Australian Censorship News: January-February 2007

UPDATES 24th February 2007
PEACEFUL PILL HANDBOOK RC.
MY BROTHER'S WIFE R18+.
LORNA GOES WILD RC.
CUM DRINK MY VINTAGE WINE RC.
SERVICE ANIMALS #24 Cut.
PICTURE PREMIUM #103 Modified.
Eros Magazine Vol.8 No1.
NSW A-G on Porn.
3 New Titles in DB. 

UPDATES 17th February 2007
Police Shock! Porn in Cross.
PICTURE PREMIUM #103 RC.
Reality TV review.
New Senior Classifier.
Internet Filtering.
Soft-Porn TV Ads.
Senate Estimates. 

UPDATES 10th February 2007
Saddam's Execution RC.
Classification Amendment Bill 2006.
Advertising Standards Complaints. 

UPDATES 4th February 2007
VIVA EROTICA Federal Court Appeal.
Interactive Australia 2007 Survey.
Des Clark on Games Censorship.
NOTES ON A SCANDAL MA15+ Review
ROCCO: ANIMAL TRAINER 22 Cut.
CANADIAN BEAVER Cut.
GANG BANG MY FACE RC.
SERVICE ANIMALS #24 RC. 
END OF DAYS Consumer Advice. 

UPDATES 21st January 2007
BLITZ: THE LEAGUE RC.
DISCOVERING PRIVA Cut.
LET ME BREATHE Cut. 
PEACEFUL PILL HANDBOOK RB Date. 
Reality TV Review Closing Soon. 

UPDATES 13th January 2007
PEACEFUL PILL HANDBOOK Review.
ROCCO: ANIMAL TRAINER 22 RC.
DISCOVERING PRIVA RC.
101 LESBIAN BEAUTIES 2 Cut. 

UPDATES 5th January 2007
VIVA EROTICA RB Report.
NOTES ON A SCANDAL MA15+ Review.
THE PORNOGRAPHER RC.
Review of 2006. 
SCAG (Censorship) Annual Report 2005-06
Australia's most complained-about ads of 2006.

UPDATES
24th February 2007

PEACEFUL PILL HANDBOOK RC.

THE PEACEFUL PILL HANDBOOK handbook has just been banned by the Review Board. Not surprising really, they are only doing what Ruddock, their master, wanted. 

Let's take a look at what the censors have banned so far this year. A good deal of the text of THE PEACEFUL PILL HANDBOOK can be found at Google books. The Saddam hanging video can be found all over the internet. Finally, all the hardcore DVDs hit with RC ratings can be downloaded by anyone with a credit card. It must be frightening to these guys how quickly they are becoming obsolete.

******

MY BROTHER'S WIFE R18+.

Siren Visual Entertainment has just got the hentai DVD; MY BROTHER'S WIFE passed the Classification Board. It was originally banned in May 2006.

MY BROTHER'S WIFE Film (DVD)
Classification RC 
Consumer Advice 
Category Film - Sale/Hire 
Version ORIGINAL 
Duration variable 
Date of Classification 31 May 2006 
Author NOT SHOWN 
Publisher SHIYUUTA BIWAJIMA, CHIKARA NIKI
Production Company DIGITAL WORKS 
Country of Origin JAPAN 
Applicant SIREN VISUAL ENTERTAINMENT 
File Number T06/2002 
Classification Number 5053452A

MY BROTHER'S WIFE Film (DVD) 
Classification R 18+ (Restricted to 18 and over)
Consumer Advice High level animated sex scenes
Category Film - Sale/Hire 
Version ORIGINAL 
Duration variable 
Date of Classification 13 February 2007 
Author SHANNON HEMEON, ANITA LARKO
Publisher SHAWNE KLECKNER, NORIKO AI
Production Company RIGHT STUFF 
Country of Origin JAPAN 
Applicant SIREN VISUAL ENTERTAINMENT 
File Number T06/2002 
Classification Number 4173540D

******

LORNA GOES WILD RC.
CUM DRINK MY VINTAGE WINE RC.
SERVICE ANIMALS #24 Cut.

Calvista have just had two more titles banned by the Classification Board. CUM DRINK MY VINTAGE WINE and LORNA GOES WILD were both Refused Classification last week.

LORNA GOES WILD (PRIVATE XXX 35) Film (DVD)
Classification RC 
Consumer Advice 
Category Film - Sale/Hire 
Version ORIGINAL 
Duration variable 
Date of Classification 23 February 2007 
Author VARIOUS 
Publisher NOT SHOWN 
Production Company FRASERSIDE HOLDINGS LTD 
Country of Origin EUROPE 
Applicant CALVISTA AUSTRALIA PTY LTD 
File Number T07/816 
Classification Number 4173353F

CUM DRINK MY VINTAGE WINE (Said to be CUM TASTE THE WINE) Film (DVD) 
Classification RC 
Consumer Advice 
Category Film - Sale/Hire 
Version ORIGINAL 
Duration variable 
Date of Classification 22 February 2007 
Author RICASSO 
Publisher NOT SHOWN 
Production Company COLOSSAL 
Country of Origin NOT SHOWN 
Applicant CALVISTA AUSTRALIA PTY LTD 
File Number T07/821 
Classification Number 5073243E

A censored version of SERVICE ANIMALS # 24: THE KANDEE MAN has just been passed X18+ (Explicit Sex). Calvista originally had the DVD banned in January.

******

PICTURE PREMIUM #103 Modified.

As expected in the last update, THE PICTURE PREMIUM #103 has been modified in order to secure lower ratings. The 'Unrestricted' issue has been dropped from Category 1 to Unrestricted. Whilst the 'Restricted' issue has been dropped from Refused Classification to Category 1.

THE PICTURE PREMIUM NO 103 (said to be unrestricted) 
Publication (Magazine) 
Classification Unrestricted 
Consumer Advice M - not recommended for readers under 15 years. 
Category Publication 
Version MODIFIED PROOF PRINT 
Duration 106 page(s) 
Date of Classification 20 February 2007 
Author NOT SHOWN 
Publisher ACP EXTRA 
Production Company NOT SHOWN 
Country of Origin AUSTRALIA 
Applicant ACP EXTRA - PICTURE 
File Number L07/24 
Classification Number 617A6736

THE PICTURE PREMIUM NO 103 (said to be restricted) 
Publication (Magazine) 
Classification Category 1 Restricted 
Consumer Advice 
Category Publication 
Version MODIFIED PROOF PRINT 
Duration 106 page(s) 
Date of Classification 20 February 2007 
Author NOT SHOWN 
Publisher ACP EXTRA 
Production Company NOT SHOWN 
Country of Origin AUSTRALIA 
Applicant ACP EXTRA - PICTURE 
File Number L07/25 
Classification Number 4172642E

******

Eros Magazine Vol.8 No1.

Eros Magazine Vol.8 No1 is out now. Subscription information, and a selection of some of the articles can be found here.

******

NSW A-G on Porn.

Some comments from the NSW Attorney-General Bob Debus regarding the recent Kings Cross porn raids.

(ARCHIVED) Police raids target child pornography. Wentworth Courier 26.02.07

The Attorney-General, Bob Debus, has rejected calls to change legislation regarding X-rated material in NSW, likening a ban on the purchase and possession of porn to "book burning".

But a spokesperson for Mr Debus said there were "no intentions of making any changes to the legislation".

"It would be a step too far - it would get into book-burning and looking at people's bookshelves," the spokesperson said.

"We can't police it without random pornography searches at State borders."

The spokesperson said that censorship laws and classifications were controlled as part of a joint State and Federal agreement through the Office of Film and Literature Classification.

******

3 New Titles in DB.

Some new additions to the database to report. Erwin C. Dietrich's SWEDISH SEX SERVICE and Joseph Lai's Golden Ninja Warrior. Also up is the long-promised report into the eight-year Australian ban on the original TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE. More censorship history coming soon! 

Updates
17Th February 2007

Police Shock! Porn in Cross.

Six-months of detective work and the NSW Police find hardcore DVDs for rent in Kings Cross. Great work guys! 

NSW Police Online
Seven men arrested after police raid Kings Cross sex shops
14 February 2007

More than 60 police today raided seven adult book and sex shops in Kings Cross arresting 7 men and seizing tens of thousands of illegal items including X-rated pornography DVDs which are prohibited for sale in NSW.

A number of computers were also seized and will be forensically examined for evidence of child pornography.

The raids follow a six-month undercover operation conducted by Kings Cross detectives.

Local Area Commander Superintendent Jenny Hayes said evidence has been gathered which will allege the owners of the seven premises targeted today were all engaged in the sale of illegal and prohibited items.

“We allege almost all the business conducted in these adult bookshops is illegal and we have effectively shut them down,” Supt Hayes said.

