[clug] [OT] Broadband clangers

[Ben Nizette]

On 13/08/2010, at 12:10 PM, Sam Couter wrote:

> Ben Nizette <bn at niasdigital.com> wrote:
>> after all (with the exception of R18+ games) no-one really objects to the restrictions on this material in physical form.
> 
> I object.
> 
> Classification = good, censorship = bad, and the combination of banning
> distribution and consumption of RC material and allowing the
> classification board to refuse to classify material is censorship.
> 
> The "it's obscene" argument falls flat given some examples of what was
> considered obscene just a few decades ago.

Part of the RC guidelines is

"Depict, express or otherwise deals with matters of sex, drug misuse or addiction, crime, cruelty, violence or revolting or abhorrent phenomena in such a way that they offend against the standards of morality, decency and propriety generally accepted by reasonable adults to the extent that they should not be classified."

and there's no doubt what's generally accepted by reasonable adults changes over time.  Where ever you set the bar I dare say people are going to vault over it in the name of their chosen art form, driving the acceptable levels up over time.  I'm not totally convinced that's an argument for not having a bar at all..

> 
> If "it's damaging to the viewer", who protects the classification board
> from damage? I of course assume they actually view material before
> classifying it.

The time an employee can spend in such a reviewer position is often limited and counselling and therapy are part of the package.  I don't know you can extend that to the general case.

> Also there are many other legal things I can do to damage
> myself if I wish.

Of course, but see below

> 
> And finally, I'm a grown adult. What right does anyone else have to tell
> me what I can and can't read, watch, listen to? I'm not hurting anyone
> else, so stay out of my business.

Well that's just the thing, a major part of RC relates to the incitement of violence or other indecent acts against others. Sure fewer than 99.99% of people who do see this stuff aren't going to act upon it but when one is too many, how do you make sure?  Similar argument to gun laws..

Don't get me wrong here, I'm not for a net filter or censorship in general but I don't think there's a nice clean line between "Religious Right, Conroy and associated nut-jobs" and "Sane people"

Getting nice and OT now, gee thx Bob ;)

	--Ben.