Preliminary R18+ findings released

We get support from the wierdest places

The preliminary results of the Australia R18+ classification for video games public consultation have been released.

Let’s start with the most important number: Of the 59,678 submissions received, 98.2% were in favour of introducing an R18+ rating.  Yep, that’s right: even though video games with adult content are apparently a cancer that is killing kids, opponents of the proposal couldn’t find more than 1089 people who objected to it strongly enough to fill in a form.

The report has graphs, demographic breakdowns of respondents, results from the standardised questions on the form and summaries of the arguments made by both sides.  Of those that provided age data, the vast majority were in the 18-34 age group and male repondents outnumbered females by about 10-1.

So does this mean we’re actually going to get an R18+ classification?  No, of couse not.  ABC News reported yesterday that the state Attorneys-General think that numbers aren’t everything and “further work needs to be done before a decision can be made”.

One thing that has been interesting is to have a look at the organisations that gave submissions.  16 organisations gave submissions opposing an R18+ classification.  The Catholic Women’s League Australia and the Catholic Women’s League Tasmania are counted as separate entities, as are the Presbyterian Church of Australia and the Presbyterian Church of Victoria.  The Australian Christian Lobby doesn’t want us to have an R18+ category and obviously the Australian Council on Children and the Media (who we’ve discussed before) don’t want it either.  Nor do several members of the Western Australian parliament or commissioners for children and young people from around the country.

Also against the introduction of an R18+ category is a group called the Endeavour Forum, whose goal in life is apparently to “counter feminism, defend the unborn and the traditional family”.  Hmmm.

The Sporting Shooters Association of Australia is doesn’t want us having an R18+ category either because, among other things, they’re concerned that “the rights of recreational shooters would be further limited should another serious crime involving firearms be carried out by those who had been affected by video game violence”.  Seriously – it’s in the report, page 12.  Charlton Heston would be proud.

Organisations who made submissions in favour of an R18+ category included PAL-GN, the Australian Computer Society, Electronic Frontiers Australia, Civil Liberties Australia, the Media Classifiers Association of Australia, the Australian Interactive Media Industry Association, academics from Bond University and several others.

There were also a couple of submissions in favour of the rating that came as a bit of a surprise (albeit a pleasant one) to me.  Telstra, apparently, supports an R18+ rating on the basis that the average age of gamers is well over 18 and the lack of evidence that the interactive nature of games makes them more dangerous than other media.  The Australian Catholic Bishop’s conference also supports the introduction of the category, figuring that if people are going to get the material anyway then it should be classified.  Way to go against the Christian grain, Catholic bishops!

The next move belongs to the state Attorneys-General.  They’ve said that evidence and arguments are just as important as the number of supporters one side of the argument has.  The numbers are obviously in favour of an R18+ category and the groups discussed above are split almost perfectly down the middle – 18 support the category and 16 oppose it.  We’ll be keeping a careful watch on the situation, so expect more longwinded diatribes in the near future!