BBFC REJECTS SEXUALLY VIOLENT JAPANESE HORROR DVD (19.08.09)

NEW CLASSIFICATION GUIDELINES PUBLISHED BY BBFC (23.06.09)

The views of over 8,700 people across the UK from the age of 16 upwards have formed the basis for the latest set of classification Guidelines published today by the BBFC.

David Cooke, Director of the BBFC said: “The BBFC is committed to consulting the public every four years to ensure that the Guidelines we use to classify all works which are submitted to us not only take account of relevant UK legislation, but accurately reflect public attitudes and concerns.

“You would not expect there to be a massive shift in attitudes since the 2005 Guidelines, and there is sometimes an assumption that public attitudes are becoming more relaxed as time goes on, but that is not always the case. A number of specific concerns which emerged from the extensive consultation exercise, involving over 8,700 people, as well as the members of our Advisory Panel on Children’s Viewing and other experts, have been incorporated in the Guidelines published today.

The BBFC is an open and accountable organisation and in order to bring about even greater transparency we have, in this new version of the Guidelines, gone into greater detail on how, why and when we do what we do.

BBFC.online has been developed over the last 18 months, in close partnership with the video and new media industries and the British Video Association. There are already some 700 videos with ‘online certificates’ and this is likely to rise to about 1000 by the end of the month.

“We know from a number of recent surveys that the work of the BBFC is well known and understood by the UK public and this latest research shows that the BBFC’s decisions are in line with the vast majority of the public’s expectations. This consultation exercise took particular notice of the views of people who had recently watched a range of films or DVDs and when asked, 82 per cent thought that the BBFC was an effective regulator. The same people agreed with the ratings given to the films they had watched in 99 per cent of all cases.

“We have always said that film classification is not a science and that it is impossible to satisfy everyone. There will always be people who think that we are either too restrictive or too liberal, but it is clear that as far as the vast majority of the UK public is concerned the BBFC is getting it right. The BBFC classifies thousands of works a year and even slight changes to the Guidelines will have an impact on new and old works coming in for classification. Works which were clearly ‘U’, or ‘15’, or ‘PG’ or ‘12A’ under the old Guidelines would still be in the same category under the new Guidelines, but works which fell on the borderline between two categories previously could now find themselves being pushed into a different category. These new Guidelines, reflecting, as they do, current public concerns and sensitivities, will ensure that our classification decisions continue to command public confidence and support for what we do.”

MAIN FINDINGS

82 per cent of recent film and DVD viewers thought the BBFC was an effective regulator

The same people agreed with 99 per cent of the classification decisions for the films they had watched round 80 per cent of people surveyed found the BBFC’s Consumer Advice useful, with this figure rising to 85 per cent of parents with primary school aged children 85 per cent of people who responded to the web based questionnaire found the Board’s website for parents – www.pbbfc.co.uk – useful 74 per cent or respondents understood that the ‘12A’ category means that the film is not generally suitable for under 12s.

MAIN CHANGES TO THE GUIDELINES

Clearer and more detailed information about what the Board takes into account when classifying works (pages 4-7) and when interventions will be made and on what grounds (32-33)

A clearer definition of ‘harm’, which results from the High Court ruling on the video game Manhunt 2 (page 4)

The introduction of ‘discrimination’ as a key classification issue in each of the categories covering race, gender, religion, disability or sexuality (page 12)

Clearer and more detailed information about how the tone and impact of a film is taken into account, as opposed to simply considering what is actually shown on screen (page 11)

At ‘U’, the relaxation of the Guideline on references to drugs to allow for references which are both infrequent and innocuous (page 21). Under the old Guidelines a documentary which mentioned the Opium Wars between Britain and China had to be passed at ‘PG’ for this single reference alone.

At the ‘12A’/’12’ category a tightening of the horror criteria (page 25). This is in line with the introduction of tone and impact and would mean that some films, like The Others, would be likely to be given a higher classification

At ‘12A’/’12’ there will be a presumption against the passing of frequent crude sexual references (page 25). This is in response to concerns expressed by the public about films such as Date Movie, Meet the Spartans and Norbit.

At ‘15’, solvent abuse is now specifically mentioned as a classification issue and depictions are unlikely to be passed (page 27). This is in response, not only to public concern, but expert opinion

Trailers and advertisements which are on the borderline between two categories be given the more restrictive rating because of the fact that the public has not chosen which trailers and advertisements to watch (pages 16-17) and because the BBFC has no control over which trailers or advertisements are shown before a particular film (eg a horror trailer before a ‘rom-com’).

