The King's Speech

12A

strong language. was classified a 15 but brought down to 12A with no cuts after an appeal.

• Historical context.
• strong language is not aggressive, sexual or directed at any person.
• it also occurs in rapid succession and is infrequent.

GUIDELINES
CONTEMPORARY CONTROVERSIES

The Simpsons

2007

nudity, drugs, imitable behaviour, rated "PG"

• it is a recognisable cartoon; "The Simpsons" is known for outrageous jokes that can be read on different levels by different age groups.
• child nudity but no sexual context and again, it's "The Simpsons"

GUIDELINES
CONTEMPORARY CONTROVERSIES

The Exorcist

1973

accused of having psychologically damaging effects on young people. The Festival of Light mounted a campaign against alleged links between teenage suicide and screenings of the film. Was classified with a 'X'. Decision overturned by a number of local authorities.

• the 70s was a time of economic downturn social unrest - people weren't going to just go along with the decision of the BBFC - protests and campaigns made against them.

HISTORY OF FILM REGULATION

Alfie

Lewis Gilbert
1960s

passed uncut even with the theme of abortion.

• showed that public tolerance was increasing and the BBFC was responding to this change.

HISTORY OF FILM REGULATION

The Wild One

Laslo Benedek
1954

concerns about juvenile delinquents delayed classification. Board described the contents as 'a spectacle of unbridled hooliganism'. Repeated attempts to secure classification. Some local authorities overturned the Board's rejection. Riots in English seaside towns were cited as providing justification for the Board's decision.

• BBFC was acting as a censor instead of a classifier.
• era in which the BBFC wanted to be seen as a "protector of public morals".
• BBFC felt that films were the cause of teenage crime - still similar to today, "Harm Test", people are quick to blame films and the media for the behaviour of young people.

HISTORY OF FILM REGULATION

Smiles of a Summer Night

Ingmar Bergman
1956

dialogue cuts made because sex references were considered too risque

• references to sex weren't acceptable in society.
• BBFC was acting as a censor instead of a classifier.
• era in which the BBFC wanted to be seen as a "protector of public morals"

HISTORY OF FILM REGULATION

How is the BBFC different?

The BBFC is different to how it was in the past because it is way more lenient than it once was. They have changed their Guidelines according to the way the public has changed their views and the way society has changed.
The BBFC is way more known and public than it once was. The websites it has on offer means that the public can easily access the information it has to offer

2000

1999
The Board embarked on an extensive consultation process to gauge public opinion before the compilation of new Classification Guidelines which showed that the major concerns were drugs and violence which sex caused less concern than previously.

A whole generation of European film makers seemed determined to push the boundaries of what was sexually acceptable on the screen.

2001
Ofcom became the new regulator for television, radio, telecommunications and wireless communications services. Film regulation is still the responsibility of the BBFC.

2002
The new '12A' category replaced the '12' category for film only.

2003
The children's BBFC website was set up

2004
The majority of film distributors agreed to include the Consumer Advice in publicity for all films.

David Cooke was appointed Director.

2005
BBFC published a new set of Guidelines based on an even more extensive research programme than the one which resulted in the 2000 Guidelines. Public support for the BBFC went up from 59% in 2000 to 63% in 2004.
The Student's BBFC website was set up.

2006
Landmark '18' certificates were awarded to two high-profile films containing explicit images of real sex.

2007
Introduction of the Parent's BBFC website.

2009
The BBFC published its most recent set of Guidelines based on another detailed public consultation exercise conducted in 2008-2009. 62% of the general public felt that the BBFC was effective.

1990

Public concern about the influence of videos has continued and there have been periodic calls for stricter standards most notably following the Jamie Bulger case. Public opinion rallied behind calls for stricted regulation.

1994
Parliament supported an amendment to the Video Recordings Act, contained in the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act which requires the Board to consider specific issues and the potential for harm when making video classification decisions.

The BBFC started to receive some of the stronger video games for formal classification which necessitated a different way of examining.

1995
Controversy erupted about Larry Clark's film Kids which some critics described as child pornography.

1997
BBFC's president Lord Harewood stepped down after 12 years in the job. His replacement Andreas Whittam Smith announce his intention to steer the BBFC towards a greater 'openess and accountability'.

