Thanks to Daniel Silk, who pointed me in the direction of the clip. Daniel also went to the trouble of putting together a letter to complain about the panel, which I’ve included after the jump.
If you’d like to read more information about games classification, I urge you to check these out:
Michael Atkinson, No R18+ For Games In Australia: Why It Hurts Children
R18 Classification & Video Games: What You Can Do
Why Michael Atkinson’s Opposal Of An R18+ Rating For Games Does Bugger All To Protect Kids, Promotes Crime
Q&A episode 10 [ABC TV]
To whom it may concern,I watched you show for the first time last night (24/7/08) as I was informed that the question of “Why Australia doesn’t have an R rating for video games”. I must say that I am thoroughly disappointed at how misinformed most of you panel was on the subject and how quickly the original question was side tracked from.
To start off, the host had a completely wrong idea about the game “Fallout 3″ which was used to start the question. This game was only refuse classification (not banned mind you) because of the use of the drug morphine as a pain killer.
Why this ONE game was pick up for its use is beyond me, as there have been countless others that have been classified fine with use of the drug in the game (Half life 1 and 2, Fallout 1 and 2 just to name a couple of popular games).Also the description your host used to describe Fallout 3 was a bit incorrect, yes there is violence in the game – but the “main purpose” is not to kill everything. The game takes place in a post apocalyptic world – as was stated – but the player is then given the choice of how to interact in this now war torn, almost primitive new world. The player CAN just kill everyone, but that will have ramification on how the rest of the game will play out. Or he could be diplomatic and talk to everyone – be friendly and help them out, and be rewarded for his actions.
This seems to be the idea that most of the older generations (I’m 25 myself and have been gaming since the age of 8) have stuck in their heads – that all these games are just full of violence for violence sake. Most ‘adult’ games have violent themes for the same reason that ‘mature/restricted’ movies have violent themes – to move the story and add suspense/tension.
Now to move on, as the first lady to answer the question decided to take it from a personal position of “I don’t want my kids to play it – so nobody can!”. This does nothing but hurt the Australian economy, but also stabs every parent by saying “You don’t know how to look after you kids, so we’ll let the government do it for you”. I agree totally that minors should not be allowed to play violent games, and that we should have a solid, PUBLISIZED rating system in place (which I’ll get to shortly) to stop minors from purchasing these games. But by refusing classification on games of a mature nature will not stop the minors from getting hold of them anymore than if there was an R rating. But if there was such a rating, at least the Australian economy can be injected with otherwise missing cash, and parents will be more informed about the games that their children are playing.
But like I said, they can still get hold of these games by other means, downloading from the internet (which is not only illegal, but hurts the economy) or importing them from other countries. Well to start, parents can monitor (and should try to monitor) their child’s internet usage as much as possible – and in this day in age is surprisingly easy with numerous programs that allow parent to control what sites can and can’t be accessed. And as far as importing the games goes (which apparently customs would seize all copies of ‘banned’ games) most of the new consoles have parent controls – which stops ANYONE from playing any game deemed so by the user (parent in this case) to a certain rating level.
Now about the rating system, which most of you panel were convinced doesn’t exist in this country. We currently have in place a rating system to a maximum of M15+ which most of these controversial games must get released into in this country if they wish to be sold. This causes confusion in parents as they think “Well little Bobby watches M rated movies he should be fine with this” without realising how broad of a rating that is. If we were to have an R rating it would decrease some confusion, and to properly inform the public about the rating system (like we currently do with television rating) would decrease it even more. I have been in game stores behind a parent who, after being informed about a game by the clerk, says “It’s only rated M so it can’t be that bad”.
How is it that Australia is the only country in the western world not to have an R rating? New Zealand has one and it isn’t over run by people stealing cars and running over pedestrians, and the UK seems to be dealing with one fine. Heck, even in Japan – where they have some really controversial games – they have a Z rating which is illegal to be displayed and must be asked from specifically before showing ID to be purchased. There are many ways to combat any of the misconceptions that are brought up when talking about an R rating, and all of them are valid and proven to work.
