2. BTEC ExtendedDiplomainCreativeMediaProduction
Understand the regulation of the media sector
Use this workbook to help you with this learning outcome. There is some guidance
and further notes that you should read and then remove, replacing it with your own
answers.
Which regulatory body did you research?
BBFC (British Board of Film Classification)
What are they in charge of regulating?
The BBFC is in charge of censoring any potentially damaging content of films.
Their primary job is to monitor violence or any offensive material in films, as well
as to ensure audiences aren’t offended. They are responsible for classifying
cinema films and regulating content and output. They classify products by
labelling them with a letter or number (U, PG, 12, 12A, 15, 18).
The level of violence, profanity, sexual themes etc. within a film usually
determines how the product will be labelled. For example, Mad Max: Fury Road
(2015) was rated as a 15 for intense, violent sequences and disturbing images,
as well as scenes of nudity. Maze Runner: The Scorch Trials was rated PG-13
for prolonged sequences of violence and action, thematic elements, substance
use and profanity. The products were classified in this way because there are
certain elements that would certainly be considered inappropriate and
unsuitable for young children.
The BBFC is also in charge of providing a wide range of services to the Film
and Home Entertainment Industry; these cover trusted age rating content and
provide content advice for works released in the cinema, on DVD and Blu-Ray
etc. Their workflow process is committed to providing cost-effective
statutory/non statutory content labelling services and promoting and protecting
creative media industries, all the while ensuring that information related to their
services is clear and coherent.
When was the body set up? Why was it set up?
The BBFC was set up for multiple reasons. The primary reason was to observe
and regulate the media sector of film. Another reason was to ensure producers
have someone to answer to for the content of their works. Film industry
members who preferred to manage their own censorship rather than work with
local/national government established the organization in 1912 as the British
Board of Film Censors. Following the decision of the film industry that feared
that a largely unregulated censorship infrastructure could have economic
consequences, the BBFC began its own system of self-regulation.
The BBFC and the government were able to maintain their varying degree of
closeness throughout the years. During World War II, Germany protested due to
the depiction of Edith Cavell’s execution in British cinema, thus leading to the
3. BTEC ExtendedDiplomainCreativeMediaProduction
BBFC’s decision to have screenplays of films submitted to the organization
before shooting started. This paved the way for the main responsibility of the
BBFC today: to regulate the content and output of films In other words they
changed their responsibility. In 1984 the organization changed its name in an
attempt to reflect the fact that it plays a large role in the U.K. rather than just
censorship.
The BBFC has existed for a long time. It seems to share an association with
PEGI (Pan European Game Information) because it regulated certain games
and refused to classify them e.g. Carmageddon. This was before the sole
classification system for video games (PEGI) was formed in 2003.
How is this organisation funded? Why is it funded that way? Are there any
benefits or drawbacks to being funded this way?
The BBFC is a non-profit organization; it is funded privately, mainly through
standard charges made to those who submit films, video works etc. for
classification e.g. film producers/distributors. The organization works as an
independent, self-financing media content regulator and is part voluntary, part
statutory. The BBFC is funded in this way because, as a highly experienced
organization, they hope to provide a cost-effective and efficient classification
service within their statutory remit; they charge film distributors who wish to put
their films on screens.
Advantages: the BBFC are more likely to team up with other products or
brands to pool resources, their revenue will be increased so there is a wide
range in size of available grants and they have the freedom to provide
alternative forms of assistance e.g. software, materials, expertise. Being funded
privately is an advantage for the organization because they won’t receive
interference from other bodies or brands if they are teaming up with and
assisting them.
Disadvantages: the BBFC will tend to rely on popularity for future productions
i.e. they have limited influence. They will be less likely to cover all project costs,
therefore their budget is limited. Priorities within the BBFC could change rapidly
and continued support can be quite difficult to predict, therefore they cannot rely
on this. Due to decreased choices based on private funding, the BBFC might
base their decisions on bias rather than objective; this is an example of how the
funding might affect impartiality.
What powers does the regulatory body have? What can they do if
someone breaks their rules? Who gives these powers to the body?
(making references to specific cases could help you create a more detailed
answer. Finding specific information on when the body was set up and who
helped create it will allow you to find out who gives the body any powers.)
The BBFC’s powers consist primarily of regulating film within the U.K. whilst the
Video Recordings Act (established in 1984) is the basis upon which the BBFC
applies the test regarding whether or not a film is suitable for viewing. In other
words, the organization has the power to seize illegal video works e.g. DVDs
4. BTEC ExtendedDiplomainCreativeMediaProduction
and Video Games and provide evidence to help secure convictions under terms
of the VRA. The BBFC has the power to determine whether or not films can be
passed or banned, make cuts and alter categories.
