Australians Overwhelmingly Support R18+ Rating

[John Funk]

Australians Overwhelmingly Support R18+ Rating

Respondents to the Australian government survey debating whether to institute a R18+ rating are overwhelmingly in favor of the idea. And I do mean overwhelmingly.

When the Australian government sought public input [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/96839-Australian-Government-Seeks-Public-Input-Into-R18-Game-Ratings] on the idea of R18+ game ratings, many beleaguered Aussie gamers heralded it as a step in the right direction. The Australian public would vote against censorship, they believed, and vote against giving the government heavy-handed power to determine what they could and could not view as entertainment.

As it turns out, the numbers may be reflecting that. According to a representative from the Copyright and Classification Policy Branch, the government had received 6,239 submissions for the R18+ public consultation - 5,465 by email, 447 by fax, and 327 by snail-mail - and had processed 1,084 thus far. Of those 1,084, only 11 had been against the idea of a R18+ rating: about 1%.

If the next five thousand respondents continue on the same pattern as the first thousand, then the Aussie government may have proof that a good many people support the R18+ rating.

But before we all rejoice - and I hate to be a Debbie Downer here - I think we need to face a sobering reality: As much as we might dislike the guy, Michael Atkinson may have a point [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/97581-Atkinson-Dismisses-Game-Consultation-as-Unfair]. The Attorney General of South Australia predicted that the response would show overwhelming support because the only people who would care enough to get involved would be gamers - and that the rest of the public couldn't give a damn one way or the other.

Maybe Atkinson is wrong and these numbers represent a wide swath of the Australian people, sick of government censorship. But then again, maybe he's not wrong - just because the guy represents everything we stand against doesn't mean he can't have a point.

But on the other hand, does it matter? If the Aussie government finds that their survey supports the R18+ rating 99:1, will it actually matter who the respondents were? I guess we'll have to wait and see.

(Gamespot UK [http://uk.gamespot.com/news/6249991.html])

Permalink

 

[Aura Guardian]

Hopefully they get the 18+ rating. I feel bad for the Australian gamers having to play stripped down versions of M rated games.

 

[BlackStar42]

Ah, the sweet feeling of satisfaction. If this hurts Atkinson, it can only be good.

 

[Ren3004]

Like I said before, if people don't vote, it's because they don't care enough. I don't see a problem with most of the participants being the people who care. If someone is really opposed to an R18+ rating, they would vote against it. Right?

Well, I hope Australia gets an R18+ rating soon.

 

[hannan4mitch]

When I lived in Germany, a friend of mine was an aussie, and he was as pissed as anybody else about the censorship.

 

[Nevyrmoore]

I have to say, at the end of the day, this won't make a bit of difference. Unless Michael Atkinson decides "Okay, fine, have your 18+ rating!", then nothing will change until someone else takes his place. Someone who agrees with the idea of an 18+ rating.

Unless they somehow find a way to, say, ignore his vote completely...

 

[JeanLuc761]

But before we all rejoice - and I hate to be a Debbie Downer here - I think we need to face a sobering reality: As much as we might dislike the guy, Michael Atkinson may have a point [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/97581-Atkinson-Dismisses-Game-Consultation-as-Unfair]. The Attorney General of South Australia predicted that the response would show overwhelming support because the only people who would care enough to get involved would be gamers - and that the rest of the public couldn't give a damn one way or the other.

I think the thing to remember about this is this: If non-voters really don't give a damn, why should that be a problem? The way I see it, people who actually care will go out and take a stance and those are EXACTLY the people we should be paying attention to.

 

[PedroSteckecilo]

But before we all rejoice - and I hate to be a Debbie Downer here - I think we need to face a sobering reality: As much as we might dislike the guy, Michael Atkinson may have a point [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/97581-Atkinson-Dismisses-Game-Consultation-as-Unfair]. The Attorney General of South Australia predicted that the response would show overwhelming support because the only people who would care enough to get involved would be gamers - and that the rest of the public couldn't give a damn one way or the other.

Maybe Atkinson is wrong and these numbers represent a wide swath of the Australian people, sick of government censorship. But then again, maybe he's not wrong - just because the guy represents everything we stand against doesn't mean he can't have a point.

But on the other hand, does it matter? If the Aussie government finds that their survey supports the R18+ rating 99:1, will it actually matter who the respondents were? I guess we'll have to wait and see.