This still doesn’t lessen the disappointment I feel after watching your show, funnily called “Questions and Answers” to see the person who asked the question spend about 10 minutes with a raise hand to try (I can only guess) and correct your panel on the gross half truths they were saying. Also I must ask, why was the topic switch from talking about bringing in a new rating to compliment they current rating system, to how this would suddenly allow snuff films and excessive pokies to be brought into this country? I have never heard such useless propaganda spread in all my life! Snuff films and video games would still be illegal, even with an R rating, as they will always be deemed inappropriate and unnecessary; just like we can’t have them now. How the topic swung to this I don’t know, but to try and push this as fact is disappointing to hear from people in government. And the guy in the audience with his question about how this would allow more pokies to open? I think he must have confused gaming and Gaming. I can understand how that could happen, as they are both used to describe a similar experience, but they are not related in any way. One is to do with gambling, which as your panel successfully said is bad and does affect others, the other describes a pastime that many people are actively participative in. Neither affects the other.
Another point I would like to bring to light is the passing of information about studies linking violent video games and violent acts. These studies are inconclusive at best and there are also studies that state the opposite, that the playing of violent games actually DECREASES violent outbursts in some people. Trying to state these studies as actual facts when the verdict is still out is just plain wrong and I’m shocked that no-one on the panel tried to debate this. Yes, there are some people who are drawn to violent media – be it games, books or movies; but you don’t see us banning the latter two do you? To say that video games glorify violence is to say that Saving Private Ryan glorified the violence of World War II, or that America Beauty glorifies having sex with minors. If you are going to ban one, ban them all; don’t just ban things based on how you are feeling at the time.So in conclusion, I am disappointed that your show seemed more like a platform to spout inconclusive propaganda and misinformation; and when your original question asker had a point he was obviously wanted to raise, was turned down and not allowed to speak out. Australia needs an R rating for its video games to bring it in line with the rest of the world, and to allow a more uniformed rating on games that should never be allowed in minor’s hands. The rating systems in Australia need to be publicized more as the public at large seems to be grossly misinformed and needs to be set straight. And seeing that there is only ONE MAN that is holding this country back in the ‘stone age of ratings’ shows that they way that these things are brought into this country need to be looked at as soon as possible.
While I’m not really fussed that I probably won’t get a reply to this letter, I do hope that you will bring these facts to light on your next show – as I feel bad for anyone who was watching to get the wrong idea about this new media type that has now shadowed the Movie and Television industries.
Sincerely,
A concerned citizen.
Rowr
July 26, 2008 at 7:40 AM
omfg.
i feel like finding the nearest sharp instrument and stabbing myself in the face with it.
Fucking Idiots. Jesus i mean. Jesus.
Report PermalinkAmy
July 26, 2008 at 9:40 AM
Oh well Seamus, wishing for change sure is doing heaps! At least the topic is being discussed more now. Why don’t you step up and be an above par representative instead of just criticising from the sidelines?
Report PermalinkSnam
July 26, 2008 at 10:32 AM
For what it’s worth, he’s my fairly long e-mail to them:
After watching an excerpt of the program that aired last Thursday (24/07/08) that covered the questions regarding video game classification and censorship I was shocked to discover both a considerable degree of ignorance to the area from both panelists and the host, Tony Jones, and a reluctance, excluding panelists Mark Arbib and Christine Jackman, to admit to being unfamiliar with the issue.
The most glaring inaccuracy was Tony Jones’ statement that there is not a rating system on video games, further suggesting that any individual of any age can purchase any video game that has been approved for sale. This is incorrect (see http://www.classification.gov.au/special.html?n=271&p=190) and any video game that posses a certain level of violence (typically either showing blood or the like) cannot be sold to anyone under the age of 15. Instances in which young children are in possession of such games are typically a case of parents not aware of the classification system (as Tony Jones himself showed is certainly prevalent) or poor policing of retail guidelines. Those against video game censorship are largely in favour of solutions including better classification education for parents or stricter retail guidelines.