If someone breaks their rules, the BBFC will reject a work and deny it a
certificate. Films containing material that falls foul of U.K. law, including violent
behaviour, sexual activity and illegal drugs will require strong consideration from
the BBFC as to whether or not they will allow it to be passed uncut. A good
example as to what the BBFC can do if a work contains content deemed too
offensive even for an 18 certificate is the case study for the 2009 horror film
‘Antichrist’ which contained ‘strong images of real sex, bloody violence and
strong disturbing gory images including an act of self-mutilation’. The BBFC’s
Guidelines stated that ‘the more explicit images of sexual activity are, the less
likely the film will be permitted at the 18 category’. Certain elements of the film
were felt to be exceptionally justified by the BBFC. For example, the relationship
of the characters is depicted as ‘graphic and unflinching, both psychologically
and physically’. This is a good example as it shows that the BBFC have the
irrefutable authority to analyse films and ensure they are not offensive or
unsuitable for viewing in which case they will take immediate action.
The BBFC usually operates under the Video Recordings Act 1984 (VRA) or the
Department of Culture, Media and Sport; these departments designate the
BBFC i.e. they give the organization these powers and provide them with the
means to investigate specific cases.
How does the industry use it?
The BBFC is a not-for-profit organization. Its income is solely from the fees it
charges for its services. The organization does not receive subsidiaries from the
film industry nor the government, possibly in an attempt to retain its own
independence as an important regulatory body. The BBFC measures the
running time of films/DVDs that are submitted for classification and it consults
the Department of Culture, Media and Sport before adjusting its fees to cover its
costs. The BBFC was set up in 1912 by the film industry, as an independent
body to bring a strong degree of uniformity to film nationality, until it got to the
point where the fact that the BBFC plays a far larger part in classification than
just censorship was realised.
The BBFC is not monitored by the Video Recordings Act; in fact it has agreed to
cooperate with LEAs (Law Enforcement Agencies) so it can assist them with
their own investigations. A good example of this is when the LEA requests the
BBFC to provide Certificates of Evidence for their investigations into compliance
failures. The BBFC requires individuals to submit their full, final edit in the
correct screen ratio with final sound mix films to them before they can be
released to the public. Individuals must also note that the version they submit to
the BBFC should be the same version they will release to the public. Different
bodies e.g. PEGI (Pan European Game Information) might only require their
respective industries to deal with complaints (in a retrospective manner) or
simply issue fines/create laws.
5. BTEC ExtendedDiplomainCreativeMediaProduction
How can the public use it?
The BBFC has a customer/public-facing arm that allows the public to interact
with the organization. This is called the BBFCinsight. An important characteristic
of the BBFC is ensuring that their classification standards meet the expectations
of the public i.e. through its decisions to take into account what the public finds
acceptable at each age category. This would strongly benefit the public because
they are unlikely to be offended by content appearing in a 15 or even a 12A
category that would be considered appropriate for the 18 category and therefore
will avoid making complaints to the film industry. The BBFC intervene with
disputes between the industry and the public in this way. The BBFC often
carries out consultation exercises with the public in order to obtain knowledge
on public opinions about ratings of films before they are released. In this way,
the public interacts with the organization as they assist with making sure the
BBFC is fully aware of whether or not their classification standards meet public
concerns.
In response to the attitudes and opinions of the public, the BBFC makes
attempts to adjust its standards and criteria. These standards mainly detail the
content that is acceptable at each age category (U to R18). They provide
consumers with large amounts of information regarding the content of films; this
will assist people in making informed decisions before viewing a film. In this
way, the BBFC engages with the public; the public also interact with the BBFC
through something called BBFCinsight. This consists of short content advice,
usually on the packaging of a DVD, with an explanation for why any individual
title received the classification. Consumers are encouraged to check
BBFCinsight, which is also a free app and a website to achieve a greater
understanding of the issues of a title e.g. violence and profanity.
Therefore, the BBFCinsight is the public facing arm that allows for consumers to
obtain advice and guidance, as well as providing them with the opportunity to
file a complaint. The public can use this body via different websites e.g.
www.bbfc.co.uk. as well as apps (the BBFC App) and podcasts that feature
guest interviews, discussions and current classification issues within the
organization.
What kinds of regulatory issues does your body deal with the most?