1998
The publication of the BBFC's first set of classification Guidelines following a series public 'roadshows' in which public views were canvassed and the launching of  a BBFCwebsite.

1999
Robin Duval became the Director and standards continued to evolve with due consideration of recent relevant research, shifts in public attitudes and the developments in comparable media such as terrestrial, satellite and cable television and the internet.

The removal of the BBFC's controversial policy on oriental weaponry. Emphasis was changed towards a policy of being concerned about the glamorisation of any weapons especially at the junior categories.

1980

1980
Tinto Brass' Caligula - problems occured after shooting and Guccione added some of his own material which was hard-core pornography.
The film arrived in the UK with the reputation of being 'the most controversial film of the eighties' and it was seized by Customs and Excise officials and was then seen by the BBFC together with lawyers and Custom officials so any footage that was in danger of breaching UK law could be removed.
After 6 months, the film was released with a 'X' certificate and passed '18' uncut in 2008.

1982
'A' was changed to 'PG'
'AA' was changed to '15'
'X' was changed to '18'
A new category 'R18' was introduced which permitted more explicit sex films to be shown in members-only clubs.

The development of the video recorder created new anxieties about home viewing of feature films as there was no requirement that videos should be classified. VIDEO NASTIES

1984
The outcome of this concern was new legislation introduced as a private member's Bill by Conservative MP, Graham Bright. The Video Recordings Act made it an offence for a video work to be supplied if it has not been classified or to supply a classified work to a person under the age specified in the certificate.

1985
The Board was designated as the authority with responsibility for classification .
At request of the industry, the 'Uc' was introduced for video only to identify works specifically suitable for very young children to watch alone.

1989
The BBFC introduced the '12' certificate on film to bridge the huge gap between 'PG' and '15'. The first film ti be given a '12' rating was Batman.

1970

It was recognized that teenagers had specific concerns of their own which ought to be reflected in the category system.

1970
Introduction of the 'AA' was finally approved by local authorities and the industry. The minimum age for 'X' certificate films was raised from 16 to 18. The 'A' category was split to create 'A' (which permitted admissions of children aged 5 or over whether accompanied or not but warned parents that the film may contain unsuitable material) and 'AA' (allowed admission of those over 14, but not under 14, whether accompanied or not.

1971
Stephen Murphy became Secretary of the Board.

1973
The Exorcist was accused of having psychologically damaging effects on young people and classified with an 'X' but the decision of the BBFC was overturned by a number of local authorities.

1975
James Ferman became Secretary of the Board and the first film that he looked at was The Texas Chain Saw Massacre which his predecessor had already refused to classify shortly before his departure. Ferman agreed that the violence and terrorisation in the film was unacceptable.

During his time, Ferman permitted increasingly explicit sexual material whilst clamping down on sadistic violence and sexual violence. His attitudes and policies reflected a more general shift of public concern during the 70s.

1977
The extension to the Obscene Publications Act gave the BBFC more latitude when considering depictions of sex in films since they now had to be considered 'as a whole'

1960

1960
Challenges to the Obscene Publications Act (1959) in cases such as the successful defence of the novel Lady Chatterley's Lover suggested a strong shift in public opinion when a jury acquitted this work.

1964
Violence in Walter Grauman's Lady In A Cage proved too strong for the Board and the film was rejected on the grounds that it could 'invite and stimulate juvenile violence and anti-social behaviour by young people'

1966
Lewis Gilbert's Alfie was passed uncut with the remark that it contained a 'basically moral theme' in spite of some misgivings at the Board about the abortion theme.
Attitudes to sexuality were on the change and Trevelyan claimed that the BBFC had never banned the subject of homosexuality from the screen but 'the subject was one that would probably not be acceptable to the British audience'

Public tolerance increased increased in the sweeping social change of the 60s, films became more explicit but in practice the Board still requested cuts, usually to verbal and visual 'indeceny'

1967
Arthur Penn's Bonnie and Clyde with its notorious denouement of the charismatic outlaws being riddled with bullets was passed 'X' uncut in 1967.

