11

Australia‟s National

Classification Scheme:

Principles for ReformPresentation to The Big Picture: Socio-

Cultural Research and Australia’s Policy

Challenges

ARC Centre of Excellence for Creative

Industries and Innovation (CCI) Symposium,

Brisbane, 28 July, 2011

Professor Terry Flew, Lead Commissioner,

Australian Law Reform Commission

2

Background

• ALRC review of Censorship and

Classification (1991)

• Rapid pace of technological change and

community uptake of new media

technologies

• Community needs and expectations in an

evolving technological environment

2

3

The Hon R McClelland MP

Attorney-General

Terms of Reference

3

Consider the extent to which

• the Classification (Publications, Films and

Computer Games) Act 1995;

• State and Territory enforcement legislation;

• Schedules 5 and 7 of the Broadcasting Services

Act 1992; and

• the Intergovernmental Agreement on Censorship

and related laws

continue to provide an effective framework for the

classification of media content in Australia

4

Review timeline

Final Report released (Jan-Feb 2012)

Release of Discussion Paper (September 2011)

Public consultations Public submissionsAdvisory Committee

meetingsPublic presentations

Consultation Process (May-July 2011)

Industry and stakeholder consultations

Public submissions Public presentationsFormation of Advisory

committee

Review announced (March 2011)

Commissioner appointed (April 2011) Issues Paper released (May 2011)

4

5

The National Classification

Scheme

5

Classification Board:

• films

• computer games

• publications (some)

Enforcement:

• sale

• distribution

• advertising

Customs:

• „objectionable material‟

ACMA:

• broadcasting

• online content

6

So what is the National Classification Scheme?Legislative basis Mode of regulation Responsible

agency/ies

Extent of classification

Publications Classification Act 1995 Govt. Regulation Classification Board Submittable content

Films Classification Act 1995 Govt. Regulation Classification Board All content

TV & Radio (FTA) Broadcasting Services Act

1992

Co-regulation ACMA All content

TV (Subscription) Broadcasting Services Act

1992

Co-regulation ACMA All content

DVDs Classification Act 1995 Govt. Regulation Classification Board All content

Computer games Classification Act 1995 Govt. Regulation Classification Board All content

Internet-based content Broadcasting Services Act

1992 (Schedules 5 & 7)

Co-regulation ACMA Complaint based -

Restricted/RC

content only

Mobile apps None ? ? None at present

Advertising None Self-regulation Advertising

Standards Board

Complaint based

Art works Classification Act 1995 (state-

based – obscenity)

Govt. Regulation Classification Board Submittable content

Billboards None Self-regulation Advertising

Standards Board

Complaint based

Heavy metal t-shirts Classification Act 1995?? ? ? ?

6

77

8

Consult, consult, consult

• widespread public consultation –

– industry

– community

8

9

Consult, consult, consult

• Plus –

– Attorney-General‟s Department

– DBCDE

– ACMA

– Classification Board

– Classification Review Board

9

10

To date

• 38 preliminary

consultations

• over 2,000 submissions

based on May Issues

Paper

• > 4 x more than ever

before in ALRC

history!!!

10

11

Next steps

• Consultations

• Public seminars

• Panels

• E-news

• Online discussion

forum

• Submissions

11

12

National Classification Scheme

• Mobile apps

• Advertising

• Art works

• User created content

• Music

• Broadcasting

• Online content

• Online games

• Feature films

• DVDs

• Publications (submittable)

• Computer games

12

13

Principles of the Classification

Code• adults should be able to read, hear and see what they

want;

• minors should be protected from material likely to harm

or disturb them;

• everyone should be protected from exposure to

unsolicited material that they find offensive;

• the need to take account of community concerns about:

– depictions that condone or incite violence, particularly sexual

violence; and

– the portrayal of persons in a demeaning manner.

13

14

Differentiating forms of content

regulation• Distinguishing features of content

• Who should be responsible?

• Cost of classifying material

• Mutability of content

• Possible impact of material – particularly in

relation to children

• Produced by/for individuals or corporations?

• Complaints-based or across-the-board

approaches?

14

15

Incremental change or fundamental

reform?

15

"Australia's media content regulation system is like a bowl of spaghetti that's been put to the back of the fridge and gets dragged out every five years, reheated with additional sauce, partly eaten and then put back in the fridge for later. It's complex, tangled and from a media user point of view its impossible to tell which bit of media content connects to which regulatory framework“ (Catharine Lumby).

16

Problems with the current framework• Technological changes (72% of households have broadband

connections; 90% by 2014)

• Media convergence blurs legislative distinctions

• New products and services whose regulatory status is uncertain

(e.g. mobile apps)

• New means of accessing content (e.g. games moving online)

• Exponential growth in online investigations

• Absence of R18+ classification for games (58,000 submissions to

AG‟s advisory 2010 – 98% favoured a new classification – in-

principle agreement at July 2011 SCAG meeting in Adelaide)

• Globalisation of content hosting

• Shift in media producer/consumer relationship with user-created

content

16

17

From Silos to Convergence

17

18

A new techno-economic

paradigm• “Each great surge of development involves a turbulent process of

diffusion and assimilation. The major incumbent industries are

replaced as engines of growth by new emerging ones; the

established technologies and the prevailing paradigm are made

obsolete and transformed by the new ones; many of the working and

management skills that had been successful in the past become

outdated and inefficient, demanding unlearning, learning and

relearning processes. Such changes in the economy are very

disturbing of the social status-quo ... These ... imbalances and

tensions... end up creating conditions that require an equally deep

transformation of the whole institutional framework. It is only when

this is achieved and the enabling context is in place that the full

wealth-creating potential of each revolution can be deployed.”

Carlota Perez, “Technological Revolutions and Techno-Economic

Paradigms”, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 34, pp. 199. 18

19

Proposed Draft Principles for Reform

of the NCS

1. Australians should be able to read,

hear,

see and participate in media of their

choice

2. Communications and media services

available to Australians should broadly

reflect community standards, while

recognising a diversity of views, cultures

and ideas in the community

19

Genera

l P

rincip

les

20

Proposed Draft Principles for Reform

of the NCS3. Children should be protected from

material likely to harm

4. The national classification scheme

needs

to provide consumer information in a

timely and clear manner, and to provide

a responsive and effective means of

addressing community concerns,

including complaints

20

Genera

l P

rincip

les

21

Proposed Draft Principles for Reform

of the NCS

5. The regulatory and classification framework needs to be responsive to technological change and adaptive to new technologies, platforms and services

6. The classification framework should not impede competition and innovation, and not disadvantage Australian mediacontent and service providers in international markets

21

Genera

l P

rincip

les

22

Proposed Draft Principles for Reform

of the NCS

7. Classification regulation should be kept

to the minimum needed to achieve a

clear public purpose, and should be clear

in its scope and application;

8. Classification regulation should be

focused upon content rather than platform

or means of delivery.

22

Genera

l P

rincip

les

23

To come in September 2011

23

National ClassificationScheme Review

DISCUSSION PAPER

DISCUSSION PAPER 77 SEPTEMBER 2011

24

Final Report

24

National ClassificationScheme Review

FINAL REPORT

REPORT 117 (ALRC 117) JANUARY 2012

25

For information about ALRC work,

copies of speeches and

presentationsALRC website – www.alrc.gov.au

Email: info@alrc.gov.au

GPO Box 3708, Sydney 2001

25