The exception will be public information films and charity advertisements where stronger material is acceptable to the public when there is a ‘public good’ justification.

At ‘18’ the Board will continue to maintain the right of adults to choose their own entertainment unless material is in breach of the criminal law; or the treatment appears to the BBFC to risk harm to individuals or through their behaviour, to society; or where there are more explicit images of sexual activity which cannot be justified by context. As part of the research, respondents were specifically asked about explicit images of real sex in main stream films like 9 Songs and the clear message was that these images were acceptable at ‘18’ because of the context in which they appeared.

David Cooke said:

“There may be criticism from some quarters that these changes are not more drastic or restrictive, but they are significant and will have an impact on our classification decisions. They also represent the views of the majority of the public. The BBFC is committed to ensuring that works are placed in the most appropriate category for them, in line with public expectations, and we will back up these decisions with the sort of information the public needs to make informed choices about what they and their families watch. Our Consumer Advice, which appears on film advertising and DVD packaging, is well recognised and appreciated and for people who want more detailed information there is the Extended Classification Information for all films, which appears on our main website, and the specifically tailored information for parents which appears on www.pbbfc.co.uk.”

<Back to top

DAVID COOKE RESPONDS TO VIDEO GAME ANNOUNCEMENT (16.06.09)

Director of the BBFC David Cooke said:

“We have argued consistently that any games classification system needs to put child protection at its heart. It must involve consultation with the British public, command their trust, and reflect their sensibilities. It must take account of tone and context and be carried out by skilled and knowledgeable examiners. It needs to involve the provision of full, helpful and carefully weighed information to parents and the public more generally. It must have the power and will to reject or intervene in relation to unacceptable games or game elements. It should make a substantial contribution to media education, for example through dedicated websites and through work with pupils, students and teachers. It must be speedy and cost effective. It must have the capabilities to monitor online gameplay and to attract new members to online classification schemes. And it must be independent in substance as well as appearance, reaching its decisions and providing information on the basis of its own detailed assessments.

“The BBFC has always supported PEGI and wished it well, but it continues to believe that it satisfies these requirements better than PEGI. However, it will cooperate fully in the detailed work needed to give effect to the Government’s decision.”

<Back to top

BBFC PASSES LARS VON TRIER’S ANTICHRIST '18' UNCUT (12.06.09)

The BBFC has passed Lars Von Trier’s latest film, Antichrist, ‘18’ uncut. The film contains images of strong real sex, bloody violence and self mutilation. The BBFC Guidelines for ‘18’ rated works state that the more explicit images of sexual activity will not be allowed unless they can be exceptionally justified by context and the work is not a ‘sex work’ whose primary purpose is sexual arousal. For these purposes Antichrist is very clearly not a ‘sex work’.

The film also contains some bloody and violent images, including a scene of genital mutilation. The Board knows of no research evidence which suggests that the viewing of this scene would raise a significant risk of harm to adult viewers or to society, or which would otherwise justify intervention.

There is, therefore, no basis for an exception to the principle, repeatedly endorsed in public consultations, that adults should normally be free to choose what films to watch or not watch.

The film was seen by the Director, David Cooke, the President, Sir Quentin Thomas and Vice President, Gerard Lemos. David Cooke said:
“Antichrist deals with what happens to a couple after the death of their child, focussing on the psychological impact on them both. The film does not contain material which breaches the law or poses a significant harm risk to adults. The sexual imagery, while strong, is relatively brief, and the Board has since 1990 passed a number of works containing such images. This reflects the principle, strongly endorsed in a number of public consultations, that adults should be free to decide for themselves what to watch or what not to watch, provided it is neither illegal nor harmful.

“There is no doubt that some viewers will find the images disturbing and offensive, but the BBFC’s Consumer Advice provides a clear warning to enable individuals to make an informed viewing choice. And this is now backed up by detailed Extended Consumer Advice on our website.”

<Back to top

BBFC REJECTS SEXUALLY VIOLENT DVD (03.04.09)

The BBFC has rejected the DVD NF713. This means that it cannot be legally supplied anywhere in the UK. The decision was taken by the Director, David Cooke and the Presidential Team of Sir Quentin Thomas, Alison Hastings and Gerard Lemos.

NF713 takes the form of an extended sequence in which a man tortures a woman psychologically, physically and sexually. The woman is bound and restrained throughout. The man employs a variety of techniques ranging from invasive questioning about her body and her sexual life to genital torture with forceps and electricity, makeshift waterboarding, beatings and forced urination. The torture is unremitting and takes up the majority of the work’s 73 minute running time. Throughout large sections the woman is naked or semi-naked and her nudity is focussed upon, particularly in the later portions of the work.