1950

1951
Controversial subjects on film were accommodated in the UK under the new 'X' category and it incorporated the formed advisory 'H' category given to horror films.
The growth of television ownership eroded the adult'family cinema audiences and the popular Press suggested that there was increased teenage criminality when in fact there was no evidence of a teenage crime wave.

1954
Concerns about juvenile delinquents delayed the classification of Laslo Benedek's film The Wild One for thirteen years because the Board described the contents as 'a spectacle of unbridled hooliganism'. Riots in English seaside towns involving Mods and Rockers (Margate and Clacton in 1964) were cited as providing justification for the Board's continuing objections to the film.

1955
Richard Brook's The Blackboard Jungle was submitted and the first reaction of Arthur Watkins was to reject it on the grounds that 'filled as it is with scenes of unbridled revolting hooliganism it would, if shown in this country, provoke the strongest criticism from parents...and would have the most damaging and harmful effect on young people'
The rejection decision was challenged by MGM and the film was viewed again by the Board President which resulted in another rejection.
A series of negotiations that began, resulting in substantial cuts for an 'X' certificate.

1956
The Board felt able to offer an 'X' with cuts to details of drug-preparation and some incidental violence.
Arthur Watkins resigned and was replaced as Secretary by John Nichols.

1958
John Trevelyan became Board Secretary.
Upheaval in social and class barriers that followed the war is reflected in films like Jack Clayton's Room At The Top which generated much amicable negotiation between John Trevelyan and Romulus Films on the language used in the film.

1912-1949

1912
The BBFC was established.

1916
T.P. O'Connor was appointed President of the BBFC. He summarised the Board's Policy by listing 43 grounds for deletion laid down for the guidance of examiners which shows the strictness felt necessary if the Board was to earn the trust of the public and relevant bodies.

YEARS BETWEEN THE WARS
Material that caused concern included horror and gangster films as well as those that dealt with aspects of sexuality. Some councils were barring children from films that were classified 'A'
London County Council and Manchester City Council banned children from Frankenstein (1931) although the sequence in which the monster drowns a small girl had already been cut.

1932
The advisory category 'H' (for horror) was agreed to indicate the potential unsuitability for children of the horror theme.

1948
Arthur Watkins was appointed Secretary to the Board under the Presidency of Sir Sidney Harris. Both men came from the Home Office. Watkins and Harris formulated new terms of reference for the Board based on three principles:

• was the story, incident or dialogue likely to impair the moral standards of the public by extenuating vice or extenuating vice or crime or depreciating moral standards?
• was it likely to give offence to reasonable minded cinema audiences?
• what effect would it have on children?

The effect on children was of major importance  since no category that excluded children. As 'adults only' category was increasingly seen as desirable, not only to protect children, but as an extension of the freedom of film-makers to treat adult subjects in an adult fashion.

BBFC Seminar

It was great to have one of the actual examiners come to talk to us. Although we had already gone through most of the information, it was insightful to hear it from a person that is involved in the process each and every day.
I knew that the BBFC classified games but was surprised to hear that they actually have to play the game in order to classify it.

It was also interesting to learn that they have no say in what they have to watch and classify. It is all done randomly. I enjoyed watching the clips especially the scene from "The Killer Inside Me" which was passed at "18" although it is VERY disturbing.

PCC Seminar

I found the seminar very interesting on Wednesday. It was great to see where they actually work and it was totally different to how I imagined it. I thought it would be a very uninviting serious place but was surprised to find it to be very friendly; definitely the kind of place I would go if I wanted to complain about the press.

Something I didn't expect was that if something discriminatory is written against a specific individual, the complaint will not be upheld unless that specific individual complains.

I liked the examples we were shown and how the reasons why decisions were made were clearly explained to us. It was great that the woman giving the seminar actually worked in the PCC and was involved in dealing with complaints.

The PCC Code of Practice

1. Accuracy
2. Opportunity to reply
3. Privacy *
4. Harassment *
5. Intrusion into grief or shock
6. Children *
7. Children in sex cases *
8. Hospitals *
9. Reporting of Crime *
10. Clandestine devices and subterfuge *
11. Victims of sexual assault
12. Discrimination
13. Financial journalism
14. Confidential sources
15. Witness payments in criminal trials
16. Payment to criminals *

A clause that is marked with a * means that there will be exceptions to the clause if it can be demonstrated to be in the public interest.

