Why Ratings Do Not Work

Australian Gamer have published a letter from South Australian Attorney General Michael Atkinson which was sent to one of their readers as a response to an enquiry about implementing an R 18+ Rated Category in Australia. The Hon. Michael Atkinson is, of course, the man famously involved in denying Australian Gamers of an R rated category.

Interestingly enough his response says more about the way our ratings system doesn't work than the way that it does. In his response he quotes the National Classification Code:

"Classification decisions are to give effect, as far as possible, to the following principles:
(a) adults should be able to read, hear and see what they want;
(b) minors should be protected from material likely to harm or disturb them;
(c) everyone should be protected from exposure to unsolicited material that they find offensive;
(d) the need to take account of community concerns about:
(i) depictions that condone or incite violence, particularly sexual violence; and
(ii) the portrayal of persons in a demeaning manner."

In this instance gaming adults aren't able to play what they want. Direct evidence that the ratings system is not working. Secondly, the Attorney General of SA must not believe that the self governance of ratings system enforcement at a retail level must not be working because he believes that these items, if R18+ rated will find their way in the hands of minors.

The Hon. Michael Atkinson says in his letter:

"I cannot see how adding an R18+ classification for games will stop parents from making bad choices for their children or stop children getting hold of a game from their friend and sibling."

This is a further example that he does not believe that the ratings system which is currently in place works. For example, if a parent were to purchase an R18+ game for their child without doing any prior research in to the product they were purchasing then he does not consider this to be bad parenting but a bad choice. Surely, the R18+ rating should be enough evidence that the said game was not suitable for their children in the first place.

So, is this decision to hold out on an R18+ rated category about the government actually becoming the indirect parents of every child in Australia? or, about recognizing that the ratings system is actually not working as it should?

In his letter he confirms that the ratings system is broken:

"Given this data, [...79% of Australian households have a device for computer and video games. Further, 62% of Australians in these gaming households say the classification of a game has no influence on their buying decision...] I cannot fathom what State-enforced safeguards could exist to prevent R18+ games being bought by households with children and how children can be stopped from using these games, once the games are in the home."

I don't believe that it is up to the government to parent our children. As 'responsible' adults it is up to us to make the necessary mistakes that it takes to become a better parent. I find it absurd that these points are not made by these legislators to show that the ratings system does not work. We have a system of governance which would prefer to work with a broken system rather than find a better way of doing things.

To be fair, most of the Hon. Michael Atkinson's concerns rest with controlling the nature of content after purchase, therefore regulating the content bought in to the country is far easier than educating people.

"What the present law does is to keep the most extreme material off the shelves. It is true that this restricts adult liberty to a small degree. This is the price of keeping this material from children and vulnerable adults. In my view, it is worth it."

The problem here is that extreme material is not being kept off the shelves. The scenes in SAW and Hostel are far more graphically depicted than any video game I have ever played. As far as I am concerned this is where his logic fails. Extreme material is not being kept from being imported in to Australia. Only selected material.

While I don't believe that editing games for the Australian market in order to import them is a bad thing. That the changes that have been made to the games have necessarily changed the gameplay in order for the game to function at an acceptable ratings level and that these changes, in reality, open the games up to purchase by a much larger market in our small marketplace. I don't agree with the hypocracy which goes on at a legislative level with regards to this ratings debate.