DOCSLIB.ORG

Study on the Rating Practice Used for Audiovisual Works in the European

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Study on the Rating Practice Used for Audiovisual Works in the European Empirical Study on the Practice of the Rating of Films Distributed in Cinemas Television DVD and Videocassettes in the EU and EEA Member States Prepared on behalf of the European Commission Final Report May 2003 Olsberg|SPI and KEA European Affairs in association with KPMG Table of Contents 1. Executive Summary........................................................................................................................... 4 1.1 Introduction............................................................................................................................... 4 1.2 The Consultants’ Process ........................................................................................................4 1.3 Consultancy Findings............................................................................................................... 6 1.4 Conclusions ............................................................................................................................. 16 2. Nature of Assignment..................................................................................................................... 20 2.1 The Study................................................................................................................................. 20 2.2 Methodology and Approach ................................................................................................. 21 2.3 Background to the Study ....................................................................................................... 23 3. Overview of Current Rating Legislation and Practice................................................................ 25 3.1 Overall Trends ........................................................................................................................ 25 3.2 Current State of Content Ratings......................................................................................... 28 3.3 Rating Practice in the EU and EEA Areas - Comparative Analysis by Sector.............. 46 3.4 National Practice in Context of EC Law ............................................................................ 67 3.5 Conclusion............................................................................................................................... 74 4. Presentation and Discussion of Samples...................................................................................... 76 4.1 Analysis of the Film Samples................................................................................................ 76 4.2 Sample and Standards Analysis............................................................................................. 79 4.3 Econometric Analysis of the Rating Heterogeneity .......................................................... 83 4.4 Conclusions ............................................................................................................................. 89 5. Key Observations ............................................................................................................................ 91 5.1 Economic Impact of Ratings Heterogeneity...................................................................... 91 5.2 Confusion Amongst Public................................................................................................... 95 5.3 Exhibition, Video and DVD Distribution Issues .............................................................. 98 5.4 Broadcast Issues.................................................................................................................... 101 5.5 Video Games......................................................................................................................... 103 5.6 Internet Page ......................................................................................................................... 104 5.7 Internet Distribution............................................................................................................ 105 5.8 State Intervention with Regard to Content Ratings – Self Regulation ......................... 107 6. Conclusions .................................................................................................................................... 110 6.1 Pressures for Change............................................................................................................110 6.2 Circulation Within the European Union........................................................................... 111 6.3 Potential Confusion of Persons Responsible For Minors.............................................. 111 6.4 Issues of Harmonising Rating Legislation ........................................................................ 113 7. Recommendations for EU Action .............................................................................................. 116 Glossary.................................................................................................................................................... 120 Appendices............................................................................................................................................... 123 May 2003 2 Legal Notice By the Commission of the European Communities Directorate-General for Education and Culture Neither the Commission of the European Communities nor any person acting on behalf of the Commission is responsible for the use, which might be made of the following information. The views expressed in this report are those of the authors. The report does not necessarily reflect the views of the Commission, nor does the Commission accept responsibility for the accuracy of the information combined herein. Reproduction is authorised, provided the source is acknowledged. Important Notice By Olsberg|SPI This report is prepared on behalf of the European Commission Directorate-General for Education and Culture solely to encourage debate and discussion on the topic. As with any such discussion paper relating to trends in the market place, the outcome may well differ significantly. No liability shall accrue to Olsberg|SPI, KEA European Affairs or KPMG for any information contained within the report. Olsberg|SPI, KEA European Affairs and KPMG take no responsibility for any action taken by readers relating to this report. Nothing in this report shall constitute business, professional or investment advice and readers should seek independent professional advice prior to