Smallest mainland state right to censor games for Australia?

Stan Beer
Monday, 31 March 2008 16:44

Opinion and Analysis

The question therefore becomes whether exposing a minor to an adult video game is roughly equivalent to exposing a minor to an adult movie. This is not an easy question to answer but there is at least anecdotal evidence to suggest that the two mediums are quite different.

Movie watching is a physically and mentally passive experience while video game playing is very much an active - an interactive - experience that engages the participant on a much higher sensory level.

The act of watching a simulated sex, violent confrontation or realistic horror scene in a movie can indeed have a substantial emotional effect on a viewer. There have even been reports of violent crimes being inspired by the participants watching a particular movie.

Anyone who has played a video game, however, can attest to the fact that they are something else. There is much more involvement in the simulated action by a video game player than a movie watcher. Especially in the sights of anti-game advocates are the shooting games which, in the wake of multiple random shooting massacres around the world but especially in the US, have been described by opponents as killing simulators.

However, whether video games are indeed training disturbed individuals to be expert rapid-fire marksmen who then go on to massacre innocent people is beside the point in this particular argument. There are already more than enough MA15+ sophisticated shoot 'em up games on the market that have been accused of being at least partially responsible for past massacres.

The question is: do we need an even higher rating for games that involve players in even more explicit simulated acts of sex and violence that would otherwise be banned by censors because they present a danger to children?

As far as Michael Atkinson is concerned, the answer is no because he believes these games should not be available to anyone. On moral grounds he may be right. However, this cannot be Mr Atkinson's call because 93% of Australians do not live in South Australia and did not have any say on whether he or his government were elected.

On the other hand, there are many outside South Australia who do agree with Mr Atkinson's principled stand, which is why public consultation on the issue is the only answer.