R18+ Classification for Computer Games - Public Consultation

[mohawk 18]

The Commonwealth Government has released a discussion paper which briefly summarises the key arguments for and against an R 18+ classification for computer games. Censorship Ministers have considered the issue of an adult classification for computer games on several occasions. However, they have not undertaken public consultation on this issue.

 

Submissions are being sought on whether the Australian National Classification Scheme should include an R 18+ classification category for computer games. Submissions can be made by downloading and completing the submission template. Submissions may also be mailed or faxed. The discussion paper and submission template contain the contact details for making a submission.

 

Submissions are invited by close of business 28 February 2010. Submissions received after the due date may not be considered.

 

 

I urge all members of Atomic to participate and lodge a submission from the Attorney General's website.

 

This is our chance to have our voice heard so get submitting.

Edited December 14, 2009 by mohawk

[metasynaptic 0]

Yeah, do, but please:

 

'OMFG PLX GIVE ME THE R18+ RATING SO I CAN HAZ PR0N AND GIBS IN TEH SAME GAME PLX'

 

Is not a suitable argument for our case. Please think your submission through.

[mark84 30]

Hey cool. Thanks for the linkage.

 

For those wanting quick links:

Discussion paper here

Submission Template here

 

Also

Confidentiality

 

Unless confidentiality is requested, submissions are public documents and may be accessed by any member of the public, published on the Commonwealth Attorney‑General’s Department’s website and quoted in further review papers. If you do not want your submission to be published, or you would like to request anonymity, you must clearly request this in your submission.

[2SHY 1]

Yeah, do, but please:

 

'OMFG PLX GIVE ME THE R18+ RATING SO I CAN HAZ PR0N AND GIBS IN TEH SAME GAME PLX'

 

Is not a suitable argument for our case. Please think your submission through.

Considered and formal requests would be best way to get a result. Although maybe not.

[Oracle X 90]

Hasn't this thing been around for a while now? It never fucking went anywhere. The time for discussion is over imo, we need to vote out those cunts who's holding the rest of the country back like they're in a fucking Amish community.

[metasynaptic 0]

Hasn't this thing been around for a while now? It never fucking went anywhere. The time for discussion is over imo, we need to vote out those cunts who's holding the rest of the country back like they're in a fucking Amish community.

The wheels of the great machine turn slowly.

 

I should know, I'm a cog.

[neowulf 0]

Done!

 

Now to see how this pans out. I'm impressed we've reached the point where they're at least *asking* the question.

[llmoose 0]

Can't see this helping but I will enter my piece.

[Hubbo 1]

However, they have not undertaken public consultation on this issue.

You mean to tell me Mr.Rudd you haven't had a focus group on this???? Must be losing his touch!

[krispy89 19]

This is a big step to taking control away from Michael Atkinson.

[Thylacine 0]

FI-nally...

 

Doing now...

 

Emailing around to everyone...

 

Posting on Facebook (a bit later)...

[VannA 12]

Still Irrelevant.

 

Changes none of the existing positions, and is simple a bone to people.

 

I've laid out the issues elsewhere. There's only a few ways to make this an issue big enough to be worth the political capital for fiscal investment, and they could backfire nastily.

[gyrus 0]

Awesome - just saw this in the news http://www.news.com.au/technology/australi...0-1225810592521

 

Interesting because I was looking at this http://www.esrb.org/ratings/ratings_guide.jsp earlier on today.

 

Yeah... we need to have a say.

 

Someone WAKE HAWKEYE UP (;-)) and get him on to this. Some bloke (??) commented on this in an Atomic Editorial recently? Maybe he would be a good person to make a submission?

[gyrus 0]

Just thought I would post my current draft of my comments for the submission:

 

Users are accessing games and content directly from overseas now.

 

Parity with overseas and ESRB ( and equivalent ) 'standards' is needed including an R 18+ rating.

Listing ESRB ( and other) ratings as equivalent to Australian standards unless a review of the classification is requested (within Australia) would ease the workload here too.

As a trade off, tougher penalties must be put in place and enforced with regard to censorship.

 

Ratings need to be made clearer MA15+ needs to be R 15+ if that is the intent.

 

The current system neglects live gambling content.

Some games now include lotteries and gambling (sometimes as 'minigames' including games on social networking sites such as “Facebook”). There needs to be provision to include this within the ratings.

Gaming Commissioners should be able to impose R ratings on games with gambling content.

 

R ratings should be enforced by law with penalties for supplying minors equivilent to those for supplying liquor. Serious fines for adults supplying (and / or allowing to be played) and businesses selling to minors.

 

Games with online content which can change (including advertising) also need to be considered.

It is possible that a game rated PG today could become MA 15+ or even R 18+ due to a new patch or advert tomorrow.

