board the ability to distinguish between adults and teenagers, which is precisely what – and all that – an R18 rating would do.
This is 2010. It is absurd that the Classification Board is still hobbled in its ability to properly rate interactive content, by those who do not understand the medium. An R18 rating is inevitable – the question is, how many Australian children are exposed to adult content while we wait for it.
I urge you to implement an R18 rating for interactive media as soon as possible.
I look forward to reading yours in the comments.
UPDATE: Would’ve been useful to know of this little statistic before submitting the above:
Prior looked back at the past three years of game releases and found that 85% of MA15+ rated games were rated M (for 17 and older) by the USA’s ESRB. 50% were rated 18+ by the Europe’s PEGI.
That’s pretty damning – but I suppose the nanny-staters would say we should just be banning more instead.
[...] calls itself “Christian”) is unhappy with the results of the R18 inquiry (submissions closed on Friday): Gamers have flooded a government inquiry to support the case for an R18+ rating for interactive [...]
As long as Michael Atkinson is GG of SA, your submission means 0. He, with the other GG’s, has veto power over the classification system and he is dead set against a R18 rating. When he has left/lost his position there my be a chance for R18 until then this is just another political ploy by a Government run by a diplomat who like to pretend they listen to the people.