making decisions concerning matters addressed in this report. The cut-off for information in this report is the end of 2002. May 2003 3 1. Executive Summary 1.1 Introduction Olsberg|SPI (“SPI”) and KEA European Affairs (“KEA”), in association with KPMG, (referred to herein as “the Consultants”) have been retained by the European Commission (“EC”)1 to investigate ratings legislation and practice with respect to audiovisual works across the European Union (“EU”) and European Economic Area (“EEA”) Member States2. Ratings, which are set by various bodies and agencies throughout Europe, both government and industry, tend to be different between states and within states across different media and modes of distribution. The main aims of the assignment are: 1. To identify the economic impact of this ratings heterogeneity, and 2. To uncover any confusion that it may cause, particularly in parents, teachers, or others responsible for minors. The brief from the EC (“the Brief”) asks the Consultants to: • define two representative Samples of 50 films each • establish the individual ratings for each film in each territory across each distribution channel • draw conclusions on the impact of ratings heterogeneity on the distribution costs of films, circulation within the internal market, and confusion in the market • provide an overview of existing legislation and practice • examine attempts to harmonise ratings legislation within EU and EEA Member States and the possible need for co-ordination, with special regard to self-regulation. The assessment of the two Samples is to provide a practical illustration of how the different ratings systems affect the distribution of cinematic works across all media channels (cinema, video/DVD, and television) throughout the EU and EEA. The Samples allow different systems to be compared across and within territories. 1.2 The Consultants’ Process 1.2.1 Selection of the Feature Film Samples The Consultants were charged with the task of determining two representative Samples consisting of 50 films each. • The first Sample was to consist of European and non-European in origin feature films (referred to in the document as the “Global Sample”), distributed in all EU and EEA Member States. • The second Sample was to consist of feature films purely European in origin (referred to in the document as the “European Sample”), distributed in the majority of EU and EEA Member States. 1 A glossary, which can be found at the end of this document, includes definitions of all the terms used herein. 2 15 EU Member States (Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Sweden and the UK) and three EEA Member States (Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway) – 18 Member States altogether. However, as no information pertaining to feature films, rating practice and legislation was available for Liechtenstein, this report will refer only to those 17 Member States for which the Consultants gathered information. May 2003 4 In the event, there were so few films
Load more

Recommended publications
  • EFA and Ausgamers' Submission Is Here
    Submission to the Public Consultation on an R18+ Classification for Computer Games The Australian National Classification Scheme should include an R18+ classification category for computer games Electronic Frontiers Australia and AusGamers Prepared on behalf of Electronic Frontiers Australia and AusGamers by Nicolas Suzor, Kylie Pappalardo and Jessica Citizen, assisted by Matt Postle and Peta Waller-Bryant. Many thanks to Julian Merlo for his research on comparative ratings, and to Jeremy Huppatz, Luke Tubnor, and others for their comments on drafts of this paper. Layout by Amanda Rainey at Raivans Design. February 2010 Electronic Frontiers Australia and AusGamers Introduction The purpose of this paper is to put forward arguments and evidence to support the case that it is time to upgrade the National Classification System (NCS) to include an R18+ adult classification for computer games. In this submission, we make three main arguments: 1. the arguments against introducing an R18+ rating are premised primarily on incorrect assumptions about games and their effects; and 2. introducing an R18+ classification to bring games in line with films will better empower Australian adults to make more informed decisions for themselves and on behalf of the children for whom they are responsible; 3. Australian adults should not be prevented from engaging with interactive entertainment that deals with complex adult themes and material and imagery that is unsuitable for children. This paper was compiled on behalf of Electronic Frontiers Australia (EFA) and AusGamers. EFA is Australia’s peak national non-profit organisation representing Internet users concerned with on-line freedoms and rights. AusGamers is one of Australia’s largest gaming and technology sites, and has been a primary hub for the gaming community in Australia since its creation in 1999.
    [Show full text]
  • Comparing Classifications Feature Films and Video Games
    Comparing Classifications feature films and video games 2012 & 2013 October 2014 Office of Film and Literature Classification Comparing Classifications 2012 & 2013 2 Office of Film and Literature Classification Comparing Classifications 2012 & 2013 Comparing Classifications: feature films and video games 2012 & 2013 Office of Film and Literature Classification Te Tari Whakarōpū Tukuata, Tuhituhinga Level 1, 88 The Terrace PO Box 1999 Wellington 6140 Phone 04 471 6770 Fax 04 471 6781 Email [email protected] Web www.classificationoffice.govt.nz ISBN: PDF 978-0-477-10417-3 This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 New Zealand licence. In general, you are free to copy, distribute and adapt the work, as long as you attribute the work to the Office of Film and Literature Classification and abide by the other license terms. To view a copy of this license, please visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/. Please note that the Office of Film and Literature Classification may not be used in any way that infringes any provision of the Flags, Emblems, and Names Protection Act 1981. Attribution to the Office of Film and Literature Classification should be in written form and not by reproduction of any such emblem or logo. Acknowledgements The Classification Office is grateful to Nokuthaba Sibanda and Lara Wieser from the School of Mathematics, Statistics and Operations Research at Victoria University of Wellington who worked with us in 2009 to develop the scoring methodology and the analytical approaches used in this report. We are also grateful to Mike Camden of Statistics NZ who helped us in 2010 to present the data graphically.