“Among the items seized today were computers which we suspect have been used to access and download child pornography and other unclassified, illegal material.

“The clear message today is that these premises will not be allowed to operate and flout the law.”

Seven men remain at Kings Cross police station for questioning.

Police will also examine the computers seized today to discover the identity of persons who may have accessed child pornography at one of the adult stores.

“We will pursue anyone who has engaged in the access, sale or possession of child pornography and bring them to justice,” Supt Hayes said.

The seven men are expected to be charged later today and will appear at the Downing Centre Court next month.

***

Eros Association
Media Release 15/2/07 
Adult Industry Calls for Total Ban on Adult Films

Following police raids on seven adult shops in Kings Cross yesterday, the Eros Association has challenged the NSW government to criminalise the sale and purchase of X18+ rated films in the state or regulate all aspects of the trade in line with the federal government’s classification scheme. Under federal government laws, the sale, purchase and possession of classified X18+ films are all legal. Only the sale of X18+ films is illegal in NSW, with purchase and possession still legal.

Eros CEO, Fiona Patten, said that the way the law currently stood meant that there was massive confusion in the public mind over the legality of the product with police officers raiding adult shops and charging shops owners one day and going back to a similar shop to buy films for their own personal use the following week.

“There is nothing illegal in police officers buying X18+ rated films from adult shops and taking them home”, she said. ‘Magistrates and even politicians are regular clients at many Sydney adult shops”, she said, “However the law sets up a dangerous and grossly unfair situation in criminalizing only one side of the transaction which penalizes the shop owner and no else. It takes two to tango”, she said.

Ms Patten said that police officers, magistrates and politicians were no different to any other community sector in that they all liked to buy and watch X18+ rated films. In 2002, a La Trobe University survey showed that 26% of Australians regularly purchased adult films. A 2006 AC Neilson survey found that 76% of Australians believed that X18+ rated films should made available on a restricted basis throughout Australia¹

She said that adult shop owners were being penalized and scapegoated for the public’s interest and involvement in the X film trade in NSW and that the only way to set up a fair system was to either regulate all aspects of the trade or criminalise them all.

Australian state governments are the only governments in developed countries that ban the sale of X non-violent erotic films to adults.

Ms Patten challenged Liberal leader Peter Debnam to show some leadership on the issue - having regard to the fact that 25% of adults in most electorates would be buyers of federally classified, X 18+ films. Over five million of these films are sold each year in NSW.

“Philosophically Mr Debnam would clearly be supporting Mr Howard’s censorship policies on these matters rather than the current outmoded NSW government position”, she said.

Contact Eros Association CEO Fiona Patten- O2 6285 2477- fiona@eros.org.au

¹ Commissioned by Adultshop.com Ltd

***

Sex-shop sting: police arrest seven at the Cross 15.02.07

POLICE say they have in effect shut almost all of the sex shops in Sydney's red-light district after officers raided seven of the eight adult book stores in Kings Cross searching for child pornography and other X-rated material.

Operation Cheryl began just after midday yesterday when 60 officers executed search warrants on the adult book stores on Darlinghurst Road and its surrounds, seizing more than 60,000 DVDs, four computers and a small quantity of drugs.

Superintendent Jenny Hayes

She alleged that the shops had been "flouting the law" and brazenly selling X-rated DVDs and videos, which cannot be sold in NSW, as well as unclassified material, which cannot be sold in Australia.

Despite the stores openly displaying the apparently X-rated material, worth millions of dollars, on their shelves, Ms Hayes said the sale of the material had been going undetected for some time.

***

X-rated film laws 'grossly unfair'. SMH 15.02.07

The Eros Association today called on both sides of NSW politics to show consistency in regulating X-rated material, saying it was a criminal offence to sell the films but legal to buy and own them.

The association's chief executive Fiona Patten, said there was "massive confusion" over the issue, which was highlighted this week by raids on seven Kings Cross adult shops.

"There is nothing illegal in police officers buying X18+ rated films from adult shops and taking them home", she said.

"Magistrates and even politicians are regular clients at many Sydney adult shops.

"However, the law sets up a dangerous and grossly unfair situation in criminalising only one side of the transaction which penalises the shop owner and no-one else.

"It takes two to tango."

Ms Patton said all aspects of the trade in X-rated material in NSW should be allowed or criminalised.

***

censorship.adultshop.com
16.02.07

X-rated film laws 'grossly unfair' Raids carried out this week by the NSW police on 7 sex shops in Sydney's King Cross area, have highlighted the inconsistency in laws governing the sale of X18+ material.

These raids have no doubt sparked confusion amongst the general public as to why X18+ films can be legally purchased in ACT and NT, but not in the States of Australia, such as Sydney's red light district area King's Cross.

The Sydney Morning Herald posted an article on this "massive confusion" which can be accessed here.

SMH is also running a poll "X rated films should they be legal?" - I encourage you to cast your vote and send a strong message to the government and OFLC who are responsible for the classification and consequently distribution of X18+ films.

Click here to access the SMH poll

***

Weird sex positions. SMH 16.02.07

On Valentines Day, no less, Sydney police invaded the sex shops of Kings Cross, arresting a handful of people for selling x-rated material that had always been available, and remains available on the Internet and by overseas mail order. So, where are the voices of outrage, those who raise their fists like defiant revolutionaries when the cops turn up to Ken Park or Baise Moi? If it's true that a quarter of the adult population actually like watching porn, and three quarters think it should be legal, where are the anti-censorship activists when Australia really needs them? Fiona Patton of the Eros Foundation - one of the few anti-censorship activists who actually is consistent in her position - calls for the law to "show consistency in regulating X-rated material". But the inconsistency of our censorship laws is nothing compared to the fickle nature of many of those who purport to fight them in Australia.

***

The first two weeks of February saw the NSW Police Kings Cross Detectives have twenty-one DVDs rated by the Classification Board. The following nineteen were Refused Classification.

The following three have were rated X18+(Explicit Sex).

Presumably once the judgement was known then the planning for the raids could begin. Judging by the names of the DVDs, many seem to be bondage titles. More details are as follows.

REAL PAIN VOLUME 2 Film (DVD) 
Classification RC 
Consumer Advice 
Category Film - Sale/Hire 
Version ORIGINAL 
Duration variable 
Date of Classification 6 February 2007 
Author NOT SHOWN 
Publisher SHOTS VIDEO 
Production Company SHOTS VIDEO 
Country of Origin HOLLAND 
Applicant NSW POLICE KINGS CROSS DETECTIVES
File Number T07/510 
Classification Number 4172540E

RAG TIME RED #6 Film (DVD) 
Classification RC 
Consumer Advice 
Category Film - Sale/Hire 
Version ORIGINAL 
Duration variable 
Date of Classification 6 February 2007 
Author ROGER L. WHORSHAM 
Publisher FETISH FILMS 
Production Company MOTHER PRODUCTIONS
Country of Origin USA 
Applicant NSW POLICE KINGS CROSS DETECTIVES
File Number T07/504 
Classification Number 4073141E

HOUSE OF PAINFUL PLEASURE #3 Film (DVD)
Classification RC 
Consumer Advice 
Category Film - Sale/Hire 
Version ORIGINAL 
Duration variable 
Date of Classification 6 February 2007 
Author RICK SAVAGE 
Publisher RICK SAVAGE 
Production Company NOOSE VIDEO PRODUCTIONS
Country of Origin USA 
Applicant NSW POLICE KINGS CROSS DETECTIVES
File Number T07/508 
Classification Number 4172450E

3 FUCKING ME (said to be THREE FUCKING ME) Film (DVD) 
Classification RC 
Consumer Advice 
Category Film - Sale/Hire 
Version ORIGINAL 
Duration variable 
Date of Classification 5 February 2007 
Author MARTIN DEL TORO 
Publisher PLATINUM X PICTURES 
Production Company PLATINUM X 
Country of Origin USA 
Applicant NSW POLICE KINGS CROSS DETECTIVES
File Number T07/512 
Classification Number 61621707

TABOO - LOVE HURTS Film (DVD) 
Classification RC 
Consumer Advice 
Category Film - Sale/Hire 
Version ORIGINAL 
Duration variable 
Date of Classification 2 February 2007 
Author LEE FORBES 
Publisher L.F.P. VIDEO GROUP 
Production Company HUSTLER 
Country of Origin USA 
Applicant NSW POLICE KINGS CROSS DETECTIVES
File Number T07/496 
Classification Number 4072440F

