CENSORSHIP FALLOUT By James MeGrath A classification storm is brewing, and one man stands in the eye of it. South Australian ‘Attorney-General Michael Atkinson made headlines both here and worldwide when it emerged at the March 2" meeting of the Standing Committee of Attorney Generals, (SCAG) that he would not be supporting a decision to allow an R18+ classification for video games in this country. Until now, Australia has not had an R18+ or equivalent classification for video games, and we're the only developed country in the world without one. Great Britain has an 18+ certificate under the BBFC (British Board of Film Classification), the US has one under the FRSB (Entertainment Software Ratings Board) and 29 countries in Europe have one under the PEGI (Pan-European Game Information) system. Ifa video game is deemed to violent or sexist to make an MA15+ plus rating, itis either edited to make this rating or banned outright from our shores. Yet if, you were to ask the average Australian if they knew that we didn’t have the classification, they'd give you a blank stare. In fact, the Interactive Australia 2009 paper released at the start of November by the IEAA (Interactive Entertainment Association of Australia) covering video game player demographics found that nearly two-thirds of adult Australians had no idea that this was the case. At the SCAG meeting in March, the state Attomey-Generals “agreed in princi consider introducing the R 18+ classification and be proposed that a discussion paper be released into the Australian community what would “be the subject of public consultation including consultation with industry and interest groups, once Ministers have agreed out of session (if necessary) to release the Paper” ‘The opportunity for community consultation on the issue has been raised, but Atkinson remains the only state Attomey-General to object to the release of the paper. As it stands, all of the state Attomey-Generals need to agree on this point unanimously in order to make a change to the classification system or release the community consultation paper. ‘fier the result of the SCAG meeting, Atkinson maintained his opposition to an R18 classification in the South Australian parliament saying, “{have consistently opposed an R18+ classification for computer games. [ am concemed about the harm of high-impact (particularly violent) computer games to children” Atkinson stated “Games may pose a far greater problem than other media — particularly films —_because their interactive nature could exacerbate their impact.”His stance has drawn the ire of video game players who came out in force to vote him the sixth most hated person in Australia in a Zoo Weekly poll in September, beating out the likes of Pope Benedict and the Japanese whaling fraternity for the dubious honour. While his opposition has drawn ire from video game players who ery ignorance on the part of legislators, the move has been applauded by parents groups who fear that an R1$+ rating could introduce excessively violent video games into the Australian marketplace. Sue Robinson from Young Media Australia, an organisation that advises parents on advances in modem media says while they support freedom of choice, video games passing under the MA 15+ banner are already violent enough. “Absolutely the first thing the industrics always say to it is that its about freedom of choice and we totally agree with that” Robinson said “What is actually available on the market is fairly graphic, is fairly violent. I's not that violent video games aren't allowed in this country” The case in point being the edit of Fallout 3, a game due to be released under the MA 15+ banner at the end of the month. Initially, the classification board refused to allow the game in the country citing player's ability to use morphine being able to mask pain and increase the strength of the player's avatar as something that may influence players to try the same thing in real life. Subsequently, Bethesda edited a new version for Australian video game players that removed the reference, Bethesda then decided that the rest of the world would receive the same copy to ensure uniformity, and this drew the anger of international video game players that were angry because they felt the game had been censored. Travis, who works in a video games store in the heart of Perth and is an avid computer game player himself, says the response from international game players has been vitriolic towards our classification system. “You look at message boards and they're basically saying ‘Stupid Australia! Why do we have to get a cut-down version because of their classification system?” he said “think one of my favourite comments was ‘for a country founded by murderers and thieves, what's wrong with a couple of drug references for a game?” For all the toning down of the game’s content though, players can still brutally kill their AT opponents and detonate mini nuclear bombs as they wander through the horrors of a post-apocalyptic wasteland.Robinson shudders to think ahout what kind of material would be allowed under a R18+ classification, but at the heart of Atkinson’s opposition to the classification is the lack of awareness on the part of parents about video games generally, For Travis, it’s not about awareness, it’s about parents taking responsibility for what their kids play. He sees some parents, who while concerned about the level of violence in video games, will buy violent video games for their child. “Some of them just don't care about it. Their thinking is, ‘well, my kid is playing this at hisher friend's house anyway, so the damage is already done™ he said. Robinson is quick to put the onus back onto retailers, saying that they should have more ofa hand in educating parents about just how violent video games can get and what exactly each classification group means. “It's about a community's response so that individually parents can understand the classification system. Proprietors need to make sure that sort of information is up in their store” she said, For Bill Rowlings, CEO of Civil Liberties Australia the argument that an R 18+ classification shouldn’t be allowed into the country because of a lack of awareness on the part of parents is a slap in the face. “Basically, Mr. Atkinson's stance is anti-family and anti-ideas. It's the re-birth of the ‘wowser mentality. It's being afraid to trust the good people of South Australia, and Australia, to be sensible and make sensible decisions for themselves and their children” he said Contrary to the belief that parents are in the dark when it comes to video game violence, Professor Jeff Brand from Bond University, who also co-authored the report from the IEAA says that while video games aren't widely discussed in Australian society, parents are aware of the dangers and act accordingly. “L think the arguments against an R18+ classification for games centre around a lack of faith in parents but we can reject that. Parents are playing games with their kids” he said, “Parents today that have kids under the age of 18 are playing games in their households” Indeed, the report finds that out of a sample rate of 1614 households, 88 per cent have some sort of device for playing computer games on. Out of this, 70 per cent of parents in these households play video games themselves and close to 80 per cent of these parents play games with their children, For Atkinson though, the problem goes far beyond mere awareness. He contends that because of the interactivity of the medium, violent video games can have a grester impact.