    [Show full text]
  • The Cultural Aspect of Video Game Regulation Practices
    The Cultural Aspect of Video Game Regulation Practices «A comparative study of the differences in video game rating practices between Europe and Japan» Marita Eriksen Haugland Master’s thesis in Nordic Media Department of Media and Communication THE UNIVERSITY OF OSLO Fall 2018 The Cultural Aspect of Video Game Regulation Practices «A comparative study of the differences in video game rating practices between Europe and Japan» Marita Eriksen Haugland Master’s thesis in Nordic Media II Department of Media and Communication THE UNIVERSITY OF OSLO Fall 2018 III © Marita Eriksen Haugland 2018 The Cultural Aspect of Video Game Regulation Practices: A comparative study of the differences in video game rating practices between Europe and Japan Marita Eriksen Haugland http://www.duo.uio.no/ Print: Reprosentralen, Universitetet i Oslo IV Abstract Video games have become a large part of media consumption, both for adults and children. This study contributes to the field of children and media by looking into the perceptions and construction of risk by self-regulatory organizations, as well as into self-regulatory effectiveness. The thesis also discusses the struggle and the compromises between child safety, cultural differences and freedom of expression. It takes up the question of how the cultural differences affect the age ratings and content descriptors. All video games rated in Europe and Japan between 2010-2016 are analyzed to show the differences between the regions. Also, content analyses are performed on 24 video games with emblematic differences in age ratings or content descriptors. The findings suggest that cultural differences in how the two systems view crime, non-realistic violence, realistic blood, non-sexual nudity, romantic behavior, and sexualized behavior is responsible for some of the differences in age ratings and content descriptors.
    [Show full text]
  • Genel İzleyici Kitlesi Turkey 18+ (English: General Audience) 7A 13A 15A
    Motion picture content rating system A motion picture content rating system is an organization designated to classify films based on their suitability for audiences due to their treatment of issues such as sex, violence, or substance abuse; their use of profanity; or other matters typically deemed unsuitable for children or adolescents. Most countries have some form of rating system that issues determinations variously known as certifications, classifications, certificates, or ratings. Age recommendations, of either an advisory or restrictive capacity, are often applied in lieu of censorship; in some jurisdictions movie theaters may have a legal obligation to enforce restrictive ratings. In countries such as Australia and Singapore, an official government body decides on ratings; in other countries such as the United States, it is done by industry committees with little if any official government status. In most countries, however, films that are considered morally offensive have been censored, restricted, or banned. Even if the film rating system has no legal consequences, and a film has not explicitly been restricted or banned, there are usually laws forbidding certain films, or forbidding minors to view them. The influence of specific factors in deciding a rating varies from country to country. In countries such as the United States, films with strong sexual content tend to be restricted to older viewers, though those same films are very often considered suitable for all ages in countries such as France and Germany. In contrast, films with violent content which would be rated leniently in the United States and Australia are often subject to high ratings and sometimes even censorship in countries such as Germany and Finland.
    [Show full text]
  • Cultures of Computer Game Concerns
    Estrid Sørensen (ed.) Cultures of Computer Game Concerns MatteRealities / VerKörperungen: Perspectives from Empirical Science Studies | Volume 23 Editorial Since the late 1970s, empirical science studies have developed into a key field of research at the intersection of science, technology and society. This field mer- ges a repertoire of theories and methods stemming primarily from cultural anthropology, sociology, linguistics and history. Its main characteristic is the detailed analysis of scientific practices and epistemic cultures and how these become entangled with public discourses and everyday life. This focus tries to reveal specific, local configurations and their epistemological as well as social consequences. Beyond a mere deconstruction, science studies are constantly looking to engage with the fields in which they do their work. The goal of this book series is to offer to scholars a German and English speaking Forum that – develops inter- and trans-disciplinary bodies of knowledge in the areas of medicine and the life sciences and makes these nationally and internatio- nally available; – supports young scientists through opening up a new field of work which runs across existing disciplinary structures; – encourages the formation of tandems through co-authorship. In particular, it supports, evaluates and comments on collaborative projects with collea- gues from the natural and engineering sciences. The series is directed towards scholars and students from both the empirical science/social studies and the natural sciences and medicine. The series is edited by Martin Döring and Jörg Niewöhner. Advisory Board: Prof. Dr. Thomas Lemke Prof. Dr. Paul Martin Prof. Dr. Brigitte Nerlich John Law Prof. Dr. Regine Kollek Prof. Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Self-Regulation Vs State Regulation: Evidence from Cinema Age Restrictions∗
    Self-regulation vs state regulation: Evidence from cinema age restrictions∗ Ryan Lampey and Shaun McRaez November 25, 2020 Abstract This paper studies the effect of self-regulation on the leniency of cinema age re- strictions using cross-country variation in the classifications applied to 1,922 movies released in 31 countries between 2002 and 2011. Our data show that restrictive classifi- cations reduce box office revenues, particularly for movies with wide box office appeal. These data also show that self-regulated ratings agencies display greater leniency than state-regulated agencies when classifying movies with wide appeal. However, consistent with theoretical models of self-regulation, the degree of leniency is small because it is not costly for governments to intervene and regulate ratings themselves. ∗We wish to thank Brian Adams, Jin Choi, Nik Kohrt, Anthony Niblett, Christian Peukert, and seminar participants at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences at Stanford University, California State University, East Bay, DePaul University, 2014 International Industrial Organization Conference, 2013 Mallen Economics of Filmed Entertainment Conference, Northern Illinois University, Purdue University, the University of California Santa Cruz, and the University of Missouri for helpful comments. McRae gratefully acknowledges financial support from the Asociación Mexicana de Cultura, A.C. Nicholas Jasinski, Shatakshi Shandilya, Matthew Sido, and Josh Wagner provided excellent research assistance. All errors are our own. yDepartment of Economics, California State University, East Bay. Email: [email protected]. zCentro de Investigación Económica and Department of Economics, ITAM. Email: [email protected]. 1 1 Introduction Self-regulation, in which an industry-level organization determines and enforces the rules and standards of conduct for firms in the industry, is an important feature of many sectors including advertising, financial services, legal services, and industrial chemicals.