LESBIAN CONTROL Film (DVD) 
Classification RC 
Consumer Advice 
Category Film - Sale/Hire 
Version ORIGINAL 
Duration variable 
Date of Classification 12 February 2007 
Author MARQUIS DE BOB 
Publisher BIZARRE VIDEO 
Production Company BIZARRE VIDEO 
Country of Origin NOT SHOWN 
Applicant NSW POLICE KINGS CROSS DETECTIVES
File Number T07/594 
Classification Number 5173552C

OMA PERVERS 4 Film (DVD) 
Classification RC 
Consumer Advice 
Category Film - Sale/Hire 
Version ORIGINAL 
Duration variable 
Date of Classification 9 February 2007 
Author NOT SHOWN 
Publisher S. G. VIDEO 
Production Company S. G. VIDEO 
Country of Origin GERMANY 
Applicant NSW POLICE KINGS CROSS DETECTIVES
File Number T07/650 
Classification Number 4072740C

FAUST FUCKER - DIE FAUST IM ARSCH Film (DVD)
Classification RC 
Consumer Advice 
Category Film - Sale/Hire 
Version ORIGINAL 
Duration variable 
Date of Classification 9 February 2007 
Author HARRY S. MORGAN 
Publisher VIDEORAMA 
Production Company VIDEORAMA 
Country of Origin NOT SHOWN 
Applicant NSW POLICE KINGS CROSS DETECTIVES
File Number T07/653 
Classification Number 4072351D

DIE PISS KONIGIN Film (DVD) 
Classification RC 
Consumer Advice 
Category Film - Sale/Hire 
Version ORIGINAL 
Duration variable 
Date of Classification 9 February 2007 
Author NOT SHOWN 
Publisher RED LIGHT MOVIE 
Production Company NOT SHOWN 
Country of Origin GERMANY 
Applicant NSW POLICE KINGS CROSS DETECTIVES
File Number T07/655 
Classification Number 4073650C

SPANK THOSE BITCHES 2 Film (VHS) 
Classification RC 
Consumer Advice 
Category Film - Sale/Hire 
Version ORIGINAL 
Duration 87 minute(s) 
Date of Classification 8 February 2007 
Author SLAIN WAYNE 
Publisher NOT SHOWN 
Production Company EXTREME ASSOCIATES 
Country of Origin USA 
Applicant NSW POLICE KINGS CROSS DETECTIVES
File Number T07/597 
Classification Number 60620726

STREET AND PANTY PISSER VOL 25 Film (DVD)
Classification RC 
Consumer Advice 
Category Film - Sale/Hire 
Version ORIGINAL 
Duration variable 
Date of Classification 16 February 2007 
Author NOT SHOWN 
Publisher S.G. VIDEO 
Production Company S.G. VIDEO 
Country of Origin GERMANY 
Applicant NSW POLICE KINGS CROSS DETECTIVES
File Number T07/706 
Classification Number 5172740F

MEGA-FIST Film (DVD) 
Classification RC 
Consumer Advice 
Category Film - Sale/Hire 
Version ORIGINAL 
Duration variable 
Date of Classification 15 February 2007 
Author NOT SHOWN 
Publisher NOT SHOWN 
Production Company MEGA FILM COMPANY 
Country of Origin NOT SHOWN 
Applicant NSW POLICE KINGS CROSS DETECTIVES
File Number T07/748 
Classification Number 5172750F

FAUST-ORGASMUS Film (DVD) 
Classification RC 
Consumer Advice Category Film - Sale/Hire 
Version REVISED 
Duration variable 
Date of Classification 15 February 2007 
Author NOT SHOWN 
Publisher NOT SHOWN 
Production Company VIDEO RAMA 
Country of Origin NOT SHOWN 
Applicant NSW POLICE KINGS CROSS DETECTIVES
File Number T98/224 
Classification Number 4073351F

TRAUM-EXZESSE Film (DVD) 
Classification RC 
Consumer Advice 
Category Film - Sale/Hire 
Version ORIGINAL 
Duration variable 
Date of Classification 14 February 2007 
Author NOT SHOWN 
Publisher MASTER COSTELLO 
Production Company MASTER COSTELLO 
Country of Origin GERMANY 
Applicant NSW POLICE KINGS CROSS DETECTIVES
File Number T07/707 
Classification Number 4172241F

WHITE SLAVE DETECTIVE! Film (DVD) 
Classification RC 
Consumer Advice 
Category Film - Sale/Hire 
Version ORIGINAL 
Duration variable 
Date of Classification 20 February 2007 
Author J. ANTON 
Publisher J. ANTON 
Production Company ANTON PRODUCTIONS 
Country of Origin USA 
Applicant NSW POLICE KINGS CROSS DETECTIVES
File Number T07/704 
Classification Number 4073251F

SUBMISSIVE SWEETHEARTS Film (DVD) 
Classification RC 
Consumer Advice 
Category Film - Sale/Hire 
Version ORIGINAL 
Duration variable 
Date of Classification 23 February 2007 
Author NOT SHOWN 
Publisher CABALLERO VIDEO 
Production Company DUNGEON DIARIES 
Country of Origin USA 
Applicant NSW POLICE KINGS CROSS DETECTIVES 
File Number T07/844 
Classification Number 62400604

SUBJECTS OF SUBMISSION THREE Film (DVD)
Classification RC 
Consumer Advice 
Category Film - Sale/Hire 
Version ORIGINAL 
Duration variable 
Date of Classification 22 February 2007 
Author NOT SHOWN 
Publisher NOT SHOWN 
Production Company BIZARRE VIDEO 
Country of Origin USA 
Applicant NSW POLICE KINGS CROSS DETECTIVES 
File Number T07/829 
Classification Number 7572242E

SWIRLIES #2 Film (DVD) 
Classification RC 
Consumer Advice 
Category Film - Sale/Hire 
Version ORIGINAL 
Duration variable 
Date of Classification 2 March 2007 
Author JIM POWERS
Publisher JEFF STEWARD 
Production Company JM PRODUCTIONS 
Country of Origin USA 
Applicant NT POLICE - DARWIN 
File Number T07/957 
Classification Number 4251442C 
Production Company MEGA FILM COMPANY 
Country of Origin NOT SHOWN 
Applicant NSW POLICE KINGS CROSS DETECTIVES 
File Number T07/748 
Classification Number 5172750F

WAXED RACKS Film (DVD) 
Classification RC 
Consumer Advice 
Category Film - Sale/Hire 
Version ORIGINAL 
Duration variable 
Date of Classification 9 March 2007 
Author NOT SHOWN 
Publisher CABALLERO VIDEO 
Production Company NOT SHOWN 
Country of Origin USA 
Applicant NSW POLICE KINGS CROSS DETECTIVES 
File Number T07/1093 
Classification Number 63402705

ALL PISSED OFF 15 Film (DVD) 
Classification X 18+ (Restricted to 18 and over.)
Consumer Advice Explicit sex 
Category Film - Sale/Hire Version 
ORIGINAL Duration variable 
Date of Classification 8 February 2007 
Author DICK GAZINYA 
Publisher R.J. POSI, CON AUSSIE 
Production Company WILDLIFE PRODUCTIONS
Country of Origin USA 
Applicant NSW POLICE KINGS CROSS DETECTIVES
File Number T07/591 
Classification Number 5173043C

DIRTY DEBUTANTES 2005 VOL 313 Film (DVD)
Classification X 18+ (Restricted to 18 and over.)
Consumer Advice Explicit sex 
Category Film - Sale/Hire 
Version ORIGINAL 
Duration variable 
Date of Classification 6 February 2007 
Author ED POWERS 
Publisher ED POWERS 
Production Company ED POWERS 
Country of Origin USA 
Applicant NSW POLICE KINGS CROSS DETECTIVES
File Number T07/495 
Classification Number 5173151C

ALL PISSED OFF VOLUME 6 Film (DVD) 
Classification X 18+ (Restricted to 18 and over.) Consumer Advice 
Explicit sex 
Category Film - Sale/Hire 
Version ORIGINAL 
Duration variable 
Date of Classification 16 February 2007 
Author RAY ANDERSEN 
Publisher BOBBY RINALDI 
Production Company WILDLIFE 
Country of Origin USA 
Applicant NSW POLICE KINGS CROSS DETECTIVES
File Number T07/701 
Classification Number 4073241E

Quote of the year so far. From Superintendent Jenny Hayes of the NSW Police.

"....the sale of the material had been going undetected for some time."

Spare us this bullshit! The NSW cops know all the Adult stores sell and rent X-rated and RC material. The fact is they choose to tolerate it. It is only the child porn angle to the case that has forced their hand. Notice as well that the police don't seem to be claiming that child porn was being sold or rented on DVD. 

Superintendent Jenny Hayes
"There is an internet room [in one of the shops], $2 for access, and previous investigation has revealed child pornography on one of those computers,"

Adult stores get busted all the time, but they are soon back in business. This will be no different. Take a look at the following article from July 2005. It proves the police know what is going on. 