My suggestion is that the law be changed to allow games that change their (censorship) classification in this way to be considered as potentially no longer meeting their 'purpose of use' allowing a refund under the Trade Practices Act.

I appreciate my view might not be 'popular' here - but I am for balance.

I support an R 18+ rating.

But I also think that if we are going to bother with censorship at all (and I believe we should) then it needs to have 'teeth'.

 

To be honest, I am more concerned with the effect that easy access to socially acceptable online gambling has on our children than violence.

Gambling is far more accessible to most Australians than weapons (or sex!) and 'conditioning' children to accept gambling as normal is far more of a concern I feel?

 

Comments welcome.

Edited December 15, 2009 by gyrus

[.:Cyb3rGlitch:. 750]

It's OK people - I have a plan! We just need a creepy looking dude to stare at Atkinson for an extended period of time, until he goes insane. Then we can claim that conservative non-gamers are more likely to go crazy than anyone else. I've got it all planned out, and some trial results:

 

Edited December 15, 2009 by .:Cyb3rGlitch:.

[jamesski 0]

The debate is going to be on Sunrise on Ch 7 this morning

[Gharphield 4]

Indeed I just watched it.

 

Well, I'm fairly happy with how that went, calm, well informed (and oddly enough PRO R18+) guy presented fairly well and put down a lot of logical reasoning behind his statements.

 

As for the other Gentleman ... well apparently we don't need any more VIOLENT VIDEOS (his words, not mine) and that this causes societies to be violent ... because you know ... WW2 and everything before it was a direct result of video games.

 

Seriously, how can people be so un-informed on a subject and are allowed to make these decisions?

[iamthemaxx 0]

http://www.australiangamer.com/forum/index...treets-for-r18/

 

Sydneysiders might want to keep an eye on this.

[VannA 12]

No, Gyrus, as I've said elsewhere, the best method to ensure something actually happens is to push for a complete reform.

 

Because a lot of things are being incorrectly classified, and there's no, as you say, teeth, in the legislation for the supplying of material to under-age people, anymore.

[gyrus 0]

No, Gyrus, as I've said elsewhere, the best method to ensure something actually happens is to push for a complete reform.

 

Because a lot of things are being incorrectly classified, and there's no, as you say, teeth, in the legislation for the supplying of material to under-age people, anymore.

I agree. My reply was initially a lot longer and more comprehensive.

 

But it way exceeded the 250 words (that annoys me because this is supposed to be a 'discussion paper'?)

 

However, my experience from working for local councils kicked in at that point... I learned that there was no point drifting too far off topic... it's simply not going to even be considered (my comments probably still drift too far).

 

I would like to see a complete reform - but that is simply not on offer here.

 

 

Step one is to get the R18+ rating.

 

Step two (for me) is to get those in the appropriate positions to recognize that the shear volume of material out there (and the speed at which new material is made available) is beyond simply assigning a 'static' rating.

 

Step three (for me again) is to highlight that gambling content is probably more of a long term social threat than violent images or sexual content. Note that I am NOT anti gambling. In fact, I was a Card Counter at one time and know a great deal about gambling. But, that is why I believe we must regulate exactly what gambling our children are exposed to. There is a great deal of gambling in Australia that many people are not even aware of as gambling.

 

Anyway /rant off

[Jonsey301 0]

just went to the sunrise site to see if they have the video of the r18+ rating talk as i missed it and just saw the poll "Would you like R18+ rated games permitted?" and it is currently at 96% yes.

[ayefkay 0]

There was a little bit on '7 - Sunrise' this morning talking about it, they interviewed these two guys about it, one was for, one against, they both pretty much discussed what we've all been saying, but they both agreed that regardless of all the commotion recently, nothings going to change due to Atkinson refusing to budge...

 

http://au.lifestyle.yahoo.com/b/sunrise/36...esa-good-thing/

 

link if anyone wants to read, theres also a video on there

 

interestingly though, is what happened after this video, they read out a few emails from the public about the issue, as expected, ALL of them agreed there should be an 18 rating, gamers and non gamers so as usual, the government knows whats best

Edited December 16, 2009 by ayefkay

[iamthemaxx 0]

interestingly though, is what happened after this video, they read out a few emails from the public about the issue, as expected, ALL of them agreed there should be an 18 rating, gamers and non gamers so as usual, the government knows whats best

You mean Atkinson *thinks* he knows what is best.

[ayefkay 0]

interestingly though, is what happened after this video, they read out a few emails from the public about the issue, as expected, ALL of them agreed there should be an 18 rating, gamers and non gamers so as usual, the government knows whats best

You mean Atkinson *thinks* he knows what is best.

 

 

sarcasm was implied ;p

[.:Cyb3rGlitch:. 750]

Last day guys!

 

If you haven't already done so, DO IT NOW.

 

It takes five minutes.

Edited February 28, 2010 by .:Cyb3rGlitch:.