Thursday 3 March 2011

The UK's Current Classification System

Do you think the way films are regulated is sensible, useful to society, and acheives its aim of protecting the vulnerable and upholding the law?

I think film regulation is completley necessary, most importantly because it is the easiest way for parents to decide for themselves what they will and won't allow their children to see, both in the cinema and on DVD. The certificates are sensible in that they provide a rough guideline based on what most children would be comfortable with at given ages, gaging the distress that is likely to be caused to children at each age group. I believe that the law is upheld effectively, as breiching of criminal law is strictly forbidden at all age ratings, and further to this any complaints that an audience or viewer may have may be taken up with their local council who, with enough complaints, can decide to prevent a cinema from screening a film Ultimately, however, film regulation can only be viable as regulation for parents to a certain extent: parents cannot expect to follow these guidelines religiously, as it is down to them to decide what they think will affect their child. The BBFC cannot regulate what parents allow their children to watch in the home.

What are the pros and cons?

Pros:

  • Gives parents information so they can decide what to let their children watch.
  • The vulnerable are protected.
  • Local authorities can overthrow decisions made by the BBFC and prevent a film from being screened.
  • The guidelines are updated and maintained in keeping with society's constantly changing beliefs.
Cons:
  • Regulation is not enforced strictly (often shops and cinemas do not demand ID)
  • What children will be affected by is subjective. You cannot generalize about the mental state of a child at a given age and what will/won't distress or upset them.
  • It could be argued that regulation is in place to protect governments and companies rather than the people.
  • Books, newspapers and other media are not censored.. why film?
  • "Nanny state" - people relying on film companies to tell them what is suitable for their child.
 How do you think the system could be improved?


There are obvious flaws in the system but I find it hard to point out exactly where it is that these flaws should be improved - having a set certification system is obviously an extremely difficult and subjective task, and given the complexity of the issue, I think that BBFC have done a reasonable job. I think it is unfair to assume that age determines maturity, and for this reason perhaps there should be more information provided on actual content (perhaps a "H" for horror, an "S" for Sexual Behaviour, and so on). I also think that the parents website is not at all well advertised, and if parents were more aware of it this would be helpful. Aside from this though, I think that it is not down to the BBFC to act as parents - they merely provide a rough guideline. I do not think that they can be held accountable for the minute percent of the population who would, for example, watch an 18 film and imitate dangerous or violent behaviour they saw, or for a young child who watches an 18 film behind their parents back.

No comments:

Post a Comment