Going to X-tremes. SMH 07.07.05

DAVID Haines steps from the noisy footpath on George Street and ascends the narrow stairway to Adult Book. Two floors up, past the magazines, sits a wall of pornographic DVDs and videos.

He scans the shelves, looking at markings on the covers. "Of the 150 DVDs and videos in that shelf, two appear to have been classified," Haines says. The other shelves also contain many apparently unclassified videos and DVDs.

The tender tones of Elvis singing Can't Help Falling in Love waft out of the shop's hi-fi. Titles such as Maximum DeSade and 18 and Japanese line the shelves. The censors have not classified either of them, according to online records.

Selling videos that are unclassified, refused classification or X-rated is illegal in NSW. But the law is generally not enforced. However, a private member's bill that State Parliament has been considering aims to legalise X-rated sales and boost penalties for selling videos and DVDs that are unclassified or have been refused classification.

Haines is uniquely placed. He is chairman of Gallery Global Network, a listed company that distributes mobile phone entertainment as well as adult videos and DVDs. But he worked for 14 years at the Commonwealth's Office of Film and Literature Classification, including eight years as deputy chief censor.

At another store a few doors away called George Street Adult Book Exchange, not far from the NSW Police headquarters, Haines surveys the thousands of videos and DVDs lining the walls. The bondage sections of these stores, he says, contain most of the extreme porn.

He selects Night Prowler 5, a video with no classification markings that appears to have been imported straight from the US. A viewing reveals that the video contains what the cover promises: "Otis's torture chamber of choice: a musty old basement peepshow where he ruthlessly binds and spanks a leggy, big-breasted brunette before a crowd of jeering patrons, her buff body chained to a brick wall to receive a vicious whipping, then bound in one humiliating position after another." The women, who appear to be acting, are naked, bound, saying "no". At some points electric stun guns are apparently used.

Earlier, the Herald had visited a store in Kings Cross where a few videos of an extreme nature were for sale. A DVD, Mr Dog, with no classification markings, contained bestiality footage; price $60. Another showed sexual acts involving a woman with a gun at her head. The shop assistant said some months before there was on sale a video with footage of a woman's labia nailed to a board.

This is a taste of some of the unclassified videos sold in sex shops and adult bookstores. Industry sources estimate there are about 200 such shops around the state. A small minority of the videos portray bestiality, sexual violence and coercion, pain and other activities that would all be refused classification if they ever went near the national censor - which they don't.

Videos and DVDs submitted to the classification office are either categorised or refused classification. The X18+ category applies to films that contain actual sexual intercourse or sexual activity. No "violence, sexual violence, sexualised violence or coercion is allowed in this category", the classification office says. In the R18+ category, simulated sex is allowed, but "sexual violence may only be implied and should not be detailed", the office says.

While classification is a Commonwealth task, banning and enforcing bans on the sale of porn is a state responsibility. In the 1980s, the Reverend Fred Nile led a Christian campaign - with some feminist support - against X-rated videos. By 1984, the sale of such videos had been banned in NSW.

The same ban exists today. In NSW, it is illegal to sell videos X-rated, unclassified, or refused classification. But it is not illegal to buy or possess X18+ classified material. Despite this, X-rated videos and DVDs are available throughout the state. But most sexual videos sold in NSW are not X-rated, they are unclassified, rendering the national classification system largely meaningless in the realm of pornography.

Nile is still a state MP and opposes the private member's bill by Peter Breen, another upper house MP, to legalise X-rated sales.

Breen believes few people, including the Premier, Bob Carr, want X-rated videos to be illegal, which is why the ban on them is not enforced. Hardly any sex shops are prosecuted over their sale of X-rated videos or videos that are unclassified or have been refused classification, Breen says. The crime statistics for the years 1995-2003 support this view.

A spokesman for the NSW Attorney-General, Bob Debus, says enforcing the law is a police operational matter, not a matter for the Attorney-General. The Herald asked NSW Police why it did not enforce the ban on X-rated videos. A police spokeswoman said in a statement: "Police officers do enforce the illegal sale of X-rated films. However, they are rarely reported to police. We would, however, encourage members of the public with any information about such activity to report it to police."

Other states also banned X-rated videos in the '80s, but the ACT and Northern Territory did not. The ACT has a regulated system under which X-rated films are sold only in licensed adult stores. Breen and sex-industry lobbyists say the ACT could be the model for a new regulated system in NSW. If the stores in the ACT sell material that is unclassified or has been refused classification, they are likely to lose their licence.

Even members of the Labor Party agree there is an issue that needs resolving. The NSW Parliament Standing Committee on Social Issues recommended, after studying the issue, that "the Attorney-General consider either establishing a licensing scheme, similar to that which operates in the ACT, to allow controlled premises to sell X-rated material in NSW or taking more enforcement action against breaches of the legislation." That was three years ago.

But there are no plans to establish a licensing system for adult shops or legalise X-rated sales, Debus's spokesman says. Any changes "should be addressed nationally" through the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General, which includes state and federal ministers. NSW has no position, he says, on the direction the talks between states should take on this matter. "No other state allows the sale of X-rated material, and Mr Breen's bill would result in NSW being out of step with the states and the Commonwealth," he says.

A spokeswoman for the federal Attorney-General says Philip Ruddock asked ministers at the last meeting of attorneys-general in March to "go back and clean up their own backyard". He reiterated his concern that the extent to which the law was not enforced was common knowledge, she says.

The Reverend Gordon Moyes - Nile's fellow Christian Democrat in the Legislative Council - believes the law is fine as it is, but is not being enforced. "People are flouting the law because they know they can get away with it," Moyes told Parliament during debate over Breen's amendment bill. "Liberalising the sale of some pornographic material will not lead to retailers restricting the material that they sell if there are no effective sanctions in place that are being enforced."

Breen's bill has fallen at its first parliamentary hurdle. Debus's spokesman said the Government decided to not support it, because "there is a fatal flaw in the bill. The bill proposes to make it legal to sell and publicly exhibit X18+ rated films without any visible mechanisms for increasing the level of enforcement of the classification laws."

Breen agrees there are no such mechanisms in his bill, but says the Government could easily introduce regulations to increase enforcement.

He believes Carr does not want to take on the religious right, including Nile and Moyes. "Bob Carr's attitude is let sleeping dogs lie," Breen says. "And while some of the videos contain dogs, they're certainly not sleeping."

When the upper house voted last week, Labor MPs crossed the chamber to vote with the Coalition, Christian Democrats and others. Government ministers sat chatting and laughing with a senior Coalition MP while the count was taken - 32 to five against the bill.

The last stop on Haines's tour of sex shops is up another narrow staircase. A pungent smell lingers as he walks past black plastic-covered masturbation booths on his way into the shop. Inside the shop, a middle-aged male office worker inspects the products, occasionally touching himself on the groin.

But Breen's proposal, and the attention on the issue this year, might have had some effect anyway. While there are bondage videos on show that Haines believes would be refused classification, the even more extreme material such as bestiality tapes that were on display during his last visit several months ago are gone, he says.

As Haines leaves, the shop's hi-fi is quietly playing the Stones' (I Can't Get No) Satisfaction.

***

Or how about this from a Four Corners investigation into the censorship in the Australian porn industry.

Deliver us from Evil 
05.05.00 
ABC Four Corners Program

".....in a Sydney sex shop Four Corners was easily able to purchase this banned video in which two women attempt to have sex with a pony.

The same shop also stocks X-rated tapes which are illegal to sell over the counter, including tapes that contain fetishes like bondage, fisting, defecation and urination."

******

PICTURE PREMIUM #103 RC.

Also banned this week was a Proof Print of Issue 103 of THE PICTURE PREMIUM magazine. This is a more explicit monthly offshoot of PICTURE magazine. Judging from previous submissions it looks like each issue is produced in two versions. The aim is to get an Unrestricted rating and a Category 1 rating. What seems to have happened is the one aimed at Category 1 has been Refused Classification, whilst the Unrestricted issue has been bumped to Category 1.

THE PICTURE PREMIUM NO 103 (said to be restricted) Publication (Magazine) 
Classification RC 
Consumer Advice 
Category Publication 
Version PROOF PRINT 
Duration 106 page(s) 
Date of Classification 14 February 2007 
Author NOT SHOWN 
Publisher ACP EXTRA 
Production Company NOT SHOWN 
Country of Origin AUSTRALIA 
Applicant ACP EXTRA - PICTURE 
File Number L07/25 
Classification Number 4072750E

THE PICTURE PREMIUM NO 103 (said to be unrestricted) Publication (Magazine) 
Classification Category 1 Restricted 
Consumer Advice 
Category Publication 
Version PROOF PRINT 
Duration 106 page(s) 
Date of Classification 15 February 2007 
Author NOT SHOWN 
Publisher ACP EXTRA 
Production Company NOT SHOWN 
Country of Origin AUSTRALIA 
Applicant ACP EXTRA - PICTURE 
File Number L07/24 
Classification Number 4462340E

******

Reality TV review.

