General definition,
information:
- The BBFC and PEGI are the two organisations who certificate and rate media products.
- The BBFC (British Board of Film Classification) was set up in 1912 to protect the public from media material that may present harm risk.
- Originally the BBFC only classified cinema films until the Video Recordings Act was passed in 1984 when it started regulating videos/DVDs. In 1984 the BBFC began to regulate video games as well.
- From 2003 the responsibility of regulating video games was passed from the BBFC to PEGI (Pan European Game Information).
- However, the BBFC will continue to classify all games that feature strong pornographic content and ancillary games attached to a wider, primary linear submission.
- The BBFC are an non-government regulatory body to which films are submitted for classification based on their content.
Specific points/debates
- They aim to protect the public by providing them with information that allows them to make a more educated decision when selecting a media products. The BBFC also provide verification for as to why they have awarded media products the certificate that they have. Like with the BBFC video games are submitted to PEGI to be given appropriate age rating.
- These age ratings are in place to give guidance to the video game customers, particularly parents. Thesis statement
Thesis statement
Point
Evidence/Case Study
Example
Analysis/Argument
Theory
Historical Context
Future Prediction
Exemplar
JUNE 2014: HOW WELL DOES CONTEMPORARY MEDIA REGULATION PROTECT THE PUBLIC?
The
BBFC and PEGI are the two organisations who certificate and rate media
products. The BBFC (British Board of Film Classification) was set up in 1912 to
protect the public from media material that may present harm risk. Originally
the BBFC only classified cinema films until the Video Recordings Act was passed
in 1984 when it started regulating videos/DVDs. In 1984 the BBFC began to
regulate video games as well. From 2003 the responsibility of regulating video
games was passed from the BBFC to PEGI (Pan European Game Information).
However, the BBFC will continue to classify all games that feature strong
pornographic content and ancillary games attached to a wider, primary linear
submission.
The
BBFC are an non-government regulatory body to which films are submitted for
classification based on their content. They aim to protect the public by
providing them with information that allows them to make a more educated
decision when selecting a media products. The BBFC also provide verification
for as to why they have awarded media products the certificate that they have.
Like with the BBFC video games are submitted to PEGI to be given appropriate
age ratings. These age ratings are in place to give guidance to the video game
customers, particularly parents. The age ratings given to video games are
awarded based on their content and suitability, not their difficulty. PEGI used
descriptors that are placed on the back of the video games packaging. These
descriptors explain the main reason behind why games have been given a
particular age rating.
Although
these regulatory bodies are in place there are problems with the systems that
prevent them from being used as a means of protection, for the public, from the
media. For example, it is not illegal for a person who is of age to buy a
particular media product for a person who is under the age certificate of a
product and allow them to view it. In this respect organisations such as PEGI
and BBFC are carrying out the service that they hope to provide by informing
the buyer of the content and the potential harm that such products may cause to
a consumer who is not of suitable age to be subjected to the media product.
The
BBFC and PEGI aim to work as gatekeepers (Kurt Lewin 1890-1947) between
the media that is appropriate for us to consume and that which is deemed to
have the potential to cause harm. However this role means that we have to place
our trust in these organisations as we, the audience, rely upon them to make
the decision of what we should and shouldn’t be subjected to in media products.
Problems are faced by these gatekeepers when it comes to media that they are
unable to regulate. For example, media platforms such as YouTube are unregulated
due to the excessive quantity of videos submitted to this platform. Also piracy
of video games and films cause major problems for these gatekeeping
organisation. Piracy is a prime example where an advance in technology has
posed a threat to regulatory companies aim to protect the public.
A Serbian film is a prime example of a film where
by the BBFC have taken precautionary measures in an attempt to prevent the
public from being exposed to potentially harmful media content. The film,
directed by Srdan Spasojevic, was eventually passed after four months of
negotiation with the BBFC for release on the 10th December 2010. The
BBFC required forty-nine individual cuts, across eleven scenes,
before classifying it ’18’ for very strong sexual violence, sex and
violence. Cuts were required to remove elements of sexual violence that tend to
eroticise or endorse sexual violence. However, even after cuts the film was
still seen to be disturbing, offensive and shocking to some adult audience
members.
The Woman In Black was
passed by the BBFC with a 12A classification following cuts and was later
released uncut on DVD with a 15 age certificate. The film was directed
by James Watkins and was released on the 10th February 2012. The BBFC
received 134 letters of complaint following the cinema viewing. This was as a
result of the film being aged at a young age group to attract audience members
who would watch the film as a result of it being Daniel Radcliffe’s first post
Harry Potter film. The film was cut by 6 seconds in order to secure a 12A
rating on release. This was as a result of the film being said to hare
been “too scary” for the 12A certificate in its first-submitted form. In
an attempt to satisfy both the audience members and the film producers the BBFC
suggested the cuts in an attempt to release the film with a certificate that
would be deemed appropriate by both parties and to prevent causing offence and
harm to the younger audience members and their parents. However, the letters of
complaint that were received suggest that the audience members and their
parents did not feel that the BBFC did a sufficient in preventing the film for
potentially causing harm.
In
the case of video games there is a huge amount of moral panic that is endorsed
by the press in an attempt to show them in a bad light and suggest that they
are causing a great deal of harm to younger generations. This view points the
finger at the regulatory bodies of this industry to suggest that they are not
doing a sufficient job in protecting the public from video games that have
potential to cause harm.
Hatred is a game that has not yet been released
has already stimulated moral panic simply based on the release of its
trailer. In Hatred you play an anti-hero whose sole aim is to put as
many “human worms” into the grave as he can. Hatred was
given an “Adults Only” (AO) rating by the ESRB for extreme violence
rather than sexual content. Effectively preventing any mainstream distribution
of the game at retail or on video game consoles. However, PEGI have not yet
rated the game and have said that they will not award the game a rating based
dimly on the trailer. Until a PEGI rating has been awarded to the game it is
hard to criticise the extent to which the regulators have gone to protect the
public. Although, fans of Hatred have demanded developer Destructive
Creations include even MORE violence in the stomach-churning title. Such
comments may alarm organisations such as PEGI and affect their view of the
video game during the classification process.
Dark Souls II is another example of a video game that
has evoked moral panic amongst the public. Dark Souls II is an action
role-playing video game. PEGI rated the video game with
a 16+ for the violence that was in the game. It was suggested
that ‘Dark Souls II is truly the most controversial game this generation’.
One of the main controversial factors related to the video game Dark Souls II
was the crime that followed that was later blamed partially on the criminal
having played the violent game, including Dark Souls II, in which he was
able to virtually perform that acts that he later carried out in
person. In November 2014, months after the release of Dark Souls II, Ann
Maguire a Spanish teacher at Corpus Christi Catholic College in Leeds was
stabbed seven times by Will Cornick (a 16-year-old student) and died as a
consequence of the school boys actions. The age rating given to the video
game by PEGI meant that Cornick was seen to be of an appropriate age to be
playing such games as Dark Souls II. In this case it could be suggested that
the regulators failed in their job and should have taken stricter precautions
in an attempt to prevent such crimes.
Both
the producers of film and video games are attempting to push the boundaries to
see what they are able to get away with. This is making the role of regulators
to protect the public even harder. The regulatory bodies are only ably to
regulate for the ‘normal’ person and have to make a decision on media products
as they see appropriate. There is never going to be full protection of the
public from media but the regulators work to do the job to the best of their
ability. Content is always going to be available on formats that aren’t able to
be regulated and therefore the extent to which the public can be protected is limited.
Comments
Post a Comment