The public interest includes, but is not confined to:

1. Detecting or exposing crime or serious impropriety.
2. Protecting public health and safety.
3. Preventing the public from being misled by an action or statement of an individual or organisation.

The Press Complaints Commission

What does the PCC do?

• independent body which deals with complaints about editorial content of newspapers and magazines in the UK and their websites.
• follows a sixteen clause "Code of Practice" which act as the "rules" for editors and journalists.
• investigates complaints from people who believe the Code has been broken.
• the PCC acts as a mediator to help the editor and complainant agree on a way to resolve the dispute.
• the Commission can also issue a formal judgement (adjudication) on the complaint.

How is the PCC funded?

• funded through a body called the Press Standards Board of Finance which collect money from newspapers and magazines in the UK.
• each newspaper and magazine contribute an amount in proportion to the number of people who buy it and read it.
• members of the public do not have to pay for the service directly or indirectly (through takers)
• the PCC doesn't receive any money from the Government.

What is the history of the PCC?

• set up in 1991 and replaced the Press Council.
• during the 1980s, some publications failed to observe the basic ethics of journalism ad this led many MPs to lose confidence in the Press Council as they thought it was weak and ineffective.
• some politicians believed it would be better to have a new regulatory authority that would come under government control and have the power to enforce legal punishments on the press.
• the PCC was set up as a "last saloon" type scenario and it has continued to grow in respect and influence.

Who complains to the PCC and what do they complain about?

• the PCC accepts complaints from anyone who believes an article involving them breaches the Code in some way.
• in 2007, 95.8% of complaints were from ordinary members of the public. (1.5% came from people in the public eye)
• the Code provides special protection to particularly vulnerable groups of people such as children, hospital patients and those at risk of discrimination.
• majority of complaints are about regional newspapers.

Why is the PCC important?

• the press should not be subject to stringent controls by law or by government.
• the PCC, being an independent, voluntary organisation, protects againt this possibility simply by its existence.
• being free doesn't mean the press should not be accountable, there has to be a balance.
• the PCC is committed to protecting the public by ensuring that when the rules are broken it can put things right as soon as possible.
• it is FAST, FREE and FAIR.

UK's current system of film classification

PROs

• protects children from what they're not supposed to see yet.
• set guidelines let film makers know what to follow.
• parents can't complain as all films are classified.
• can compare films that have similar classifications.
• examiners represent a diverse society which makes it relevant to society.
• the guidelines are updated every year.

CONs

• assumes that all children are the same.
• makes children think the world is perfect.
• bland films.
• films can change the boundaries for classification.
• films take on role of moral guidance.
• age is not a key factor in determining response to a film.

Do you think the way films are regulated is sensible, useful to society and achieves its aim of protecting the vulnerable and upholding the law?

In some ways, I think the way the films are regulated is very sensible and useful. The fact that the examiners are diverse means that most opinions of society are heard. Although people in a society break rules, it is important for there to be rules and guidelines. 

Regulation does manage to protect the vulnerable however, if the rules aren't taken into account then they become useless. It is becoming increasingly easier for 12 year olds to watch a '15' in cinema as ages are not regularly checked. In my own personal experience, I managed to watch an '18' film in cinema when I was 16 years old.

Also, if a child is unable to watch the film in cinema as they are too young, there is nothing stopping their parents buying the DVD for them or for the child to just watch it online. With digital TV being so common in homes, the child can easily purchase films they should not be watching via the "on demand" facilities as long as they know the PIN code.

Is there anything you think could be done to improve the system? 

In my opinion, there isn't much that could be done to improve the system as I think that the problems don't lie mostly within the rules but mostly whether the rules are being upheld. Also, I think that classifying by age is probably not the best way as younger generations are becoming more desensitized but I couldn't suggest another way for the BBFC to do it.

However, there are a lot of services that the BBFC provides that people don't know about. For example, there is a website where parents can find information on the age ratings and why certain films received certain classifications.

Differences between the ratings

U > PG

• References to illegal drugs or drug misuse as long as it is innocuous or carries a suitable anti-drug message.
• Frightening sequences that are not prolonged or intense.
• Mild bad language.
• Sexual activity may be implied but should be discreet and infrequent. Mild sex references and innuendo only.
• More serious issues such as domestic violence can be featured.
• Moderate violence, without detail.

