Saturday, 1 November 2008

South Australian AG restricts freedoms

Along the lines of what I've been blogging all week (in the censorship of the internet by the Australian Government), another interesting facet of censorship has almost slipped past my radar - video game classification and censorship in Australia (yet another thing I've blogged about in the past).

It has recently been reported (on that the good South Australian Attorney-General Michael Atkinson has stopped any further discussions about allowing an R18+ category for video games in Australia. Australia (for those that don't know), is the only developed country that does not have this type of classification.

What does that mean? It means that based on the opinions and the subjective views of a small group of people, Australians will not be able to access some video games which are freely available to the rest of the world. Arguments have come out that "children need to be protected". Simply put - CENSORSHIP.

Are these the same children that are accessing child pornography on the internet at will? Are these the same children that are ordering bomb making devices and instruction manuals on the internet at will? I'd like to actually meet some of these children. And most importantly, since when did every single parent in this world attempt to externalise all the sources of their child's misbehaving? It appears that when a child is good, we all say that the parent must have raised it well - if the child is bad, then it must be the fault of drugs, video games, violent films, and other external forces. Parenting is on of the hardest jobs on the planet - I am not trying to downplay it at all, but I think parents should take responsibility for their child's education and reasoning.

Lastly, violent video games are also educational - as I've stated before on this blog. Additionally I do remember, a few months back, that the media tried to find a link between a school yard shooting and the Grand Theft Auto franchise of video games. Something leaked out that the game was to be blamed for the assailant using lethal force in the schoolyard. It was later reported that this was not the case, but in fact, the victim had access to Grand Theft Auto, and not the shooter. I guess as humans, we all try to find links, even when they do not exist.

If I find out someway to voice protest against the lack of an R18+ classification, I'll blog it here.

"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"

No comments:

Post a Comment