In the Board’s view, the primary purpose of NF713 is to sexually arouse the viewer at the sight of a woman being sexually humiliated, tortured and abused. As such it constitutes a ‘sex work’, which is defined by the Board’s Guidelines as a work whose ‘primary purpose is sexual arousal or stimulation’. The focus on the woman’s naked, humiliated body together with the conventional BDSM aspects of the later part of the work lead credence to the view that sexual arousal is its primary intent.

The Board operates a strict policy on sex works and does not issue classification to such works if they depict non consensual sexual activity (whether real or simulated), the infliction of pain or physical harm (whether real or simulated) or sexual threats, humiliation or abuse that do not form part of a clearly consenting role-playing game. NF713 focuses exclusively on these elements of non-consensual activity, pain, humiliation and abuse and takes the form of a dramatic scenario in which the viewer is invited to believe that what is being shown is ‘real’. Unlike many BDSM works it is not apparent that what is occurring is part of a consensual role play where the roles are clearly set out and, in any case, the Board's Guidelines preclude the kind of strong abuse on offer here, even if consent is established.

David Cooke, Director of the BBFC said:
“It is the Board’s carefully considered view that to issue a certificate to NF713, even if statutorily confined to adults, would involve risk of harm within the terms of the Video Recordings Act, would be inconsistent with the Board’s Guidelines, and would be unacceptable to the public. The BBFC has a strict policy on rape and sexual violence. With portrayals of sexual violence which might eroticise or endorse sexual assault the Board may require cuts at any classification level.

“Rejecting a work outright is a serious matter and the Board considered whether the issue could be dealt with through cuts. However, given the unacceptable content featured throughout cutting the work is not a viable option in this case and the work is therefore refused a classification.”

Under the terms of the Video Recordings Act distributors have the right to appeal the Board’s decision.

Note for Editors

The Video Recordings Act makes clear that harm is not to be interpreted narrowly as behavioural harm, but may also include more insidious risks, and the Board follows this approach in having regard to, for instance, moral harm and possible desensitisation. The correct legal definition of the harm test was clarified by Mr Justice Mitting in his ruling of 24 January 2008 at the High Court. In that ruling he stated that ‘The task of the Board [...] is to have special regard to any harm that may in future be caused to potential viewers’. The Act also makes clear that harm is not the only issue to be weighed in the balance.

<Back to top

BRITISH PARENTS “CONCERNED” ABOUT CONTENT OF VIDEO GAMES AND WANT INDEPENDENT REGULATION (27.02.09)

Three quarters of British parents are concerned about the content of video games and the same number want independent regulation of their content, according to a new YouGov poll for the British Board of Film Classification. The vast majority also believe that video games affect some children’s behaviour.

The poll, conducted as the Government prepares to make a decision on whether to allow the games industry to continue to regulate privately, shows parents overwhelmingly favour some sort of system which would see video games rated in the same way DVDs and films are rated.

The Government is currently considering the outcomes of a consultation following the publication of its Review by Tanya Byron last year which recommended that games for people of 12 years and over should come to the BBFC for classification. The games industry has argued that games should be regulated by their own self regulatory system called PEGI.

The key results from the poll are as follows:

• By 74 per cent to 7 per cent parents are concerned about the content of some video games.
• By 79 per cent to 6 per cent parents think video games may affect the behaviour of some children.
• By 74 per cent to 5 per cent parents believe video games should be regulated by an independent regulator.
• By 77 per cent to 4 per cent parents believe video game ratings should reflect the concerns of UK parents.
• By 82 per cent to 3 per cent parents believe it would help them if video games used the same ratings as films and DVDs.

David Cooke, Director of the BBFC said:

“This poll clearly shows parents support a regulatory system for games that is independent of the industry and UK based, reflecting UK sensibilities and sensitivities. The UK public wants the protection of children to be paramount when regulating games which, of course, reflects the concerns which led to Tanya Byron being asked to produce her report. The BBFC has been classifying games for over 20 years and our decisions reflect the views of the public. Our classification systems and symbols are known and trusted by the public and in a converging media world they want to know what their children are playing as well as watching.”

Notes for Editors

1. All figures, unless otherwise stated, are from YouGov plc. Total sample size was 2143 adults (1329 parents). Fieldwork was undertaken between 9–11 February 2009. The survey was carried out online. The figures have been weighted and are representative of all GB adults (aged 18+).
2. This survey was carried out for the BBFC by YouGov but the respondents were unaware of who commissioned the survey.

<Back to top

<< Back