PG > 12A

• Discriminatory language or behavior cannot be endorsed by the work as a whole.
• Misuse of drugs must be infrequent and not be glamorized or give instructional detail.
• Moderate physical and psychological threat permitted, disturbing sequences must not be frequent or sustained.
• Dangerous behavior should not dwell on detail which could be copied, or appear pain or harm free.
• Moderate language is allowed.
• Nudity is allowed but sexual context must be brief and discreet.
• Sexual activity may be briefly and discreetly portrayed.
• Mature themes are acceptable.
• Sexual violence may only be implied or briefly and discreetly indicated.

12A > 15

• Drug taking may be shown but film as a whole must not promote or encourage drug misuse.
• Strong threat and menace are permitted unless sadistic or sexualized.
• Frequent use of strong language.
• Nudity allowed in sexual context but without strong detail.
• Sexual activity may be portrayed without strong detail.
• No theme is prohibited.
• Violence can be strong but should not dwell on infliction of pain or injury

15 > 18

• An 18 must not breach any laws.
• An adult should be able to choose their own entertainment.
• Sexualized violence but cannot cause harm or risk to society.
• Explicit images of sexual activity may be permitted for educational purposes.
• Sex works containing only material which may be simulated are generally passed at '18'.

18 > R18

The guidelines for R18 are pretty similar to those of 18. However, they focus more on the issue of consent as in R18 works, they are allowed to show real sex. R18 works can only be shown in specially licensed cinemas and supplied in licensed sex shops.

"R18"

"shown only in specially licensed cinemas, or supplied only in licensed sex shops, and to adults of not less than 18 years old"


Following content is not acceptable:

• any material which is in breach of the criminal law.
• material (including dialogue) likely to encourage interest in sexually abusive activity (for example, pedophilia, incest or rape) which may include adults role-playing as non-adults.
• portrayal of any sexual activity which involves lack of consent.
• infliction of pain or acts which may cause lasting physical harm, whether real or (in a sexual context) simulated.
• penetration by any object associated with violence or likely to cause physical harm.
• any sexual threats, humiliation or abuse which does not form part of a clearly consenting role-playing game. Strong physical or verbal abuse, even if consensual is unlikely to be acceptable.

"18"

"suitable only for adults. Adults are free to choose their own entertainment"


Exceptions are most likely in the following areas:

• where material is in breach of criminal law or has been created through the commission of a criminal offense.
• where material or treatment appears to the BBFC to risk harm to individuals or through their behavior to society. This may include portrayals of sexual or sexualized violence which might eroticize or endorse sexual assault.
• where there are more explicit images of sexual activity which cannot be justified by context.

Intervention may be more frequent than for cinema films in the case of video works (including video games) which may be more accessible to younger viewers.

• where sex materials genuinely seeks to inform and educate in matters such as human sexuality, safer sex and health, explicit images of sexual activity may be permitted.
• Sex works are works which primary purpose is sexual arousal or stimulation. Sex works containing only material which may be simulated are generally passed '18'. Sex works containing clear images of real sex, strong fetish material, sexually explicit animated images, or other very strong sexual images will be confined to the 'R18' category.

"15"

"suitable only for 15 years and over."


Discrimination
Work as a whole must not endorse discriminatory language or behavior.

Drugs
Drug taking may be shown but the film as a whole must not promote or encourage drug misuse. Misuse of easily accessible drugs and highly dangerous substances (aerosols or solvents) is unlikely to be acceptable.

Horror
Strong threat and menace permitted unless sadistic or sexualized.

Imitable Behavior
Dangerous behavior (hanging, suicide and self-harming) should not dwell on detail which could be copied. Easily accessible weapons should not be glamorized.

Language
May be frequent use of strong language. Strongest terms may be acceptable if justified by the context. Aggressive or repeated use of strongest language is unlikely to be acceptable.

Nudity
Nudity may be allowed in a sexual context but without strong detail. No constraints on nudity in a non-sexual or educational context.