Most of the 184 submissions to the ACMA inquiry into Reality Television complained that it had gone too far. Didn't I tell you to get your opinion in!

******

New Senior Classifier.

Attorney-General
Philip Ruddock
Media Release 030/2007 
16 February 2007 
APPOINTMENT TO THE CLASSIFICATION BOARD

Attorney-General Philip Ruddock today announced the appointment of Mr Daryn Nickols as a Senior Classifier of the Classification Board. 

Mr Nickols has been appointed as a full-time Senior Classifier for a period of three years, commencing 19 March 2007. 

“The appointment of Mr Nickols as a Senior Classifier will help to ensure the continued good management of the classification process,” Mr Ruddock said. 

“Mr Nickols is currently a Senior Investigation Officer with the NSW Ombudsman. As a Senior Classifier, he will bring a well developed capability to the day-to-day management of the classification process.” 

Mr Nickols, 34, was born and raised in Sydney’s western suburbs and now resides in North Sydney. He has a ten year old daughter and holds a Bachelor of Applied Science (Social Ecology) from the University of Western Sydney. 

The Classification Board, based in Sydney, is responsible for classifying films, publications and computer games on behalf of the Australian Government, and state and territory governments.

Members of the Board are chosen to be broadly representative of the Australian community. In making classification decisions, Board members are required to apply the relevant law and guidelines and their decisions are meant to reflect the standards of reasonable adults in the community.

******

Internet Filtering.

This week was Senate Estimates time again in Canberra. Steve 'Happy Clapper' Fielding has really been settling into the role vacated by Brian Harradine. He questioned the ACMA and Helen Coonan about internet filtering.

Fielding's other topic of concern was  pornographic television advertising. As well as Fielding and Connan, the other speakers are:

Content and Media
Dr Simon Pelling, Acting Chief General Manager, Content and Media
Mr Gordon Neil, General Manager, Media Industries

STANDING COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT, COMMUNICATIONS, INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND THE ARTS: Australian Communications and Media Authority: Discussion

Date: 12 February, 2007 
Committee name STANDING COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT, COMMUNICATIONS, INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND THE ARTS
Page: 27 
Proof: Yes
Database: Estimates Comm.
Source: Senate

Senator FIELDING—Minister, I am wondering whether you or your department could clarify this. I asked questions earlier with regard to television ads and where people go to complain about those ads. We were not sure whether it was this department or another department. Can someone clarify that for me now? I am back here just to make sure I do not miss out on this opportunity. Is this the area?

Talk Dr Pelling—I believe your question as I recall it related to regulation of television ads to the Communications Media Authority. To get the details, I may have to take that on notice, but television ads are regulated at a number of levels. The Commercial Television Industry Code of Practice covers issues related to things like the amount of advertising and the placement of that advertising. I cannot tell you right now whether it also covers issues relating to the content of that advertising in the sense that you were referring to it.

Talk Senator FIELDING—What was that first one again?

Talk Dr Pelling—The amount of advertising.

Talk Senator FIELDING—The amount and placement?

Talk Dr Pelling—And the placement of advertising.

Talk Senator FIELDING—You are not sure on content. Which group was that?

Talk Dr Pelling—That was the Commercial Television Industry Code of Practice.

Talk Mr Neil—It regulates the broadcasters including for content.

Talk Senator FIELDING—Would you like to keep going for a moment?

Talk Dr Pelling—The code of practice is a code adopted by the broadcasters and enforced by the regulators—the Australian Communications and Media Authority. In addition, there are Children’s Television Standards, which are set under the broadcasting act, and they stipulate a range of rules about the placement and the dealing of advertising during those periods when children’s television operates. I understand the third level, in addition to the coregulatory approach for broadcasters, is the Australian Association of National Advertisers, which has voluntary industry codes. For example, it has a code relating to things like marketing of food and beverages and it would certainly deal with other areas of content. I think the AANA is an industry association which is not directly related to any government department. That is a voluntary code of practice that they adopt.

Talk Senator FIELDING—Is the AANA a voluntary code?

Talk Dr Pelling—Yes. That applies to the advertising industry.

Talk Senator FIELDING—What was the first one that you mentioned?

Talk Dr Pelling—I have mentioned three: the Commercial Television Broadcasters Code of Practice, which is what all their general program content is regulated under; the Children’s Television Standards, which ACMA makes under the act specifically related to children’s television.

Talk Senator Coonan—That is the classification placement and amount.

Talk Dr Pelling—The advertisers themselves have an association called the Australian Association of National Advertisers, which has its own code.

Talk Senator Coonan—That is content.

Talk Senator FIELDING—Thank you for that.

Talk Mr Neil—ACMA regulates the broadcasters; it does not regulate the advertisers. Within the BSA—the Broadcasting Services Act—and within the codes of the various parts of the industry by which they are answerable to ACMA, there are elements of that which go to what they may or may not advertise, but in fact the advertisers have their own independent regulatory system which is not overseen by any act of the Commonwealth. Of course, they are subject to regulation by the Trade Practices Act for false and misleading and the general provisions of various laws, but there is no explicit regulation of advertisers per se.

Talk Dr Pelling—That relates to things like where the ads are put and how many ads are shown in a given time, but not actually to the content of the ads.

Talk Senator FIELDING—Do the Children’s Television Standards cover just placement and not content?

Talk Senator Coonan—No. The standards that are administered by ACMA also prohibit certain types of advertising to children during programs that are classified C for children and P for preschool. That is not quite right.

Talk Senator FIELDING—Does the government regulate children’s ads for the correct way of content now and not just placement?

Talk Senator Coonan—The standard does. It is administered by ACMA.

Talk Senator FIELDING—The content standards.

Talk Mr Neil—For instance, the television sex ads that are on at midnight. If they were on at five o’clock they would breach the codes of the broadcasters because they would be out of classification.

Talk Senator FIELDING—There was a caller on one of the talkback shows in Melbourne who really classified the ads that are on late at night masquerading as dating services as soft porn. I am interested to know what standards are there of content of non-children’s ads now? I am just talking about ads now. Is there any government department responsible for that or does anyone look at the standards?

Talk Dr Pelling—My understanding is that they would have to comply with broad classification rules.

Talk Mr Neil—The Attorney-General is responsible for what was the Office of Film and Literature Classification. It has just changed its name. It sets the standards, which are used to determine the levels of G, PG, M, MA, R, 18+, XRC. They provide those. The commercial broadcasters in fact have standards, which are based on those but are slightly different. They have an MA violent category where the OFLC has Mature Accompanied and it has Mature Ault. They have modified them slightly for television but they are very close to them and those standards are used to determine at what time of night on free-to-air television a classification may be shown. In the case of the internet, we rely entirely on the OFLC’s classification system.

Talk Senator FIELDING—Whose classification?

Talk Mr Neil—The Office of Film and Literature Classification, and as I said, this is where the Attorney-General’s Department was raised.

Talk Senator FIELDING—I would like to come back to the complaints side of things. If someone is complaining about television ads—as I said, some people describe them as sort porn—where do they go?

Talk Mr Neil—In that case, if they believe the ad was inappropriate for the time and, indeed, it could be inappropriate for television on its classification, the first port of call should be to the broadcaster to say that they believe that they have broadcasted something inappropriate for that time zone. The broadcaster has 35 days to respond. If they do not respond or the person is unhappy with the response, then they go to ACMA with their complaint.

Talk Senator Coonan—ACMA can take action if it wishes. An example of that was when I initiated an inquiry by ACMA in relation to the Big Brother online episode. The code is designed to reflect providing community standards. It is due to be reviewed this year and, what is different about it, was that with the reality TV program, how it happened, the type it happened, et cetera, and whether or not the standards and the rules were properly able to cope with that particular kind of iteration of what was shown both by broadcaster and stream was the subject of that particular inquiry. We have collapsed or at least added into this review reality TV. I will be getting a report back on that shortly.

Talk Mr Neil—I would like to add that if the person believed it was X or RC—by ‘soft porn’ they meant something which exceeded the allowable standards—then that is a breach of the BSA and they can complain directly to ACMA without going through the first stage to the broadcaster because it is a breach of the act, as opposed to the code.

