Censorship can be a grey area and that is usually because what is under contention of being censored is far from black and white. The ramifications of this contention is of most interest to the Creative Industries as it may have a direct effect on the kind of content that governing bodies allow to be distributed, which in turn affects commercial viability and therefore production. There are the artists who may produce art for art’s sake, though there remains an indeterminate amount seeking remuneration from their efforts through sales and exhibitions. When their work or part of their work is suddenly deemed inappropriate by the law, the resulting controversy often results in publicity, a concept Art Photographer Bill Henson is no stranger to.
It is somewhat difficult to comprehend who or what is controlling the definition of art and its place in the cultural life of Australia. The manifestation of governmental and public opinion surrounding specific case studies can distinguish publicity from the constant reconstruction of culture, apropos the importance of the re-educating of governing bodies upholding the opinion of the public by the public themselves. Representing a fair spectrum, we have the publicly denounced work of Bill Henson and arguably one of the most controversial films of the decade, Ken Park, with its positive appraisal fiercely contesting only recently updated censorship laws. The battleground for these fights for cultural integrity is the media, the most public and least bias of course being the internet, though the internet in Australia is currently in the process of becoming censored itself! As though product from the creative industries were not being censored enough, the almost alarming concern the government is so compassionately exhibiting for all of our welfare may just be impacting industries in more ways than just what is appropriate to expose to a morally deteriorating or protection-dependant public.
Table of Contents
1. INTRODUCTION
2. CLASSIFICATION AND CENSORSHIP
3. FILM AND TELEVISION
4. The Internet
5. ART
6. CONCLUSION
Objectives and Topics
This work examines the complex relationship between government censorship, legislative classification, and its influence on the Australian creative industries, specifically exploring how legal restrictions impact artistic freedom, public perception, and commercial viability.
- Legal frameworks of censorship and classification in Australia
- Impact of classification on film and television distribution
- Controversies surrounding artistic expression and moral standards
- Economic and technical implications of internet filtering systems
- The role of media and public debate in shaping cultural policy
Excerpt from the Book
FILM AND TELEVISION
Since the establishment of the Office of Film and Literature Classification in 1988, there has been controversy surrounding the issues of censorship and many amendments made to State and Territory Legislation (Jackson, 2001). The current classifications are M, R, and X etc, but every now and then something emerges that cannot be classified, such as 2002 drama Ken Park. If it cannot be classified, then it can only be sold or exhibited if it abides by certain standards passed as law (Parliament of Australia, 2008), of which the film does not.
In a video embedded on sbs.com.au, Movie Show host Margaret Pomeranz offers viewers the opportunity to hear from the Directors of the film. In the video’s interview, Director Edward Lachman calls it ‘an affirmation for youth... that they’re going to survive...’ (SBS Film n.d.) Director Larry Clark expresses his outrage at past Hollywood classifications that allowed full-frontal female nudity but not male.
He wanted the film’s nudity and sex scenes to reflect the honesty of the stories portrayed, that these stories were typical of potentially either the viewer or somebody the viewer knows. (SBS Film n.d.) As honest as the film may be, it does contain some highly graphic scenes involving actors that appear to be under the age of eighteen, hence it was bestowed the classification of RC.
Summary of Chapters
INTRODUCTION: This chapter provides an overview of the grey areas in censorship, highlighting how legal definitions of "inappropriate" content impact the creative industries and provoke public controversy.
CLASSIFICATION AND CENSORSHIP: The author discusses the historical and legal shift from "censorship" to "classification" in Australia, focusing on the responsibility of the Classification Board to uphold public moral standards.
FILM AND TELEVISION: This section uses the case study of the film Ken Park to illustrate the conflicts between artistic intent, filmmaker outrage, and the regulatory powers that can result in an "RC" (Refused Classification) status.
The Internet: The chapter explores the controversial government proposals for mandatory internet filtering, analyzing the potential for reduced network speeds and the suppression of open, untainted public debate.
ART: This chapter focuses on the moral panic surrounding visual art, specifically analyzing the police seizure of Bill Henson’s photographs and the ensuing public and political discourse.
CONCLUSION: The author concludes that while regulation remains contentious, the interaction between artistic boundaries and government intervention serves as a catalyst for redefining cultural values and rights.
Keywords
Censorship, Classification, Creative Industries, Australia, Ken Park, Bill Henson, Internet Filtering, Artistic Freedom, Cultural Identity, Government Regulation, Media Ethics, Child Pornography, Public Debate, Moral Standards, Legislation
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core subject of this publication?
The work explores the intersection of government censorship, classification laws, and the Australian creative industries, analyzing how these factors constrain and shape artistic expression.
What are the primary thematic areas covered?
The main themes include legislative reform in film classification, the economic and social implications of internet censorship, and the friction between artistic freedom and moral accountability.
What is the main objective or research question?
The research seeks to understand how government-imposed content regulations affect the commercial and cultural landscape, and whether these actions serve to protect the public or hinder the evolution of cultural identity.
Which scientific or research methods are employed?
The author uses a qualitative approach, drawing on legal statutes, official government reports, contemporary media coverage, and critical case studies to analyze the evolution of censorship policies.
What is discussed in the main body of the work?
The body analyzes the transition from old-fashioned censorship to modern "classification," the legal ramifications for controversial films like Ken Park, the technical debate regarding ISP filtering, and the public outcry surrounding the photography of Bill Henson.
Which keywords best characterize this work?
Key terms include Censorship, Classification, Creative Industries, Internet Filtering, and Cultural Identity.
How does the author define the relationship between artists and the government?
The author suggests an adversarial yet necessary tension, where artists push cultural boundaries, which in turn pressures the government to continuously justify its role in upholding moral values.
What does the book suggest about the future of internet censorship in Australia?
It warns that mandatory filtering risks economic damage to businesses, degrades internet performance, and suppresses the very medium required for the public discussion that should precede such policy decisions.
- Quote paper
- Nick Birch (Author), 2009, The impact of censorship on creative industries, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.hausarbeiten.de/document/269669