Sex
Sexual activity may be portrayed without strong detail. May be strong verbal references to sexual behavior, but strongest references are unlikely to be acceptable unless justified by context. Works whose primary purpose is sexual arousal or stimulation are unlikely to be acceptable.

Theme
No theme is prohibited provided the treatment is suitable for 15 year olds.

Violence
May be strong but should not dwell on the infliction of pain or injury. Strongest gory images are unlikely to be acceptable. Strong sadistic or sexualized violence is also unlikely to be acceptable. May be detailed verbal references to sexual violence but any portrayal of sexual violence must be discreet and have a strong contextual justification.

"12A/12"

"Suitable for 12 years and over. No-one younger than 12 can see a 12A film unless accompanied by an adult."


Discrimination
Discriminatory language or behavior must not be endorsed by the work as a whole. Aggressive discriminatory language or behavior is unlikely to be acceptable unless clearly condemned.

Drugs
Any misuse of drugs must be infrequent and should not be glamorized or give instructional detail.

Horror
Moderate physical and psychological threat may be permitted, provided disturbing sequences are not frequent or sustained.

Imitable Behavior
Dangerous behavior (hanging, suicide and self-harming) should not dwell on detail which could be copied or appear pain or harm free. Easily accessible weapons should not be glamorized.

Language
Moderate language is allowed. Use of strong language must be infrequent.

Nudity
Nudity is allowed, but in a sexual context must be brief and discreet.

Sex
Sexual activity may be briefly and discreetly portrayed. Sex references should not go beyond what is suitable for young teens. Frequent crude references are unlikely to be acceptable.

Theme
Mature themes are acceptable but treatment should be suitable for young teens.

Violence
Moderate violence is allowed but should not dwell on detail. No emphasis on injuries or blood but occasional gory moments may be permitted if justified. Sexual violence may only be implied or briefly and discreetly indicated and must have a strong contextual justification.

"PG"

"Parental guidance - general viewing, but some scenes may be unsuitable for young children."


Discrimination
Discriminatory language or behavior is unacceptable unless clearly disapproved or in an educational or historical context. Discrimination by character which children can readily identify is unlikely to be acceptable.

Drugs
References to illegal drugs or drug misuse must be innocuous or carry a suitable anti-drug message.

Horror
Should not be prolonged or intense. Fantasy settings may be a mitigating factor.

Imitable Behavior
No detail of potentially dangerous behavior which young children are likely to copy. No glamorization of realistic or easily accessible weapons.

Language
Mild bad language only.

Nudity
Natural nudity with no sexual context.

Sex
Sexual activity may be implied but should be discreet and infrequent. Mild sex references and innuendo only.

Theme
Nothing in treatment of serious issues should condone unacceptable behavior.

Violence
Moderate violence, without detail may be allowed if justified by its context.

"U"

"Should be suitable for audiences aged four years and over and set within a positive moral framework and offer reassuring counterbalances to any violence, threat or horror"


Discrimination
No discriminatory language or behavior unless clearly disapproved of.

Drugs
No reference to illegal drugs or drug misuse unless they are infrequent and innocuous, or for educational purposes.

Horror
Should be mild, brief and unlikely to cause anxiety to young children. Outcome should always be reassuring.

Imitable Behavior
No potentially dangerous behavior which young children are likely to copy. No emphasis on realistic or easily accessible weapons.

Language
Infrequent use of very mild bad language.

Nudity
Occasional natural nudity with no sexual content.

Sex
Mild sexual behavior (kissing) and references only (to making love)

Theme
Problematic themes must be treated sensitively and be appropriate for young children.

Violence
Mild violence only. Occasional mild threat or menace only.

The 13 Main Issues

• Violence
• Language
• Sex
• Sexual References
• Drugs
• Criminal Activity
• Weapons
• Imitable Techniques
• Horror
• Theme
• Legal issues
• Discrimination

Main Issues - Video Games

• Classified under the same Guidelines and using same categories as 'linear' works such as film or DVD.
• Limited research has been done into whether 'interactivity' has any significant effect on potential for harm.
• Ability of a game to make a young player complicit in behaviour involving sex, drugs or realistic violence may be as important as the level of detail shown especially where such behaviour forms a major component of the game and where the level of interactivity is high.
• The frequency is often difficult to quantify as it depends on how the player chooses to play the game ad how many times a level is attempted before completion.
• If frequency is a defining issue (strong language), BBFC bases judgement on assessment of frequency with which a player is likely to encounter the issue during normal gameplay.
• Given lack of research in relation to harm and given rapid developments in sophistication of video games, BBFC may take more cautious approach when video games are borderline between two categories or contains material which raises issues of acceptability at adult categories.