The discussion of Fallout 3 also seemed skewed towards discussing the violence within the game and the dangerous potential of that, however the reasoning behind refusing classification for the game did not mention violence at all, but rather due to the appearance of morphine in the game’s publicity stills. While I in no way condone the use of drugs, its appearance in various media as a story-driving element is important as seen in works within other media (such as the book/film Trainspotting or the film “Requiem for a Dream”. Those involved in the discussion also used the term ‘ban’ or ‘banned’ frequently but this, too, was erroneous, as the title has been technically been ‘refused classification’. While this may appear to be splitting hairs, the difference is that ‘banned’ suggests action of an active classification board while refusal to classify is indicative of the fact that the incompleteness of our rating system results in censorship as default.
Many statements made by panelists seemed obtuse or irrelevant such as Barnaby Joyce’s mentions ‘avatar rape’, though such a title would likely be illegal with or without an R18+ classification nor does his vague description suggest such a title exists; it appears as though he is assumptive that a game like that must exist. Heath Ridout states “Grant Theft Auto seemed to turn everyone in to a car thief” and “violent games breeds violence” as though it was accepted fact (http://www.pbs.org/kcts/videogamerevolution/impact/myths.html is an excellent and well researched source to discount some of these beliefs). Ridout goes on to suggest that those over 18 will obtain the games anyway, which would require either importing (illegal due to customs law) or through illegal downloading. Is Ms Ridout suggesting that breaking the law is the best solution to this incomplete classification system?
An R18+ classification for video games is present in nearly all developed countries, excluding Australia. The issue is not about making games more accessible to minors but by giving video games the same classification used by other media. I concede that the question on your program was poorly asked and the asker unfortunately accepted Tony Jones’ loaded description of the title involved, however the responses clearly highlighted the misinformation over the issue both with politicians and the media.
I can only hope that this is an issue that might receive more thorough research and investigation in the future.
Yours,
Alex Collie
Report PermalinkFunky J
July 26, 2008 at 12:32 PM
I urge all Australian Gamers to complain to the ABC about this.
http://www.abc.net.au/contact/complain.htm
If you want to contact the people on the show individually, here’s how:
Nick Zenophon is http://www.aph.gov.au/SEnate/senators/homepages/contact.asp?id=8IV or nickx@xen.net.au
Barnaby Joyce is http://www.barnabyjoyce.com.au/Contact.asp or senator.joyce@aph.gov.au
Mark Arbib is http://www.alp.org.au/people/email/arbib_mark.php
Although Ms Redout’s association doesn’t have appear to have a general email, there’s numerous emails on her associations website – kaym@aigroup.asn.au; stephanie.vlandys@aigroup.asn.au; sgordon@aigroup.asn.au; craigr@aigroup.asn.au; jillm@aigroup.asn.au.
Christine Jackman is a little hard to track down, even though she is a journalist. Try jacksonc@theaustralian.com.au or simply letters@theaustralian.com.au. However, like all “good” journalists, she does have a facebook account…
Also, I suggest you also write to Tom Crago (tomcrago@tantlus.com.au or possibly tomcrago@gdaa.com.au) and demand that he step up and defend Game Developers of Australia from this type of ignorance and slander.
Report PermalinkSirk
July 26, 2008 at 3:37 PM
Watching that was like watching a train wreck in slow motion. I’m glad I missed the show when it was live otherwise I would have annoyed the neighbours with my shouting at the television. We won’t get any serious progress on this issue until we get representatives who have some knowledge about it and I sadly don’t think that’s going to happen any time soon.
