Exemplar Regulation Answer June 2014

How well does contemporary media regulation protect the public?

The BBFC is the British Board of Film Classification and regulates films within the UK. It is a non-governmental body which has exercised responsibility in the cinema for just over 100 years. The BBFC looks at films and assesses their impact and whether or not they may cause harm to viewers. Since 1984, with the Video Recordings Act, the BBFC is now also responsible for classifying films for sale and hire, and the BBFC is the sole body responsible for this regulation in the UK.

On the other hand, when it comes to video games, the regulation is quite different, and the BBFC could not keep up with the regulation of video games. It was more efficient for a separate body to begin regulation, which is why we now have PEGI. The Video Standards Council (VSC) was made the sole statutory in July 2012, and the VSC uses the PEGI rating system to employ a form of regulation on (most) video games in the UK. The PEGI system we use was already in operation in a number of different countries in the EU and had therefore had a large amount of experience, more than the BBFC.

The process for both the BBFC and PEGI is quite similar, in that a producer must submit a finished copy of their work to the board, where it is assessed and criteria is in place which it must follow in order to be classified a certain age-category. There is little opportunity for negotiation, and PEGI or the BBFC has the overriding voice to classify a product. However, in some cases such as “A Serbian Film”, which was initially rejected; producers have the choice to make cuts in the case of film, or edits in the case of video games in order to achieve a certain classification. This may be very important for a producer as fundamentally, it can increase revenues significantly, by either being granted classification or by having a lower classification.

Whilst there is an attempt to regulate films and video games, a number of factors make it significantly more difficult. The increased diversity of ways to access content has made life very difficult for regulators. YouTube is an example, where thousands of hours of video are uploaded every minute, and therefore a regulatory authority such as the BBFC can not possibly be responsible. As a result, in the case of YouTube, the responsibility is passed down to the users, where videos can be flagged as being harmful.

Piracy is another example, where there can be no physical gatekeepers, so anyone who can pirate can gain access to content illegally uploaded to the internet. This can include both video games and films. In fact, it was recently found that approximately 28% of UK citizens have previously pirated content. This would mean that roughly 18 million people in the UK alone have pirated content; and unfortunately this number is likely to remain similar or even increase.

A Serbian Film is one example of a film which has seen the producers really push some of the boundaries that the BBFC has in place when it comes to classification. Eventually rated 18 certificate, this film received a very large amount of criticism from viewers for a number of reasons. The content within A Serbian Film is really one of a kind, with a huge amount of extreme sexual violence being portrayed. The BBFC received the submission of A Serbian Film and it took a total of 4 months for an agreement to be made on an 18 certificate. When the BBFC eventually came to a conclusion and decided what could be shown, it was found that a total of 49 individual cuts were required across 11 scenes, which was estimated to take away 3 minutes and 48 seconds from the film. The producers still wanted to release the film, and due to continuity reasons, a total of 4 minutes and 12 seconds was cut from the film. Despite the BBFC removing some of the most significant content, which was thought to potentially have harmful messages within, some viewers still sent the BBFC letters of complaint that it was inappropriate and harmful. Others complained and said that the BBFC had done too much and that it had removed an element of the story through the cuts. However, the BBFC always make an effort to try not to reject works, as they want to allow viewers liberty.

Human Centipede II, was also rated 18 with cuts, and once again is an example of a film which has attempted to push the boundaries on what is acceptable. 2 minutes and 37 seconds was needed to be cut from the film in order for the BBFC to grant the film with a certificate. As time progresses, more and more developers are now submitting these sorts of works, which means that the BBFC does have a more difficult job than they once did. The regulation enforced does make some difference, although at the same time, people may still find ways to bypass the system through methods such as piracy, or getting an older peer to purchase the content for them.

12 Years A Slave is very different compared to Human Centipede II and A Serbian Film, and is rated a 15 certificate. However, the film contains strong racist terminology which usually would not be acceptable. However, the film also portrays the historical messages of slavery and in such a case, the BBFC have made an exception. Because of the historical context, the BBFC was much more lenient and thus there was little problem with classifying the film with a 15 certificate. In fact, the only real content for concern was a couple of violent scenes including a slave being whipped, with deep lacerations being shown; and also a slave hanging from a noose in a struggle.

In the case of video games, there have been a number of games used repeatedly such as “Call Of Duty” which the press often use to try and spark a moral panic, which arguably sells the article more. One example of these video games includes “Dark Souls II” which the press have tried to blame for the Mrs Maguire case. A 16-year old boy had repeatedly stabbed one of his teachers, and the press had made out that as Dark Souls II had been found in his bedroom, which was apparantly ultimately responsible for his actions. Dark Souls II received a 16 certificate from PEGI and therefore the 16 year old boy was not abusing PEGI’s rating system. However, if this was the case then it would also be strange that the same boy also had multiple pictures of knives on his phone and other pupils had recalled him talking about extremely violent topics jokingly. In these cases, it is actually absurd to blame video-games for certain incidents, because regulation is imposed and it is designed for the man on the Clapham omnibus. If regulatory bodies are especially harsh, then they would receive many complaints, and on the other hand, if they are too lenient, then they would also receive many complaints. Therefore, these regulatory bodies, be it PEGI or the BBFC, have a very difficult job at trying to reach an equilibrium to satisfy the majority.

Grand Theft Auto V is another example, which has been a hugely successful 18-certificate video game. In fact, it is quite apparent to many that the video game also attracts a much younger audience, but incidents blamed via GTA V are very limited. At the end of 2014, it was recorded that the game had shipped out 45 million copies worldwide, proving that it was hugely popular. There are only a couple of incidents which might actually have been caused as a result of the video game, and in these cases, the suspects are often thought to be psychologically ill and therefore the classification system cannot apply to them appropriately anyway.

Like films, video-games are also trying to push the boundaries further, with games such as “Hatred” being produced. PEGI therefore also has a difficult job like the BBFC at trying to classify.

Overall, it would seem that contemporary media regulation cannot effectively protect the public, but they do act as a limitation to the extent of people who gain access to certain content. In the future, the jobs of the classification bodies is likely to become increasingly difficult, however currently they are somewhat beneficial.