Talk Senator FIELDING—Thank you for that. It raises my point as before. I think people believe that complaining to a television station leads nowhere so they do not pick up the phone to start with. That is a concern. For you not to tell me otherwise and prove that I am not right in what I am saying—as I speak to a lot of people and they just feel that if they complain then nothing is going to happen, so they do not complain—that is the reason I am going to continue to push for ACMA to be copied in on all complaints, so that you can start to get a feel for what Australians are genuinely thinking about what is going on. Does the film and literature review board look at the content on every ad?

Talk Senator Coonan—No, they classify it.

Talk Senator FIELDING—They classify it before it goes?

Talk Senator Coonan—Yes.

Talk Senator FIELDING—They classify every ad before it goes to air?

Talk Mr Neil—The broadcasters classify their ads before they go to air.

Talk Senator FIELDING—The broadcasters classify them?

Talk Mr Neil—They have their own central group that looks at ads and each of the broadcasters has its own experts for looking at this material. That is their own checking system but in the end they are answerable to ACMA. Their job is to get that right. If they get it wrong then they have got a problem.

Talk Senator FIELDING—I would like to clarify this, and it may be a little bit separate. Is it correct that a film must be classified by the film and literature review board before it is shown?

Talk Mr Neil—All films are classified.

Talk Senator FIELDING—Television ads can go to air with the current players themselves looking at it and agreeing in their own process that this is quite okay to go to air with no classification?

Talk Mr Neil—Broadcasters have highly trained individuals with long experience who do this for them and have done it for a long time. They are experts in the field.

Talk Senator FIELDING—I think a lot of people in Australia would disagree with that, especially with the ads that are on a lot of the time at night—raunchy ads—which people have described as soft porn masquerading as dating services, selling phone sex and all sorts of things on them. Quite clearly something is going astray.

Talk Senator Coonan—Can you give me an example of a channel—I presume it is free-to-air—a time and a particular ad?

Talk Senator FIELDING—I was going to bring them in here and show a couple. I wish I had done that now.

Talk Senator Coonan—Yes.

Talk Senator FIELDING—And the people that are complaining about them.

Talk Senator Coonan—What channel was it?

Talk Senator FIELDING—I have not got it at hand but I can certainly go back and look at it for you.

Talk Senator Coonan—Was it a free-to-air?

Talk Senator FIELDING—It was free-to-air.

Talk Senator Coonan—Free-to-air, thank you. Will you give me some information?

Talk Senator FIELDING—Yes.

Talk Senator Coonan—I would be interested to follow that.

Talk Senator FIELDING—So if someone has a complaint, where do they go regarding these television ads?

Talk Mr Neil—If they believe the ad is X or beyond, they can complain directly to ACMA because that would be a breach of the Broadcasting Services Act. Normally if you have a complaint with the broadcaster, you would go to the broadcaster first. The notion is to give them an opportunity to answer your concern. If they do not satisfy you then you go to ACMA. They do advertise regularly the complaints procedures and where you can get their code, et cetera. In fact, on free-to-air television they are required to do that.

Talk Senator FIELDING—Is there any way of someone requesting ACMA to look into these ads or have I done that by basically mentioning it here today?

Talk Mr Neil—We would need to identify the ads. If you bring them to us then we can take them to ACMA and ask if they are breaching the Broadcasting Services Act.

Talk Senator FIELDING—I have not got copies readily at home. I do not record these things. I will need to work out how to get them. I am sharing a community feeling that people are concerned about these ads and I am concerned that the people that are rating them are the people that are airing them.

Talk Senator Coonan—That is what a coregulatory arrangement does. That does not mean to say that it is perfect. When you look at the hours and hours of content that is broadcast, not all of it is looked at by anyone other than the broadcaster. Most of it is fine, but not all of it is, and if you are in a position to be able to identify where someone may have infringed this code, please bring it forward because we will treat it very seriously.

***

Soft-Porn TV Ads.

Here the speakers are:

Senator Chris Ellison Minister for Justice and Customs

Mr Robert Cornall, Secretary of the Attorney-General’s Department. 

STANDING COMMITTEE ON LEGAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS: Attorney-General's Department: Discussion
Date: 13 February, 2007 
Committee name: STANDING COMMITTEE ON LEGAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS
Page: 4 
Proof: Yes
Database: Estimates Comm. 
Source: Senate

Senator FIELDING—Family First is interested in what I describe as raunchy—some people even describe it as soft porn—ads on television at night designed to sell dating services, phone sex and mobile phone screensavers. What can you tell me about such ads?

Talk Mr Cornall—This department’s responsibilities extend to the classification of film, literature and computer games. Matters that appear on television fall within the responsibilities of the Department of Communications, Information Technology and the Arts. Within that area, television is largely an area subject to self-regulation under various codes of practice. Mr Anderson wants to add to that.

Talk Mr Anderson—To add one thing to that: there is a process through the Advertising Standards Board by which complaints about television advertising and, I think, other forms of advertising can be made as well. They have a process through which they inquire and then deal with the television stations if they uphold a complaint. But, as Mr Cornall mentioned, that is not a matter within this portfolio.

Talk Senator FIELDING—Do the Office of Film and Literature Classification look at films and books?

Talk Mr Anderson—They do not look at books; they look at magazines. They can look at books, but publications is a potentially narrow category. It is mainly computer games, DVDs, public exhibition films.

Talk Senator FIELDING—Predominantly people watch a lot of the films on television. I understand that the industry rates its own ads—is that right?

Talk Mr Anderson—The television industry is self-regulated.

Talk Senator FIELDING—Do they use any of the Office of Film and Literature Classification ratings to marry up with your specifications?

Talk Mr Anderson—They are required to have regard to the classification guidelines that are used by the Office of Film and Literature Classification, but they are applied by their own assessors and some of the TV stations under their code of practice have additional classifications that are not used for by the Office of Film and Literature Classification.

Talk Senator FIELDING—Has your department had any complaints in regard to these sorts of ads late at night? In Canberra, I think these ads are being aired as early 9 pm.

Talk Mr Anderson—I am not aware. It is possible that people might have made complaints to the Office of Film and Literature Classification itself, but if they had they would have been redirected to the Department of Communications, Information Technology and the Arts or to the Advertising Standards Board, or alternatively to the TV stations under their codes of practice.

Talk Senator FIELDING—Does the government play any role in who is on the committee or board that rates its own TV ads?

Talk Mr Anderson—It is not a matter for this portfolio. I do not know how those people are appointed.

Talk Senator FIELDING—I was in another committee and they pointed me to this area. It sounds like you are pointing me back to the other committee.

Talk CHAIR—Are you saying you were in the communications committee yesterday?

Talk Senator FIELDING—Yes.

Talk Mr Cornall—If that is the case, I am surprised because it is very clear that we do not have any role to play with respect to television regulation.

Talk Senator Ellison—I think what I can do to assist Senator Fielding is to take it on notice and check with that committee. One way or another between us, we will come up with the answer.

Talk Senator FIELDING—My concern is that obviously films quite rightly are looked at because they have influence on people but it seems to me that ads are left up to the industry. With no hands-on role from the government, I think you have the fox guarding the hen-house. I am really concerned. I have had a lot of complaints. I am sure that most members of parliament would be getting complaints about these sorts of ads that some have described as soft porn or raunchy ads masquerading as date services are a concern to Australian families and my concern is that I do not think the government is looking at it hard enough. I will be keen for the minister to take it up with the other committee.

Talk Senator Ellison—It is an important issue and one which I know is of concern in the community. From the point of view of the Attorney-General’s Department, the issue is not within its responsibility. However, sitting here as minister I will take it on board and we will develop a whole-of-government response for Senator Fielding because it is an important issue.

Talk Mr Cornall—I flick through all of the correspondence we draft for the Attorney and I do not recall any answers for the Attorney to this sort of question. I have just asked Mr Anderson and he does not recall any either. So I do not think these issues are being raised with the Attorney-General.

[12.54 pm]

UPDATES
10th February 2007

Saddam's Execution RC.

******

Classification Amendment Bill 2006.

This week the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Amendment Bill 2006 was back for a second reading. The bill was first introduced into the House of Representatives on December 7th last year. At the time the Attorney-General Philip Ruddock showed how the bill could be used to increase censorship.

"The minister, rather than the director, will also determine fee waiver principles to be applied by the director and the convenor when waiving fees payable under the act for applications."

In the past, Des Clark, the Director of the OFLC, has allowed fee waivers to groups such as the Australian Family Association. Much to their displeasure, he had also refused them. With the Attorney-General calling the shots, these groups are going to have a much easier time challenging ratings.

On the plus side, it allows for DVD extras to escape scrutiny if it is thought that their content does not exceed the rating of the film itself. This is an obvious plus for small companies such as Siren when releasing something like an extras laden Something Weird DVD. 

