R18+ propaganda manipulating public opinion

This time around they've managed to swing the public behind them with a well designed and publicised, persistent propaganda campaign, promising protections that could not have been provided.

As an example, since January this year around 18 regional newspapers in NSW and Victorian have carried the same story- (the faces and the stats change) that "everybody wants it, it will be better for families and will bring Australia into line with the rest of the world". How can anyone argue against that?

Since December, the responsible State and Territory Ministers have gone away to consider their options. We don't know what they are considering as we've not been told.

What is needed is acknowledgement of the difference between the experience offered by watching films and that of gaming - where, for example, you are rewarded for being the best at violence. A separate games system can and should have regard for interactivity as its basis.

What would make sense is for the Ministers to decide that it doesn't make sense for the guidelines for games to be changed ahead of a complete review of the classification systems for films and games to be conducted by the Australian Law Reform Commission later this year. Are we so hell bent on putting an R18+ in for games that we fail to do the logical thing- wait and review all together?

The ALRC's review provides the opportunity to look back at the criteria that were being used to classify games at the MA15+ level in 1999, and compare them with those used from 2003 onwards in the common films and games system. In 1999, games in MA15+ could have "depictions of realistic violence of medium intensity". Depictions that had "unduly detailed and or relished acts of extreme violence or cruelty" would be given RC. Since the joint system from 2003, MA15+ films and games have been permitted to have violence with strong impact so long as its justified by context (just make up a violent story!!), and stylised violence is seen as having less impact.

A central concern in this debate is the high level of violence available at MA15+ but this shows why we have it. We would not have had so many very violent games in the MA15+ category in the past years, if we'd kept the 1999 wording. Expressing our concerns at the subjective nature of the 2003 wording, we were assured at the time by the Minister of the day not to worry, the standards will stay the same. The level of concern about what's allowed in MA15+ may have its roots here. But what is clear is that the answer to violence in MA15+ is not to introduce R18+.

So gamers may rant and rave (and they do if anyone dares oppose them) but let's take the ALRC opportunity to review the options properly, not respond to propaganda.