Michael Atkinson explains R18+ game block, not the only A-G opposed
January 28, 2009 – 8:33 pmIn an exclusive letter to GameSpot UK explaining why he won’t permit R18+ games, SA A-G Michael Atkinson claims he is not the only Australian censorship minister opposed to introducing an adults only classification:
I don’t support the introduction of an R18+ rating for electronic games, chiefly because it will greatly increase the risk of children and vulnerable adults being exposed to damaging images and messages.
“I have three sons who regularly play computer games at home–the eldest is now 22. I see my children become physically and emotionally obsessed with games, and it is difficult to drag them away from the gaming console. The repeated act of killing a computer-generated person or creature desensitises children to violence. It makes violence part of their everyday lives and what is especially concerning is that it is their re-creation. A child being able to watch sex and violence in a movie is damaging to the child, but the child participating in sex and violence in a computer game is worse.
Some other classification ministers are also opposed to an R18+ classification but have not spoken about it publicly. I’m confident the proposal would be blocked by other classification ministers if I weren’t using my veto power
Atkinson believes restricting the liberty of Australian adults is a small price to pay:
“Some of your readers may believe that the present system restricts adult liberty. It certainly does restrict choice to a small degree, but that is the price of keeping this material from children and vulnerable adults. In my view, the small sacrifice is worth it. Classification exists for advertising, films, and books for the same reason–to protect children and vulnerable people.
As per usual Atkinson doesn’t bring any hard evidence to the table. In fact, he brings none. It’s his opinion and nothing more.
I’ll leave it to Sarah from the STOP Censorship mailing list to sum up his letter:
This is the problem with Australian politicians. They are under the false impression that they are elected to make decisions for the people. Not on behalf of the people. In Australia there is no government of the people by the people. It is government of the people by the chosen few. This is underlined by the fact that he uses the word “I” more frequently than anything else.
20 Responses to “Michael Atkinson explains R18+ game block, not the only A-G opposed”
“A child being able to watch sex and violence in a movie is damaging to the child, but the child participating in sex and violence in a computer game is worse.”
Where is the hard data to support such an assertion? Where is the data to support the claim that interactivity is worse? We hear this presented as an irrefutable axiom over and over, and with never a shred of proof. If there is a clear causal relationship (or even a clear correlation) between depictions of sex and violence, whether passive or interactive, then it should be trivial to quantify. Falsehood (intentional or otherwise) is a poor basis for policy.
How is it reasonable to suggest the job of deciding what a child sees (or doesn’t) is the role of the government? Is this not the very reason for a R18+ classification in the first instance, to allow parents to make their own decisions about what their children see? If the government doesn’t trust adults to make appropriate decisions, then we may as well scrap the ratings system entirely – if you aren’t making the decisions then what does it matter what the rating is?
“Some other classification ministers are also opposed to an R18+ classification but have not spoken about it publicly. I’m confident the proposal would be blocked by other classification ministers if I weren’t using my veto power”
When 105,000 Australians are listed on GetUp! as opposing internet censorship I don’t really think it matters whether his buddies agree with him or not (although the silence speaks volumes on that front). Their opinions on the matter are irrelevant – they are public servants, their job is to represent the will of the Australian people.
“In my view, the small sacrifice is worth it.”
Why take the risk? Yes, let’s never leave the house in case ’something’ happens. Let’s not allow any controversial art, books, movies, games or speech – ‘bad things’ might happen. Having a feeling of safety is more important than being free to see, read, play, hear or speak in a way that might upset someone.
I’m tired of policy being driven by fear and cowardice.
If it were just a case of unethical politicians using fear to control people I would be rightly furious, but I actually think it’s worse than that. Many of the politicians pushing censorship are quite vocal about their religious beliefs playing a role in their support of those policies. Christianity is about as appropriate in politics as Scientology, Animism, Voodoo or Pastafarianism are. There is absolutely no place for religion in politics in Australia, we are not a theocracy. We shouldn’t have the Pope, or any other religious leader, or any form of deism or theology having any say in domestic politics. Politicians need to spend less time in church and more time in the electorate – actually doing their jobs.
By Stuart Anderson on Jan 28, 2009
“I don’t support the introduction of an R18+ rating for electronic games, chiefly because it will greatly increase the risk of children and vulnerable adults being exposed to damaging images and messages.”
So now adults are to be treated like children?
“I have three sons who regularly play computer games at home–the eldest is now 22.”
Your son is now an adult, kick him out or STFU.
“I see my children become physically and emotionally obsessed with games, and it is difficult to drag them away from the gaming console. The repeated act of killing a computer-generated person or creature desensitises children to violence.”
Wow, there’s no contradictions there at all.
By batman on Jan 28, 2009
Right: So he doesn’t want an R18+ rating for games because he wants to protect his 22 year old “child.”
Uh huh.
Mr. Atkinson Sir, computer games are the least of your worries. Just sayin’.
