Chief Censor - He's at it again!

Forums › ICT Policies and Regulation › Chief Censor - He's at it again!

1 | 2 | 3

SaltyNZ

8865 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9544

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#1177729 18-Nov-2014 08:31

KiwiNZ:
That affects only those involved, pornography, violence etc etc affects a great deal more.

I didn't realise anybody else was affected if I played Call of Duty at night with headphones on after the kids have gone to bed. My god, what have I done!!??

iPad Pro 11" + iPhone 15 Pro Max + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18775 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12766

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1177733 18-Nov-2014 08:42

SaltyNZ:
KiwiNZ:
That affects only those involved, pornography, violence etc etc affects a great deal more.

I didn't realise anybody else was affected if I played Call of Duty at night with headphones on after the kids have gone to bed. My god, what have I done!!??

*sigh* You know precisely what I was referring to.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

SaltyNZ

8865 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9544

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#1177735 18-Nov-2014 08:48

KiwiNZ:
SaltyNZ:
KiwiNZ:
That affects only those involved, pornography, violence etc etc affects a great deal more.

I didn't realise anybody else was affected if I played Call of Duty at night with headphones on after the kids have gone to bed. My god, what have I done!!??

*sigh* You know precisely what I was referring to.

I do. I just don't see how having a Government Censor prevents it, other than the really nasty stuff which is rightfully illegal everywhere (and isn't stopped by having a Government Censor either).

iPad Pro 11" + iPhone 15 Pro Max + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.

ckc

321 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 100
Inactive user

#1177760 18-Nov-2014 09:18

I don't think harm to others should be conflated with entertainment choices.

maxeon

1279 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 106

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#1177771 18-Nov-2014 09:38

rugrat: How much does it cost to get a rating in other countries?

Article mentions $1400 for New Zealand if Restricted in UK or Austraila, don't see an international company paying that for New Zealand with population size, so guess if censor has his way we get none of the content that's restricted.

Maybe we should just accept the ratings given in another country, rather then if something being restricted overseas then it needs to be rerated here, as I don't see international company's complying, and it all looks unenforceable as a company only has to follow the rules in the country it's operating in, but with the internet it's now easier for the end user of a product to buy internationally.

So far he's only been targeting paid for content, guess the likes of YouTube will be in his next press realease, lol.

+1

The price OFLC board charges (not to mention their time frames to make a booking) are ridiculous. Their rules around classification process compared to what Australia / UK has is outrageous.

I personally have a lot of experience with them in deal with censor issues for importing a Foreign language film to screen it here for a limited selected audience.

Rules are ..
- If the movie I am planning to screen in NZ is censored in Aus/UK and either of the countries have given rating below M or 15+ they will cross rate the same rating for a charge of $150 (approx - might have gone up now).
- If the same movie is censored in Aus/UK and any one of the countries have given a RESTRICTED rating of R15 or R18, they have to do a FULL Censor of the movie again in Wellington costing $1600 to the exhibitor.

- So, if I plan to bring a foreign language movie to Auckland to screen a selected 200 audience which has a restricted rating, I have to spend another $1600 to get it rated and the whole process takes about a week with 2 full working days to spend with the team. The appointments are to be made Well in advance.

- By the time I get the rating, there is a pirated copy on the internet and the ticket price goes up by another 10 dollars more to accommodate OFLC costs.

- In all the cases, I pretty much get the same restricted rating as the above country.
- Movie theatre does not hire / screen the film without a rating certificate - so you are restricted there.

- In Australia / UK, there is an exception where the film is screened for limited audience, you can take something called exception for Adults only screening, which means no children are allowed but you are allowed to screen for limited selection of audiences.

Example - Movie X is to be screened in Lido Cinema for 2 Show for a maximum of 200 Audience.

But due to the extraordinary costs of the OFLC and their policies around it - to have EVERY movie rated irrespective of number of audience is just restricting people in New Zealand with various foreign languages to a very large extent. I don't mind having movies rated for audience purpose, but they have to get some exceptions around limited audience movies or reduce costs / reduce time and effort required.

The law in my view is there to protect / serve a purpose but currently is restricting, encouraging piracy.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19064 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16304

Lifetime subscriber

#1177982 18-Nov-2014 15:03

People who have a huge need to control what other people do like to conflate things such as ‘terrorism’ and ‘security’. The way to deal with censorship is to ignore it, which modern technology fortunately makes easy to do. The protection of children is just another conflation. If you have any values at all you don’t let your kid do drugs, or run out into traffic, or go on sleepovers with friendly strangers. Likewise, you check what they do on their devices. Protection is the responsibility and the duty of caregivers. It is not the job of the State. Censorship has no place in a grown-up society.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

New World

Shop on-line at New World now for your groceries (affiliate link).

DravidDavid

1907 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 305

#1178046 18-Nov-2014 16:59

If I want a video game that is "banned" I'll just go find it on the internet. Anyone who wants a game, regardless of its rating will get their hands on it.

JimmyH

2898 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1554

#1178076 18-Nov-2014 18:48

KiwiNZ:

That affects only those involved, pornography, violence etc etc affects a great deal more.

OK, I'll take the bait.

I agree that violence (I mean *actual* violence, not movie, cartoon or video game violence) affects quite a few people, and is an issue of concern.

However, apart from the nasty underage stuff etc which isn't legally available in any jurisdiction (and is therefore outside the scope of this thread, which is about legal purchases from other jurisdictions), I'm curious to know who the great "great many" people who you believe are adversely affected by pornography actually are - including what the adverse effects are, and what the evidence for this is?

I have seen a bunch of claims like this pop up in the media over the years, usually backed by shrill quotations from activists but, if you will excuse the term, very little hard evidence.

Mostly it seems to be something that teenage boys look at for a few years, before they get bored with it, grow up, get a real GF, and move on. I find it a bit of a stretch to think that a few unclad pictures are somehow ripping our social fabric apart?

I also don't accept that playing Grand Theft Auto, or watching Maniac featuring Elijah Wood means that an adult will then go out and perpetrate violence.

I find it even more of a stretch that Maniac is banned here because (according to our fine censor NZ adults can't be trusted to watch it) - yet it's perfectly safe for adults to watch it in Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, the Philippines, Singapore, South Korea, the UK and the USA.

MikeAqua

8024 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3818

#1179330 19-Nov-2014 10:15

I can't help wondering if this is a revenue raising exercise. More things rated = more money for chief censors office.

Mike

psychnurse

329 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 37

ID Verified

Trusted

#1179335 19-Nov-2014 10:27

I wont be surprised that while he's in the role he tries to stamp his mark on torrent sites. Good luck with that one.

richms

29098 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10209

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1179493 19-Nov-2014 12:59

Of course it is revenue related.

I just want to see the end of this BS which means I cant sell a DVD or BR unless I still have the case with the ugly sticker.

Richard rich.ms

Apple TV

Stream your favourite shows now on Apple TV (affiliate link).

Nebbie

458 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 29

Trusted

#1179683 19-Nov-2014 16:23

richms: Of course it is revenue related.

I just want to see the end of this BS which means I cant sell a DVD or BR unless I still have the case with the ugly sticker.

I think this is why the Short film industry in New Zealand is pretty small and this is holding back future "Peter Jackson's" or is it there to try and protect the existing big players to prevent competition.

---------------------------------------------------------------
Nebukadnessar

1 | 2 | 3