Report PermalinkMarcus
July 26, 2008 at 5:06 PM
I wonder if any of these people have ever read the report by the OFLC called ‘Computer Games and Australians Today’. It was released in 1999 but society hasn’t changed much at all in 9 years. I suggest you all go read it; despite being 912 pages long you can still churn out some laughs comparing the report to their preposterous arguments.
Report PermalinkTony abbot
July 27, 2008 at 3:01 PM
Where is the video games industry on this issue (and I dont mean game “journalists” aka kids that live in mums basement)? Why are they not speaking out on this issue? Surely Australia is turning some sort of profit for them to lobby the required government officials.
Report PermalinkByteMeHarder
July 28, 2008 at 8:02 PM
Now that all the major consoles have “family settings” can someone please explain to drop-kick parents how they can stop their kids playing content (games/DVD’s/downloaded content etc) they do not think is appropriate?
Please?
Pretty please?
Report PermalinkStumpy
July 29, 2008 at 7:37 PM
Funny as hell that we can have 13 year old girls posing nude for photographers IRL and galleries are quite happy to show it (and even seeking this stuff out) but can you imagine if a character in a game had that option?
Instaban.
The whole place is a stinking mess with its double standards and over regulation. And yet nothing seems to actually get done! I’m off to england.
Report PermalinkKAL'EL
July 30, 2008 at 11:25 AM
How idiotic can our politican’s be, it’s the parent’s reponsibility to monitor what there kid’s play but until there children are at the age to get a job they are the one’s that buy them the game’s so if a child under the indicated age get’s a MA15+ or R18+ game shouldn’t the parent’s and the shop clerk be to blame for selling to and/or buying it for them. Until people stop trying to blame someone else for there own mistake’s the gaming community might aswell just bend over & take a deep breath since it’s probably going to be awhile till we get a R18+ rating
Report PermalinkAl King
July 30, 2008 at 9:16 PM
Alex, I believe the ‘avatar rape’ Joyce was referring to occurred in Second Life, as made possible by user-created animations/accessories etc. Otherwise you’ve hit the nail on the head. It is not sensible to extrapolate from that despicable instance of antisocial behaviour in an MMO to the conclusion that a board intended to classify media is given the power of censorship of material potentially appropriate for adults as a result of a poorly defined classification system. If this debate is to be reduced to stupid jingoism, as is apparent from the video, we should at least “call a spade a spade”. Ill informed moral outrage and daft appeals to motherly experience do not justify the utterly broken rating system which we currently endure.
Report PermalinkTim
March 16, 2010 at 12:23 AM
Man 0 Woman!
What is going on!
Here is clearly a failure to communicate…..Them and us senario! True it may be, though not intangible…. I am a sole care, single parent of 3 Beauty Australians of over over 12 years….These Beauty’s are under no illusion of there reality, though they do play and enjoy the games online and through commercial marketed lines ie: xbox,play/S,nintendo etc ( someov=scaryshite) even scare me!!
What we are really truly’ talking about here is respect…..
Unfortunately something the media has lost!!! but ofcourse us civilians hold close?
Please tell me you care? about your Kids?? when you ban them from some violent game yet let them watch mainstream Tele. and you can!
Please “dont” tell me you care about your kids and your worried over a game? Yet dont ban the daily news??bloody pleases dont tell me that!!
Go! Gen Y!!! you may not have so much wisdom but you certainly have honesty…..And even in my Gen Honesty was always the best policy!! no…matter whom or who gets hurt…. x’s & hugs to all out there….. Tim
Report PermalinkSean
August 17, 2011 at 5:44 PM
its actually proven that video games are an outsource for violence and anger. And for me when im upset i play video games and i come away feeling calm and i have never commited a crime in my life, except when i was a kid i shop lifted, felt bad and went back the following day and owned up and payed for the item.
Report Permalinkalso to blame games for murders in american schools is wrong, bullying is what lead to tht.
they really need to get the info correct.