Parliament of Australia 
Department of Parliamentary Services Parliamentary Library 

BILLS DIGEST 
Information analysis and advice for the Parliament 

6 February 2007, no. 78, 2006–07, ISSN 1328-8091

Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Amendment Bill 2006 

Mary Anne Neilsen 

Law and Bills Digest Section

Date introduced: 7 December 2006 
House: House of Representatives 
Portfolio: Attorney-General 
Commencement: Various dates as set out in clause 2.

***

Here is the Labor's Kelvin Wilson showing support for the bill. It is heartening to hear him speak against censorship. However, we are going into an election later this year with Labor taking a policy that will attempt to censor the internet. 

CLASSIFICATION (PUBLICATIONS, FILMS AND COMPUTER GAMES) AMENDMENT BILL 2006 Second Reading Speech Mr KELVIN THOMSON (Wills) (10.00 a.m.)—The Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Amendment Bill 2006 amends three pieces of legislation—the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995, the Broadcasting Services Act 1992 and the Freedom of Information Act 1982. The bill integrates the Office of Film and Literature Classification into the Attorney-General’s Department and, in so doing, amends its functions to cover multimedia technological developments.

There is a clear argument for updating the law in order to properly classify multimedia content, such as the extra features that are now frequently included in the DVD release of movies and television programs. Things like out-takes, games, advertisements, behind-the-scenes specials and additional material left out of the original movie or television program for good reason also ought to be properly classified. The updated guidance offers better protection for families by providing comprehensive advice to parents on content. Labor supports this.

The integration of the Office of Film and Literature Classification into the Attorney-General’s Department provides greater control of its functions to the Attorney-General. The bill transfers from the board director to the Attorney-General the power to determine markings for each type of classification and the manner in which they are to be displayed. I ought to make the general point when we are having this kind of discussion that, however much we might deplore some of the content which shows up in the modern era, publications, computer games and video material evermore accessible via the internet cannot be hidden. The ideas they contain cannot be hidden and the only ultimately effective way to overcome offensive or destructive ideas is to present and espouse virtuous ideas, and this is what past censorship efforts have taught us. Former US President John F Kennedy said about America:

We are not afraid to entrust the American people with unpleasant facts, foreign ideas, alien philosophies and competitive values. For a nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people.

I think he was pretty close to the mark.

The explanatory memorandum tells us that the classification publications legislation amends three acts and that it has four schedules. Schedule 1 facilitates the integration of the Office of Film and Literature Classification into the Attorney-General’s Department; removes the director’s financial powers and responsibilities for the administration of the Office of Film and Literature Classification; replaces references to that agency in legislation with more appropriate references; and provides for Australian Public Service staff from the Attorney-General’s Department to support the Classification Board and the Classification Review Board in executing their statutory functions. So, rather than having the director appointing consultants, attorneys-general will be providing APS staff and the financial accounts will be kept by the Attorney-General’s Department, which will be assuming responsibility for the financial administration.

Schedule 2 makes amendments to reinforce the independence of the Classification Board and the Classification Review Board. It provides separate statutory powers to the convener of the review board to manage the administrative functions of the review board independently of the board. It confines the existing powers of the director to matters associated with the board and gives new powers to the convener for matters associated with the review board. These include obtaining copies of material to be reviewed, considering applications for the waiver of fees and issuing classification certificates. Consistent with ministerial responsibility, the bill also transfers to the minister administering the act, the Attorney-General, the power to determine fee waiver principles in consultation with state and territory censorship ministers. As part of that schedule, we will remove the anomaly whereby the Classification Review Board is now reliant on the Director of the Classification Board for some of its administrative functions. This schedule also remedies some technical errors.

Schedule 3 makes amendments to improve the operation of the national classification scheme and respond to a very rapidly changing technological environment for entertainment media. It provides that additions to already classified films of descriptions or translation, such as subtitling or captioning or navigation functions such as interactive menus, are not considered modifications necessitating reclassification.

The bill also sets up an additional content assessor scheme which will recommend to the board the classification and consumer advice for additional content which is released with an already classified or exempt film. Quality assurance processes are included in the scheme to ensure the ongoing integrity of the classification process. Of course, it is the case that we are getting these additions to already classified films in a changing technological environment, so the government takes the view—I think not unreasonably—that things like navigation functions should not be considered modifications which require reclassification and, where we have additional content being released with an already classified film, we will have this assessor scheme for the additional content. I think that is a reasonable modifying measure and there are safeguards which have been put in place to protect the integrity of the classification scheme as a whole.

The final schedule, schedule 4, makes a number of miscellaneous minor amendments to repeal expired or redundant provisions. The bill also transfers from the director of the board to the minister the power to determine markings to be displayed about classified material. That power is to be exercised by the minister in consultation with state and territory ministers. The bill will not have any financial impact, or it is not expected there will be any significant financial impact. It will not result in any change to the net asset position for the Commonwealth. It relates pretty much exclusively to changes to administrative processes. So the opposition does not regard this as a controversial piece of legislation and will not be opposing it.

***

CLASSIFICATION (PUBLICATIONS, FILMS AND COMPUTER GAMES) AMENDMENT BILL 2006; VETERANS' AFFAIRS LEGISLATION AMENDMENT (STATEMENTS OF PRINCIPLES AND OTHER MEASURES) BILL 2006: Second Reading
Date: 08 February, 2007 
Database: Senate Hansard
Speaker: Campbell, Sen Ian (Minister for Human Services, LP, Western Australia, Government) 
Page: 18
Proof: Yes 
Source: Senate
Stage: Second Reading 
Type: Speech
Context: BILLS 

CLASSIFICATION (PUBLICATIONS, FILMS AND COMPUTER GAMES) AMENDMENT BILL 2006 VETERANS’ AFFAIRS LEGISLATION AMENDMENT (STATEMENTS OF PRINCIPLES AND OTHER MEASURES) BILL 2006 Second Reading Speech Senator IAN CAMPBELL (Western Australia—Minister for Human Services) (11.07 a.m.)—I move:

That these bills be now read a second time.

I seek leave to have the second reading speeches incorporated in Hansard.

Leave granted.

The speeches read as follows—

CLASSIFICATION (PUBLICATIONS, FILMS AND COMPUTER GAMES) AMENDMENT BILL 2006

The Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Amendment Bill 2006 amends the Classification Act to implement Government policy on the accountability framework for statutory agencies and to ensure the National Classification Scheme’s on-going smooth operation in a changing technological environment.

The bill facilitates the integration of the Office of Film and Literature Classification into the Attorney-General’s Department.

Classification Board and Classification Review Board functions remain unchanged. But the Director of the Classification Board will cease to have agency management powers and financial responsibilities. The Attorney-General’s Department will provide staff to support each of the Boards and assume responsibility for their financial administration.

These changes reinforce the independent functions of the Classification Board and the Classification Review Board. The bill confines the existing powers of the Director to matters associated with the Board and gives separate statutory powers to the Convenor for matters associated with the Review Board.

The bill also transfers from the Director of the Classification Board to the Attorney-General, as the Minister administering the Act, responsibility for delegated legislation, consistent with ministerial responsibility.

This includes the power to determine markings to be displayed about classified material – to be exercised in consultation with State and Territory Censorship Ministers. The Minister, rather than the Director, will also determine fee waiver principles to be applied by the Director and the Convenor when waiving fees payable under the Act for applications.

The bill also makes amendments to improve the operation of the National Classification Scheme – responding to industry concern about marketing imperatives and the law’s application in light of changing technology. They streamline the classification process and reduce the regulatory burden on industry. These amendments have been the subject of consultation including with State and Territory Censorship Ministers.

Descriptions or translations such as sub-titling, captioning, dubbing or audio descriptions, and navigation functions such as interactive menus, are increasingly added to already classified films. Currently, these constitute ‘modifications’, necessitating the film’s reclassification.

However, descriptions or translations do not provide new content. They provide access to already classified material for the ageing population, and for people with language barriers, or visual or hearing impairments. Likewise, menu functions merely facilitate navigation around new media such as DVDs. They include ‘play’ or ‘fast forward’ functions, or menu options to navigate between selections.

Following amendment, such descriptions or translations and navigation functions will no longer be considered modifications requiring reclassification.

This bill also facilitates the addition of related but new material to already classified feature movies when they are re-released on disc for sale or hire. These include additional scenes, interviews with the Director, and even featurettes taking their meaning from the content of the film.

Currently, these additions mean that the disc constitutes a new ‘film’ as defined, and must be classified, even though the feature movie on the disc has already been classified. Additional content rarely results in a classification different from that of the feature film on the disc.