If the rest of the Australian Public doesn't care one way or the other then why is he so adamant about ensuring that the 18+ rating doesn't come to pass? Who is he protecting?

I just find it odd really, he's a moral defender with no-body to defend, meaning that he's fighting strongly in favor of an "abstract concept of morality" rather than anything that is actually represented within the people he is claiming to protect morality for. This is something you Aussie's should be VERY worried about.

 

[funksobeefy]

I really think that a one percent majority is a good sign that they dont want this.

Also all Australians should vote against this kinda censorship, it can transfer so easily across media forms and you could lose the right to free speech.

I actually dont know if you guys have a first amendment like free speech, but you should create one.

 

[Jared]

Hopefully they get the 18+ rating. I feel bad for the Australian gamers having to play stripped down versions of M rated games.

Seriously. The government needs to seriously think about freedom of rights here. Its not a prison colony anymore! They gov. needs to stop thinking like one!

 

[Benjamin Grin]

It doesn't matter who took the survey; surveys are intrinsically biased based on the sampling group. If you ask 100 people a question and get an answer, that's the opinions of 100 people; but the survey tries to spin it as the opinions of everyone.

Even if gamers are the only ones to take the survey they didn't do so unfairly. They didn't force others not to take the survey because other peoples' ideas didn't gel with those of the gamers (Unless, of course, Australian gamers can mobilise a conspiracy crazy fast) So, really, it doesn't make a lick of difference if those who have taken the survey are gamers. The government got its required number of answers. The gamers have suggested, in their actions, that there are enough numbers to warrent this idea.

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

In your face, Atkinson! His only point is that he finds this stuff distasteful, and given he's hardly free of blame [http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P1-103696902.html], I think the basis of democracy should have him retract his dangerous ideals.

Strangely enough, said accusations of Michael Atkinson have been removed from his Wikipedia page. Well, we wouldn't want people having an idea that 6 million Australian dollars from the Treasury was hidden in his bank account.

Of course, he'll kick off his usual paranoia trip to blame the corruption of youth, but as soon as he's out of office, who'll care?

 

[Lord Mountbatten Reborn]

We feel for you Australia!

 

[D.L.390]

What, if we have a poll on the legality of abortion do the votes only count if they're from women? If we have a federal election, do the votes only count if you're a politician?


It doesn't matter who the votes are from. If you care one way or another, you'll vote. If you don't vote, then you're stuck with what the majority who do care vote for. Simple as that.

It's called DEMOCRACY. That's how it works.

But I do hope that the thing gets passed, and I hope that the compulsory filter doesn't. If it does I'm going to leave the country.

 

[Chishandfips]

Unless Michael Atkinson decides "Okay, fine, have your 18+ rating!", then nothing will change until someone else takes his place.

Isn't the whole idea of democracy that if the votes are in favour of R18+, Atkinson can't do a damn thing about it?

 

[Zenode]

But before we all rejoice - and I hate to be a Debbie Downer here - I think we need to face a sobering reality: As much as we might dislike the guy, Michael Atkinson may have a point [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/97581-Atkinson-Dismisses-Game-Consultation-as-Unfair]

Well, its not like it will affect anyone EXCEPT gamers so who really gives a damn, if he is concerned about the kids, having this rating will give parents a better understanding of what to expect instead of having an M or MA15+ game that should have been an R18+ they will have that extra tier of knowing what to expect (not that parents should buy R18+ games for kids)

I'm sorry but every single argument that Michael Atkinson has given is either related to gamers being a bunch of retards who think KILLING FOR ZE POINTS is cool or THINK OF THE CHILDREN.

 

[GamingAwesome1]

I feel like doing my "In your face" dance right now. As if this continues then never again shall Aussies have to play shite versions of M games.

I'm not Austrailian either. I'm just pissed that such disrespect can go to a medium in one particular place. One up for the Aussies!

 

[DND Judgement]

Of those 1,084, only 11 had been against the idea of a R18+ rating: less than 1%.

Actually, a little more than 1% - 1.46 recurring percent, to be exact.

But anyway, I really hope this comes into play - I'm no Aussie, but I really feel they need justice on this.

damn ninja'd...


but yeah i hope the aussie's stop getting watered down versions of games...

 

[RikSharp]

michael atkinson: "we can't have a public vote, they will vote against me cos its only the people that the current rules affect that care enough to vote"

i think thats kind of the point...
the people that it affects want to tell you that they want new rules.
going by the numbers, looks like they are doing just that.