    [Show full text]
  • Effectiveness of Kenya Film Classification Board's Media
    EFFECTIVENESS OF KENYA FILM CLASSIFICATION BOARD’S MEDIA LITERACY PROGRAMME IN CREATING AWARENESS ON FILM CLASSIFICATION PROCEDURES, A CASE STUDY OF STAREHE CONSTITUENCY BY FAITH KAMENE MUSYOKA K50/81500/2015 A RESEARCH PROPOSAL SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE AWARD OF DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS IN COMMUNICATION STUDIES, UNIVERSITY OF NAIROBI 2019 Declaration This research project is my original work and to the best of my knowledge has never been presented for a degree award in any other university. …………………………… ……………………… Faith Kamene Musyoka Date K50/81500/2015 This research project has been submitted for examination with my approval as a University Supervisor. …………………………… ……………………… Dr James Oranga Date School of Journalism &Mass Communication University of Nairobi i Dedication This research project is wholeheartedly dedicated to my Family. You’ve always wanted me to finish this study. Thank you for your support and for loving me always. ii Acknowledgement I wish to extend my sincere appreciation to the people who assisted me in the production of this work in terms of both physical and moral support. More important, I am thankful to God for seeing me through to this far. I am very grateful to my supervisor, Dr James Oranga, for his invaluable guidance in the successful completion of this research project. My heartfelt thanks go to my family; my dad, mum, my sister Mercy, Brother Kelvin, for their spiritual and financial support throughout my academic life. Edwin, you have been the best support system throughout this study. Thank you. You are appreciated. Thank you, and God bless you all.
    [Show full text]
  • Education – Relationships – Play – – Relationships Education
    Education – Relationships – Play Multifaceted Aspects of the Internet and Child and Youth Online Safety Edited by Agnieszka Wrońska, Rafał Lew-Starowicz, Anna Rywczyńska Education – Relationships Play Education – Relationships – Play Multifaceted Aspects of the Internet and Child and Youth Online Safety Education – Relationships – Play Multifaceted Aspects of the Internet and Child and Youth Online Safety Areas: The Internet – social and legal contexts The Internet – selected aspects of child and youth protection Edited by Agnieszka Wrońska Rafał Lew-Starowicz Anna Rywczyńska Warsaw 2020 KEY CONCEPTS SERIES, VOL. 6 Education – Relationships – Play Multifaceted Aspects of the Internet and Child and Youth Online Safety Areas: The Internet – social and legal contexts The Internet – selected aspects of child and youth protection Scientific Editors: dr Agnieszka Wrońska, Rafał Lew-Starowicz, Anna Rywczyńska Cooperation: Agnieszka Rybińska Reviewer: prof. dr hab. Mirosław Grewiński Chief editor: Tomasz Mrożek Translation into English: Poliglota Cover design: Artur Ładno Design: Diana Makulska/Podpunkt DTP: Print: TOP DRUK Łomża Publisher: Foundation for the Development of the Education System National Agency of the Erasmus+ Programme Al. Jerozolimskie 142a, 02-305 Warsaw www.frse.org.pl | [email protected] © Foundation for the Development of the Education System, Warsaw 2020 ISBN: 978-83-66515-08-6 This publication has been developed with the financial support from the European Commission in the framework of the Erasmus+ programme. The information and views set out in this publication are those of the authors and the European Commission may not be held responsible for the use, which may be made of the information contained herein. Special thanks you to the NASK for contribution to this publication.
    [Show full text]