The bill provides for an additional content assessment scheme whereby a person appropriately trained and authorised by the Director may recommend to the Classification Board the classification and consumer advice for additional content released with already classified or exempt films. The Classification Board will retain responsibility for classifying the film. But its consideration will be assisted by the assessment of an authorised assessor.

The scheme contains safeguards to ensure the integrity of the system. These include requiring the Board to revoke classifications in specified circumstances which demonstrate that the assessment on which the classification was based was highly unreliable and the Board would otherwise have made a different classification decision.

In addition, the Director has a power to revoke, in specified circumstances, an additional content assessor’s status or, in serious cases, bar them from being an assessor for up to three years, or bar an applicant from using the additional content assessment scheme for up to three years. These powers are permissive, and only exercisable under certain conditions. They are designed to deter users from abusing the system or providing lax or inadequate assessments of additional content. Decisions by the Director to revoke an assessor’s status or bar an assessor or applicant from using the scheme may be reviewed by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

The additional content assessment scheme was developed following public consultation on a discussion paper released earlier this year. The amendments are modelled on the existing authorised computer games assessor scheme which has been operating successfully for some years.

The bill contains several other minor amendments which respond to changing technology and marketing initiatives and miscellaneous technical amendments.

The amendments contained in this bill will ensure the National Classification Scheme continues to serve both industry and the public well – responding to the needs of the rapidly evolving world of entertainment media but guaranteeing the reliability of classification information for consumers.

I commend the bill.

***

On November 30th 2006, the Democrats Natasha Stott Despoja asked the following questions in relation to the new arrangements. This week, the Liberal's Chris Ellison finally answered them.

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE: Office of Film and Literature Classification
Date: 07 February, 2007 
Database: Senate Hansard
Questioner: Stott Despoja, Sen Natasha (AD, South Australia, Opposition) 
Responder: Ellison, Sen Chris (Minister for Justice and Customs, LP, Western Australia)
Page: 115 
Proof: Yes
Question_no: 2903 
Source: Senate

Type Question Context Answers to Questions on Notice

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE Office of Film and Literature Classification (Question No. 2903) Question Senator Stott Despoja (South Australia) asked the Minister representing the Attorney-General, upon notice, on 30 November 2006:

(1) (a) Can the Attorney-General explain why it was necessary to remove the classification policy support function of the department’s Canberra operation; and (b) was the Office of Film and Literature Classification (OFLC) advice of inferior quality or was it not in accord with the conservative views of the Government. 

(2) Given that the Remuneration Tribunal Determination 2006/13 indicates that the total remuneration packages for the Director and Deputy Director of the OFLC have been reduced, respectively, from $245 000 to $191 370 and $206 490 to $164 510: (a) can the Attorney-General release the submission made to the Remuneration Tribunal; if not, can the review on which the submission might be based be released; (b) can the Attorney-General advise why the Remuneration Tribunal Determination makes the exception of continuing with the higher remuneration for the Director and Deputy Director, despite the downgrading of the remuneration levels; and (c) are the positions now different and simpler and as a result deserve a lower level of remuneration. 

(3) Will the cost savings afforded by this new structure be passed on to industry in the form of lower classification fees. 

Answer Senator Ellison (Western Australia—Minister for Justice and Customs)—The Attorney-General has provided the following answer to the honourable senator’s question:

(1) (a) and (b) It is Government policy in the context of the Uhrig report to review all Australian Government agencies and identify any functions that should be brought back within a Department. The Government decided that the policy and administrative functions of the OFLC, including policy development and advice to Government, should be within the Department. This is consistent with the States and Territories where classification policy advice is provided by government departments. The independent decision-making functions of the Classification Board and the Classification Review Board remain unchanged. 

(b) The statutory responsibilities of the current Director, including financial management and agency administration, and delegated responsibilities of the Deputy Director, will continue until legislative amendments come into effect. This should occur prior to 1 July 2007. The term of the current Director, Mr Des Clark, expires on 16 April 2007 and the term of the Deputy Director, Mr Paul Hunt, expires on 31 May 2007. It is appropriate that any changes to the remuneration level of the statutory offices should coincide with the new arrangements. 

(c) The Director and Deputy Director will continue to have decision-making roles as members of the Classification Board and the Director’s responsibilities for managing the Board will be unchanged. However, neither office will have separate agency or financial management roles. 

(2) (a) The Attorney-General’s submission to the Remuneration Tribunal noted that the removal of management and administration functions from the responsibilities of the Director and Deputy Director may justify a reduction in their remuneration levels.

(b) The statutory responsibilities of the current Director, including financial management and agency administration, and delegated responsibilities of the Deputy Director, will continue until legislative amendments come into effect. This should occur prior to 1 July 2007. The term of the current Director, Mr Des Clark, expires on 16 April 2007 and the term of the Deputy Director, Mr Paul Hunt, expires on 31 May 2007. It is appropriate that any changes to the remuneration level of the statutory offices should coincide with the new arrangements. 

(c) The Director and Deputy Director will continue to have decision-making roles as members of the Classification Board and the Director’s responsibilities for managing the Board will be unchanged. However, neither office will have separate agency or financial management roles. 

(3) The costs and savings of the integration will be monitored and any impact on the cost of providing classification services will be considered in future fee reviews.

******

Advertising Standards Complaints. 

Here are a few more interesting recent complaints heard by the Advertising Standards Board in January. Lots more can be found at their website (adstandards.com.au). 

The following three advertisements all had the complaints against them dismissed.

ADVERTISING STANDARDS BOARD CASE REPORT
1. Complaint reference number 506/06 
2. Advertiser Jamba! GmbH (Jamster - Porn Manager Game) 
3. Product Mobile phones/SMS 
4. Type of advertisement TV 
5. Nature of complaint Portrayal of sex/sexuality/nudity – section 2.3 
6. Date of determination Tuesday, 16 January 2007 
7. DETERMINATION Dismissed 

DESCRIPTION OF THE ADVERTISEMENT 
This television advertisement features a kneeling blonde woman wearing a black bodice outfit with a small cartoon male in briefs and a robe, smoking a cigar, alongside. An image of a video camera is also featured with the words "Porn Manager Mobile Game". A male voiceover announces "so, due to a complaint we had to rename this game, it is still of course the pornography manager game, and trust me, it is so good one lady should have complained. Direct your own x-rated movie scenes in the best selling mobilegame. Just text x1 to 194000." During the description the game screens are shown with still visuals of cartoon characters.

THE COMPLAINT 
A sample of comments which the complainant/s made regarding this advertisement included the following: 

It was saying download some chick and you can make her do any sex moves you want. 

THE ADVERTISER’S RESPONSE 
Comments which the advertiser made in response to the complaint/s regarding this advertisement included the following: 

We respectfully disagree with the complainant's claim that our advertisement was inappropriate due to it's sexual nature. From the images of the game, one can see that there are no sexual images; it is a cartoon and a set up for a pornography scene which is very "tongue in cheek". 

We put stars to hide the word porn, as we understand that it might offend viewers and it was aired on MTV only after 11.30pm. 

We sincerely regret that any offence was taken.

THE DETERMINATION 
The Advertising Standards Board (“Board”) considered whether this advertisement breaches Section 2 of the Advertiser Code of Ethics (the “Code”). 

The Board viewed the advertisement and considered whether it breaches Section 2.1 dealing with sex, sexuality and nudity. 

The Board agreed that that the advertisement itself was not particuarly explicit, and the animations on the featured game were hard to make out. The Board also agreed that the depiction of the woman in the advertisement was not so sexual or offensive by community standards, given the timeslot, as to warrant changing or removing the advertisement from the air. The Board also agreed it was difficult to seperate the advertisement from the product in this case. 

Finding that the advertisement did not breach the Code on other grounds, the Board dismissed the complaint.

***

ADVERTISING STANDARDS BOARD CASE REPORT
1. Complaint reference number 531/06 
2. Advertiser Simon & Schuster (The Red Dahlia) 
3. Product Retail 
4. Type of advertisement Transport 
5. Nature of complaint Violence Other – section 2.2 
6. Date of determination Tuesday, 16 January 2007 
7. DETERMINATION Dismissed 

DESCRIPTION OF THE ADVERTISEMENT 
This advertisement featured on public transport advertises Lynda La Plante's latest novel "The Red Dahlia". The left hand image coloured red, and is that of a woman with eyes closed and her left hand held up. The words "Two women, mutilated and murdered 50 years apart." An image to the right duplicates that on the left, but is coloured black as if in shadow. Text continues "The similarities? Terrifying. The difference? D.I. Anna Travis" A footnote reads "The Black Dahlia was the most notorious, unsolved murder in L.A. history. Now a copycat killer stalks London in Lynda La Plante's most sinister thriller yet." 

THE COMPLAINT 
A sample of comments which the complainant/s made regarding this adver