I don’t think that anyone in their right mind denies the need for a system of classification for media content. Such a system provides a valuable tool for anyone to understand the content of material, as part of the decision process of whether or not that material is for them.
In Australia, we have had a long debate over the last couple of years in regards to our classification system, and the recent addition of the R18+ category for computer games shows that we can make progress.
Over on the internet side of things, the debate has been heated in regards to the so-called “RC” or “Refused Classification” category – which of course is a classification, even though the name suggests it is not.
Our federal communications minister, Stephen Conroy, tells us quite clearly in this press release on his own website that “RC” is about:
“Child sexual abuse imagery, bestiality, sexual violence, detailed instruction in crime, violence or drug use and/or material that advocates the doing of a terrorist act.”
Care to explain this one, Senator?
| Film Banned in Britain Approved Here |
“A film banned in Britain for its graphic portrayal of sexual violence, forced defecation and mutilation will be screened in Australian cinemas after the censors approved it in a decision that has surprised its distributor.”
“The Human Centipede II (Full Sequence) will screen in Sydney, Brisbane, Melbourne and Perth after the Classification Board gave the film an R18+ classification without demanding any scenes be removed.”
Clearly some “sexual violence” is less “classification refusable” than other “sexual violence”.
This is getting beyond a joke. RC does not work. If an example like this does not demonstrate the need to get rid of it as part of the classification review currently underway, I don’t know what would.
Fix it.