The BBFC operates under their own Classification Guidelines which possess
key principles; these are to protect viewers considered vulnerable e.g. children
from violent, offensive and potentially harmful content in films, as well as to
encourage customers to make informed viewing decisions as they are free to
choose what they see. This shows that the organization take into account
consumer choice rather than just censorship. The BBFC is not subject to the
Freedom of Information Act 2000, however it does perform public functions
when it comes to classifying works. For example, the organization is happy to
provide information about its classification decisions, however it is not obliged to
respond to any requests by the public. The BBFC states that works should be
able to reach the widest audience that is appropriate for the themes they
possess and that the content remains within the law and is not potentially
harmful or offensive in any way.
6. BTEC ExtendedDiplomainCreativeMediaProduction
The BBFC works on several major principles in determining the age rating of a
given work (U to R18). These mainly consist of ensuring the material is not in
conflict with the law and is not in combination with different content that could
cause harm or copy an existing work of a similar nature. The harm could relate
to desensitizing a potential viewer to the effects of violence, encouraging a
dehumanised view of others, or reinforcing unhealthy fantasies and even
degrading the viewer’s level of empathy. The organization needs to ensure that
the material is appropriate for the age group concerned and acceptable for a
broad public opinion. For example, if a work has a generally dark and unsettling
tone, it might be highly disturbing for the audience and cause harm. Apparently,
threat has a more significant impact than violence and the BBFC are clearly
shown to be concerned for the wellbeing of the public. This is why they deal with
issues
The organization takes into account levels of violence, focus on sex or sex
references, drugs, profanity and discriminative behaviour in films. The
organization will also be required to make decisions referencing the best
interests of academic and public opinion research. They will also consider if the
content of a film (or even a video game) is potentially harmful, in which case
they will order the production company of a certain work to make cuts. Based on
all of this information, the highest priority of the BBFC is censorship of films.
Case Studies:
Find a case study which demonstrates the regulatory body working in practice.
A Serbian Film
The 2010 Serbian language drama, A Serbian Film, was submitted to the BBFC
for classification due to the Westminster Council receiving complaints about a
proposed screening of the film, which did not yet have a certificate, at the
London Fright Fest on August 29. There were rumours that the film possessed
extreme content, thus leading to the Council taking the unusual step of directing
that the film be classified by the BBFC before screening was to take place. The
BBFC examined A Serbian film on 13 August; they had a limited amount of time
to analyse the controversial film and make a decision before the scheduled
screening in London, so they were required to be quick. The BBFC’s Head of
Policy, the Director, the Vice Presidents and the President saw the film. A wide
range of views were expressed about the film to the point where the decisions
they made conflicted with the Guidelines of the organization.
The main issues the BBFC had to face with A Serbian Film were scenes
juxtaposing graphic images of sex and sexualised violence with images of
children, all of which had the tendency to endorse or eroticize the behaviour.
Even though the filmmakers tried to convince the organization that they avoided
exposing young actors to anything indecent, A Serbian Film suffered numerous
cuts which totalled to four minutes and eleven seconds before it achieved a
classification. This shows that the BBFC takes into account issues of context
and whether it considers scenes of sexual violence to ‘endorse or eroticize
7. BTEC ExtendedDiplomainCreativeMediaProduction
sexual assault’.
Find a second case study which demonstrates the regulatory body working in
practice.
The Human Centipede II (Full Sequence)
In June 2011, the BBFC refused a classification for the horror film The Human
Centipede 2. The other two films in the trilogy (First Sequence and Final
Sequence) passed uncut at 18, even though their concepts were tasteless and
disgusting. The concept of the first film could have grabbed the attention of the
BBFC and the organization might have even considered refusing to classify it,
until the sequel proved to be far more disturbing and graphic. The 2nd film
revolves around a mentally challenged man who watches the first film and
becomes obsessed with it, later putting the idea of the Human Centipede into
practice. Unlike the first film which focused on a medical experiment with debate
on whether or not its unwilling participants will be able to escape, the sequel is
shown from the perspective of the main character with the idea of the Human
Centipede as he degrades, humiliates, mutilates, tortures and eventually
murders his naked victims. In this film, there was little attempt to portray any of
the characters as anything other than objects to be brutalized, humiliated and
tortured for the pleasure of the main character as well as the audience.
There was a strong focus on pain, perversity and sexual pleasure throughout
the film. The BBFC, after examining the film, judged that the film could fall foul
of the Obscene Publications Act and ‘poses a real risk that harm is likely to be
caused to potential viewers’, therefore the organization rejected the Human
Centipede 2 which was refused a classification, effectively banning the film in
the United Kingdom. This meant that supplying the film on any platform,
anywhere in the United Kingdom, would be illegal. However, after the filmmaker
made a series of compulsory cuts, the film was eventually given an 18
certificate. According to the BBFC, the OPA prohibits the publication of works
that have a tendency to deprave or corrupt a significant proportion of those
likely to see them. It was initially considered that due to the hugely unacceptable
content throughout the entire film, cuts were not an option. However, after cuts
were made, the film received a classification.
