Minister's decision on R rated games?

Mike Bantick
Monday, 31 March 2008 04:43

Opinion and Analysis

The Australian Attorneys-General have met and discussed the possibility of introducing an R18+ classification for video games.  Their decision?  Let the public decide.

As expected, the outfall from the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General (SCAG) debate over the R18+ classification of video games is a set of locked horns.

As reported by the Sydney Morning Herald , South Australian Attorney-General Michael Atkinson maintained his anti 18+ classification stance; "Games may pose a far greater problem than other media - particularly films - because their interactive nature could exacerbate their impact," he said.

This was opposed by all other state SCAG attendees, with Victorian Deputy Premier and Attorney-General being one of the more vocal advocates for the introduction of the new classification; "I believe that censorship laws should strike an appropriate balance between freedom of expression and community concerns about depictions that condone or incite violence, as well as the principle that minors should be protected from material likely to harm or disturb them," he said.

"It seems inconsistent that in Australia, adults are allowed to view 'adult only' films which have been classified R18+ by the Classification Board, but not computer games with an equivalent high level content."

Also citing the ability of modern gaming consoles to restrict access to inappropriate material via the built in parental controls.

There are many other good reasons to introduce the R18+ classification that will help protect children from undesirable material, and at the same time not restrict the freedom of choice of the average gamer (whose age is now 28 years old)