Evaluate arguments for and against stronger regulation of the mediaPosted: May 2, 2014
.History of Regulation – BBFC 1912, media regulation in films got stronger up until 1984 video recording act after the video nasties era.
.1984 BBFC name change from Censors to Classification – less stronger regulation
.PEGI (2003) – Aim to provide parents with info on games so they make the right choices, not censor games.
Paragraph 1- Case studies/Facts
+Video Nasties 1980, Video Recording Act 1984, Cannibal Holocaust (Deodato, 1980) – need stronger to protect from this and new technology e.g. VOD – Netflix
+PEGI – Steam, Xbox Live, Playstation Store needs to be regulated, children can buy games they are underage for online – e.g. GTA V, 29% of parent would let their child play GTA V (survey of parents conducted on babies.co.uk) – issue that needs to be addressed
+Video games interact – active not passive like a film
+The Bunny Game (Rehmeier, 2010) – offensive, unrelenting portrayal of kidnapping and rape with no message other than witnessing the pleasure the offender gets from it – doesn’t need to be seen in UK. Banned. – Should BBFC be allowed to make that choice for us though?
+Bobo Doll Experiment (Bandura, 1963) – children affected by/replicate violence they see by adult ‘role models’ – Hypodermic Needle theory
- Information not censorship
- Hypodermic Needle Theory – 1930’s outdated
- Need to protect films like Antichirst (Lars Von Trier, 2009) – serious drama, exploring grief ect, not a sex work but contains violent sexual images that may be offensive to some. People should be told this but not stopped from seeing it.
- Uses and Gratifications theory – people interpret media differently, hard to regulate even if regulation was made stronger
Paragraph 2 – How should regulation be?
-People should be allowed to make choices, 1984 name change, censors > classification, BBFCinsight is good just needs to be more widely available and publicised