By Mark Newton on Jan 28, 2009
Playing video games is just playing video games. They are nothing more than a hobby, and if a mother doesn’t wish her children to play an R18+ game, THEN SHE SHOULDN’T BUY IT. If the child ends up going to a friends house and plays it, well then he needs to learn sometime. Part of being human is having self control, and honestly if you can’t develop that, then there are serious issues to be discussed.
By Anonymous on Jan 29, 2009
It’s pretty funny when games are refused classification, edited slightly then resubmitted and obtain a MA15+ rating. (Silent Hill: Homecoming?)
Which allows for violent games to be brought to a wider and younger audience. Games which otherwise should have been for adults. Maybe Michael Atkinson should think about that.
Hes certainly not getting my vote next election. Though I doubt gamers would be enough to vote him out, especially seeing as he got 67.1% of the primary vote last election. =(
By Kyle on Jan 29, 2009
From NSW Hansard 28th February 2008
http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/prod/PARLMENT/hansArt.nsf/V3Key/LC20080228017
Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile: Do you propose a change?
The Hon. JOHN HATZISTERGOS: I have indicated what is the position. However, I have previously put proposals to strengthen the code and guidelines, particularly in relation to banning material that advocates terrorism acts. The former Federal Attorney-General agreed to my proposal, as did the relevant Ministers from all the States and Territories, and a discussion paper was released and a number of submissions were made. I proposed that there be a change to the code, but ultimately the code was not amended in the way I had proposed: the former Federal Government passed legislation to facilitate the change unilaterally.
I do not know where this matter will end up. Hopefully there will be a cooperative decision in relation to the way forward. I will no doubt be looking at these issues very closely. My general position, however, in relation to matters of this kind is that there is considerable material out there, particularly of the kind Reverend the Hon. Fred Nile refers to. I am not sure there needs to be some sort of expansion of the material that is available beyond what is already required, but I will look at all the arguments that are put.
By Bob Bain on Jan 29, 2009
Mr. Atkinson, the fact that you are stopping the introduction of an R18+ rating for games basically means that you are out of touch with reality.
You have no right to dictate what adults can or cannot play, and by not giving a toss about what adults want, you are encouraging piracy.
By Glenn Petrie on Jan 29, 2009
Excellent comments guys.
By Mike on Jan 29, 2009
What kind of democracy is this if one can veto the decision of majority?
Also, does not allowing adult only rating have any sense? Nowadays anyone can download any game he wants if he doesn’t have a choice to buy it in a store.
By SkipEU on Jan 30, 2009
I really think we need to start to push to get the legislation changed so it doesnt require unanimous support by the AG’s to change the law in regards to censorship.
If we are lucky enough to kick Atkinson out of office whenever the election comes up it still doesnt guarantee that another AG will step up and take Atkinsons view point, still denying us an R18+ classification for video games.
“I don’t support the introduction of an R18+ rating for electronic games, chiefly because it will greatly increase the risk of children and vulnerable adults being exposed to damaging images and messages.”
By that logic Michael we may aswell abolish the R18+ Rating for films aswell, if the kiddies/mentally disturbed get a hold of that stuff you never know what will happen.
By Jarrod on Jan 30, 2009
Forgot to ask. Anyone know when that research report on the R18+ rating for video games is coming out?
By Jarrod on Jan 30, 2009
It was supposed to be released at the end of last year. I have no idea what is happening. Maybe the paper will be released at the time of the next SCAG.
By Glenn Petrie on Jan 30, 2009
I really want to find those games that have the sex AND violence in them. (sarcasm) I’ve only really found the latter. And a couple of people here have hit it on the head – if you deny the majority, they’re just going to go to other means to get want they want, in this case piracy.
Hell, I got a patch to fix up fallout 3. Looks much better.
By AileenWuornos on Feb 3, 2009
Edit: I thought I should also just add that I’m 20 year old woman. Just you know. The government has this whole idea that it’s women and children that need protection from this kinda thing. I know I certainly don’t.
By AileenWuornos on Feb 3, 2009
Someone really needs to point out to this guy that an R18+ rated game would have the same effect on a person as any other R18+ rated material. They changed the rating system a while back so that ratings for movies and video games follow the same standard.
Why then is he not opposed to R18+ rated movies?
By James Madley on Feb 5, 2009
I’m afraid the fascists are in control now.
By Alan on Jun 30, 2009
Vote This clown out, no adult rating for video games a pastime enjoyed by many adults but they are unable to play an adult game in Australia because this prick doesn’t want them to??
I thought this was a democracy?
This guy is a joke.
By fred jonson on Nov 24, 2009
“I see my children become physically and emotionally obsessed with games, and it is difficult to drag them away from the gaming console.”
dude, your son is mentally ill, he is also 22 so i suggest you talk to him about moving out and living
By Chevy on Dec 6, 2009
Guess I’ll have to keep importing my games from overseas stores. This damages the dollar as I am transferring more funds to overseas dollars, pays tax to US businesses and fails to give profits to Australian businesses that employ Australians.
Good one Michael. Really supportive of Australia with your “head-in-the-sand” approach.
By Scotto on Dec 9, 2009