8. BTEC ExtendedDiplomainCreativeMediaProduction
Regulation:
You should answer the following questions using the information you have
gained so far in the unit to help you provide examples to support your opinions.
You may also wish to undertake further research to help you produce detailed
answers.
Should there be regulation of the media?
It is important that regulatory bodies, not just the BBFC, but PEGI (Pan
European Game Information) and OFCOM (Office of Communications) exist.
Different types of media, including films and video games, could contain content
that is likely to offend or cause harm to potential viewers/players etc. Based on
the case studies for certain works such as A Serbian Film and Human
Centipede II, my opinion is that a large amount of people could be offended and
would be very likely to complain. If there was no regulation of the media
whatsoever, those who are considered vulnerable e.g. children and sensitive
adults will be free to watch films that should be rated 18, in which case it is
illegal for anyone under 18 to see a film at a cinema that is rated in that manner
today. Also, filmmakers and film production companies would not feel limited to
what they can create or portray in their works; this would be a big issue due to
presence of obscene publications.
Should regulators be independent?
If regulatory bodies were independent, they would monitor their own adherence
to legal, ethical and safety standards, free from external control and not subject
to the authority of someone or something. In other words, they would be self-
sufficient. In my opinion, regulators should not be independent because they
could become unconventional; a good example of this would be that PEGI, as
an important organization which regulates video games, might no longer
conform to what they usually do or the methods they utilize to regulate games or
deal with any issues. They may even abandon their role in providing
classifications for video games, primarily due to functioning in a completely
different way than before.
Another reason why bodies should not be independent is because they may rely
on themselves to solve any issues they might have; this could make things
difficult. For example, the BBFC is independent; they have no external
organization e.g. the government to regulate them, or to check that they are
actually doing their job properly, but the BBFC is functioning in a professional
manner. In other bodies, self-reliance could result in tension throughout their
members and things could be far more difficult for them, therefore they might be
better off working under the government.
Certain bodies will not depend on anyone else for livelihood or subsistence due
to being independent; they may attempt to support themselves at a minimal
level, however they wouldn’t be able to maintain the state of remaining in force
or in effect. This could have a significant impact on the way they operate, and if
any issues occur, they might not have any external body to turn to for
assistance. The BBFC was initially created as a censorship board by the film
9. BTEC ExtendedDiplomainCreativeMediaProduction
industry, however its role was far more important than just censorship so it went
on to function as an independent body, never with the regulation of the
government.
The reason why attempts at self-regulation could ultimately fail could be
conflicts of interest, in other words the two different aims of two different parties
could be incompatible. In this case, it would be between the regulatory body and
the public. The results of failure could be disastrous; and an external
organization might be assigned the duty of policing them. These bodies may
even take to using highly punitive messages against them.
Extension tasks
Answer just one of the following questions with a long form answer using
specific examples to help support your opinions.
Why do we allow regulatory bodies to censor media products like films
and video games?
We allow regulatory bodies e.g. the BBFC to provide censorship on certain
types of media including films, mostly for the sake of those who could be
considered vulnerable e.g. young children. Films and video games can be
highly offensive and pose a harm to potential viewers due to their content. This
relates to the level of violence and profanity in films and video games, which
could offend lots of people. Censorship plays an important role in preventing
something that is potentially upsetting or offensive, harmful, politically incorrect
or inconvenient from being consumed by the public. Industry bodies are there to
censor products and we allow them to do this so that severe forms of violence
do not influence younger viewers e.g. to commit violent acts or think it is okay.
Young viewers e.g. children should be considered because of the fact that they
are at the age where anything disturbing they see could be hard-wired into their
brains and this could have an effect on their later years in terms of attitude and
development.
For example, video games can consist of strong images of violence as well as
sexual scenes; especially games such as Grand Theft Auto. The characteristics
of this specific video game could be potentially upsetting and/or harmful to
audiences, therefore regulatory bodies are required to step in. They are allowed
to classify a work; this ensures that viewers understand the type of content
which might appear in a game rated 15 and another with a rating of 18; these
two contrast with each other because the levels of violence would be different,
as would the amount of profanity or sexual scenes. If there were no ratings for
films or video games, certain viewers (those who are not deemed mature
enough to decide what they can watch e.g. young teenagers) could come
across offensive or inappropriate content involuntarily. Specific regulatory
bodies such as the BBFC are even allowed to operate independently i.e. without
government interference so they can classify, censor and investigate works,
mostly in the best interests of the public.