Main Issues - Public Information advertisements/ charity advertisements

• More restrictive approach set out will not normally apply.
• Potentially shocking or offensive content in such advertisements must not go beyond what is likely to be acceptable to particular audiences.

Main Issues - Trailers/advertisements

• Audiences choose what films to watch based on expectations of particular genre at given classification.
• Audiences have no choice about the accompanying trailers or advertisements shown in cinema which may be very different in tone and content to film they have CHOSEN to see.
• Trailers and advertisements are short and self-contained so borderline material is less likely to be justified by context and more likely to cause offence so classifications may be more restrictive.
• Strong language is not permitted in trailers or advertisements at any category below '15'
• Only one use of strong language is permitted in a trailer or advertisement at '15' and must be neither threatening or aggressive.
• Advertisements for alcohol can be passed at any category but may be more restrictive classification if there are overt attempts to associate alcohol with sexual prowess or a glamorous/ successful lifestyle.
• BBFC is not responsible for exhibition of cinema trailers and advertisements - it is the responsibility of the cinema.

Main Issues - Photo or pattern sensitivity, motion sickness and reactions to low frequency sound

• Small number of viewers sensitive to flashing and flickering light, or some shapes and patterns and may experience seizures or other serious physical effects.
• Some viewers experience feeling of motion sickness or other symptoms when viewing works which feature hand held or otherwise moving camera work, or which feature low frequency sounds.
• Responsibility of film makers and distributors to identify works in which these issues may arise so viewers are given appropriate warnings.
• Such effects are not normally taken into account in classification decision.
• If it is obvious that the work is highly likely to affect a number of viewers, BBFC may advise the distributor to have appropriate warnings in place.
• In extreme cases, display of appropriate warnings may be required as a condition of classification.

Main Issues - Titles

• If title incites hatred on grounds of race, religion or sexual orientation or incites other criminal behaviour, or encourages an interest in abusive or illegal sexual activity, changes will be required as a condition of classification.
• If title is likely to cause significant offence to significant number of people if displayed in a public place, the distributor will be advised to consider the places in which it is likely to be seen (except for works classified as 'R18')
• In extreme cases, assurances on public display of full title or changes to title may be required as a condition of classification.

Main Issues - Violence

• Always been a feature of entertainment for children and adults.
• Classification takes into account the degree and nature of the violence.
• More restrictive classifications: portrayal of violence as normal solution to problems, heroes who inflict pain and injury, callousness towards victims, encouragement of aggressive attitudes, content which depicts characters taking pleasure in pain or humiliation.
• Sexualised violence or works which glamorise violence will relieve more restrictive classifications or even be cut.
• Strict policy on sexual violence and rape.
• Cuts more likely with video works than film because of potential for replaying scenes out of context.
• Association of sex with non-consensual restraint, pain or humiliation may be cut.

Main Issues - Theme

• Depends significantly on the treatment of theme; especially sensitivity of its presentation.
• Most problematic themes (e.g. drug abuse, sexual violence, paedophilia, incitement to racial hatred or violence) are unlikely to be appropriate at most junior levels of classification.

Main Issues - Sex

• Ranges from kissing and verbal references to 'making love' to detail of real sex.
• Progressively stronger portrayals are allowed as categories rise.
• Sex works are likely to be passed only in adult categories.
• Real sex, strong fetish material, sexually explicit animated images, other strong sexual images = 'R18'
• 'R18' only supplied in licensed sex shops which no one under 18 may enter.
• 'R18' films can only be shown in specially licensed cinemas.
• Guidelines applied to same standard regardless of sexual orientation.

Main Issues - Nudity

• Natural nudity with no sexual context is acceptable at all classification levels.
• Nudity with a sexual context will receive a more restrictive classification.
• Strong detail in such a context will only be passed in adult categories.

