January 20th 2007


  Buy Issue 2747
Qty:

Articles from this issue:

EDITORIAL: Bushfire crisis: a state of denial

AUSTRALIAN CONSTITUTION: High Court strikes blow against states' rights

CANBERRA OBSERVED: Kevin Rudd - a more formidable Opposition leader?

NATIONAL AFFAIRS: Government's challenges over AWB-Iraq saga

QUARANTINE: Government to permit NZ apples into Australia

SCHOOLS: Trojan horse in Classical Studies curriculum

STRAWS IN THE WIND: South Pacific blues / Diamonds are an African's worst friend / Modern Madama Melbas / Putin's gambit / The Balibo Five and all that

FILM CLASSIFICATION: Australia's pornography industry suffers setback

ABORTION: Suffering in silence no more

CINEMA: Faithful re-telling of the Christmas story

Pope's back-flip on Turkey (letter)

Lack of Darfur coverage (letter)

Discarding safeguards to pursue human cloning (letter)

BOOKS: GENOCIDE: A History, by William D. Rubinstein

BOOKS: A MISCELLANY OF MEN, by G.K. Chesterton

Books promotion page

survey link

FONT SIZE:

FILM CLASSIFICATION:
Australia's pornography industry suffers setback


by Angela Conway

News Weekly, January 20, 2007
A push by Australia's pornography industry to relax restrictions on sexually-explicit erotic films has suffered a rebuff at the hands of the Classification Review Board.

Reporting on the outcome is Angela Conway, who represented the Australian Family Association at the board's recent hearing.

One of the big players in Australia's pornography industry, the adult online retailer Adultshop.com, suffered a significant defeat when the Office of Film and Literature Classification (OFLC) review board rejected its appeal to grant the currently X-rated film Viva Erotica an R rating.

Had Adultshop.com's appeal succeeded, it would have set a precedent for other sexually-explicit material also to be placed in the R classification, thus rendering the X classification meaningless. This would effectively have ended the states’ ability to prohibit the sale, or public viewing, of pornographic films within their borders.

Adultshop.com has admitted that, in making its film Viva Erotica, it deliberately selected content typically covered by the X classification. It had requested a U.S. film production company to provide it with a smorgasbord of sexually-explicit scenes.

Explicit

Then, in order to support its argument for getting rid of the X classification, Adultshop.com commissioned an A.C. Nielsen online poll on Australian people's attitudes to the content and availability of films with explicit sexual or violent content.

After the results were reported in September, a series of full-page advertisements appeared in newspapers around the country, claiming that films containing non-violent explicit sex between consenting adults did not offend the majority of Australian adults and that, therefore, current restrictions on such films were inappropriate.

Significant sums of money are estimated to have been spent on the film, polling and advertising. Adultshop.com would have incurred an additional $9,000 for the appeal process itself, culminating in its appearance before the Classification Review Board, not to mention further fees for hiring an instructing solicitor and two barristers (including a well-known Sydney silk).

Adultshop.com also submitted to the hearing expert witness opinions from well-known pro-pornography academics, Catherine Lumby, Alan McKee and Katherine Albury. The NSW Council of Civil Liberties also made submissions in support of Adultshop.com.

Contesting Adultshop.com's appeal was the Australian Family Association, which provided its own submissions to the classifications hearing.

A lawyer from the Australian Government Solicitor's office also attended the hearing, although her involvement during the proceedings appeared to be as an observer only.

Adultshop.com's core argument was that sexually-explicit material ought only to be given an X classification if it was offensive to reasonable adults.

It insisted its own polling and research had demonstrated that films such as Viva Erotica were not offensive to the majority of adults and therefore negated the need for the X classification.

The R classification prohibits actual sex as a general rule. Adultshop.com, however, has argued that its opinion poll findings have trumped this general rule contained in the OFLC's Guidelines for the Classification of Films and Computer Games 2005. These guidelines, provided for by legislation - and agreed to by federal and state attorneys-general - reflect an ongoing process of public consultation, and aim to achieve consistent and accurate classification decisions.

The AFA argued that the current classification mechanisms - such as the classification guidelines, public consultations and the selection of board members - aim to ensure that the operation of the scheme continues to reflect community standards and attitudes.

Had Adultshop.com succeeded in its bid to abolish the X classification, it is not certain how explicit sexual content could not, over time, remain uncontaminated by violent and degrading material - an outcome about which the community has consistently raised concerns.

The AFA also sought to raise growing community fears that the greater availability of pornographic films has directly led to the increased incidence of children being exposed to undesirable material and sexual abuse.

Ross Fitzgerald, reporting on the appeal outcome in The Australian, summarised comments reportedly made by the federal Attorney-General, Phillip Ruddock, at an OFLC Christmas function, to the effect that we ought "to be careful of self-interest groups hijacking the censorship agenda by claiming to be the natural representatives of community standards". Fitzgerald concluded "most of those present had no doubt that he was alluding to religious fanatics and other fundamentalist hardliners." (The Australian, December 12, 2006).

The AFA has sought clarification from the Attorney General's office concerning the meaning of Mr Ruddock's comments, but so far has received no explanation.

To date, the review board has yet to publish the reasons for its decision. There are reports that Adultshop.com will seek to take its appeal against the decision to the Federal Court.

- Angela Conway is national research officer for the Australian Family Association.




























Join email list

Join e-newsletter list


Your cart has 0 items



Subscribe to NewsWeekly

Research Papers



Trending articles

NATIONAL AFFAIRS Cardinal rebuts commission's 'Get Pell' campaign

COVER STORY Anti-discrimination law validates Safe Schools

U.S. AFFAIRS First Brexit, now Trump: it's the economy, stupid!

INDUSTRY AND ENVIRONMENT Wikileaks reveals U.S, funding behind anti-coal campaign

COVER STORY QUT discrimination case exposes Human Rights Commission failings

FOREIGN AFFAIRS How the left whitewashed Fidel Castro

ANALYSIS What is possible to a Trump Whitehouse



News and views from around the world

19-year-old homeschooled pro-lifer wins Ontario election by landslide (Lianne Laurence)

Trump makes right choice for education secretary (National Review)

Transgender conformity (Katherine Kersten)

Sex education programs do not reduce teen pregnancy or STI rates (Philippa Taylor)

Photographer who captured Safe Schools founder harassing bystander shuts down business (Frank Chung)

Is the global middle class here to stay? (Samuel Rines)

Donald Trump could end America's new feudalism (Joel Kotkin)

It just got easier to find the perpetrators of Stalin's purges (David Filipov)

Castro's death eradicate bacillus of old-style Marxism (Gerald Warner)

Labor MP Terri Butler in QUT race case apology (Geoff Chambers)



























© Copyright NewsWeekly.com.au 2011
Last Modified:
December 2, 2016, 2:36 pm