Main Issues - Language

• Extent of offence to bad language varies according to age, gender, race, background, beliefs and expectations as well as the context in which the word, expression or gesture is used.
• Therefore, it is impossible to set out list of words, expressions and gestures that are acceptable at each category.
• Different classification levels have general guidance that takes account the views expressed in public consultation exercises.

Main Issues - Imitable Behaviour

• Classification takes into account any detailed portrayal of criminal and violent techniques and glamorisation of easily accessible weapons (e.g. knives)
• If anti-social behaviour (e.g. bullying) is represented in an uncritical way then the work will receive a more restrictive classification.
• Cut or rejected if the work as a whole promotes illegal behaviour.
• Portrayals of potentially dangerous behaviour (hanging, suicide and self-harm) will be cut if a more restrictive classification is not appropriate.

Main Issues - Horror

• Use of frightening elements to scare or unsettle an audience is part of a long tradition of story telling and film making.
• Many children enjoy excitement of scary sequences.
• For younger audiences, classification takes into account frequency, length and detail of scary scenes, horror effects, music and sound, is there a swift and reassuring outcome?
• Older audiences pay to see horror films so works are classified to protect the young and vulnerable.

Main Issues - Drugs

• Cannot promote the misuse of drugs.
• Cannot contain a detailed portrayal of drug misuse which is likely to promote or glamorise the activity.
• Less restrictive classification if the work shows drug misuse while emphasising  the dangers.
• Smoking, alcohol abuse or substance misuse in works that appeal to children, it will be indicated in the Consumer Advice.

Main Issues - Discrimination

• Potentially offensive content relating to race, gender, religion, disability or sexuality will arise in wide range of works.
• Classification depends on strength/impact of the content and the context.
• Less restrictive category if the work as a whole disapproves of and seeks to challenge these attitudes or if it is obviously dated.

Reflections from Lesson 1+2

I've found our introductory lessons to film classification very interesting.
Something I learnt was that local authorities can overturn the decision of the BBFC. I had no idea that this was possible and thought the decision of the BBFC was like law and classifications given were final.

I also found looking at the guidelines very interesting especially those for films rated "U" and "PG". The guidelines for "U" films were very subjective and left seemingly little left to work with. I think these guidelines will definitely need to have a major revision in the future as the younger generations are becoming more and more desensitised certain issues in the society that these guidelines are trying to protect them from.

A fact that shocked me was that only one or two films are rejected each year. I would have thought that with some of the outrageous ideas of directors, there would be loads more films given a thumbs down by the BBFC.

Overriding Factors

The BBFC has guidelines for classification but they do need to have some leniency as many films are on the borderlines of certificates. There are factors that they take into account in situations such as these:

• Context - expectations of public, genre, manner in which issue is presented, apparent intention of film maker, original production date
• Tone and Impact
• Release format

Legal Considerations

There are various laws that the BBFC must take into consideration when classifying a film:

• Human Rights Act 1998
• The Licensing Act 2003
• The Video Recordings Act 1984
• The Obscene Publications Act 1959 & 1964
• Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008
• The Protection of Children Act 1978
• The Sexual Offences Act 2003
• The Public Order Act 1986
• The Cinematograph Films (Animals) Act 1937
• The Animal Welfare Act 2006
• The Tabacco Advertising and Promotion Act 2002

General Principles

The two general principles followed by the BBFC are that:

• works should be able to reach the widest audience that is appropriate for their theme and treatment.
• adults should be free to choose what they see as long as it is within the law and not potentially harmful.

They must also consider:

• whether it is in conflict with the law.
• whether it may cause any harm at the category concerned (harm resulting from behaviour of potential viewers as well as moral harm).
• whether it is clearly unacceptable to broad public opinion.

Who are the BBFC?

The British Board of Film Classification

• Regulate all films released in the UK as well as video games, programmes released on DVD or Blu-ray and those distributed via the internet.
• Independent, non-governmental body but they are answerable to OFCOM.
• Funded by charging fees to classify films
• They classify films on behalf of local authorities who license cinemas under the Licensing Act 2003 - local authorities have the power to overturn the classification of the BBFC and show or ban a film in their area.