Office of Film and Literature Classification (New Zealand)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

The Office of Film and Literature Classification (OFLC, Māori: Te Tari Whakarōpū Tukuata, Tuhituhinga) is the government agency in New Zealand that is responsible for classification of all films, videos, publications, and some video games in New Zealand. It was established under Section 76 of the Films, Videos, and Publications Classification Act 1993 (FVPC Act), replacing various film classification acts,[1] including the Indecent Publications Tribunal. It is an independent Crown Entity in terms of the Crown Entities Act 2004. The head of the OFLC is called the Chief Censor, maintaining a title that has described the government officer in charge of censorship in New Zealand since 1916.

The FVPC Act gives the OFLC jurisdiction to classify "publications" which include films, videos, DVDs, computer games with restricted content, books, magazines, comics, manga, sound recordings, pictures, newspapers, photographs, photographic slides, "any print or writing", any "paper or other thing" that has images or words on it (including apparel, playing cards, greeting cards, art, store-fronts and billboards), and electronic digital image, text and sound computer files. The OFLC also approves film posters and slicks. Only computer games with restricted content, and all films, videos, and DVDs, must carry a label before being offered for supply or exhibited to the public.

Any person may submit any of the "publications" listed above for classification by the OFLC, with the permission of the Chief Censor. The Secretary for Internal Affairs, Comptroller of Customs, Commissioner of Police and the Film and Video Labelling Body may submit publications for classification without the Chief Censor's permission. The Courts have no jurisdiction to classify publications. If the classification of a publication becomes an issue in any civil or criminal proceeding, the Court must submit the publication to the OFLC. Any person who is dissatisfied with a decision of the OFLC may have the relevant publication, but not the OFLC decision, reviewed by the Film and Literature Board of Review.

Labels[edit]

The FVPC Act gives the OFLC the power to classify publications into three categories: unrestricted, restricted, and "objectionable" or banned. Unrestricted films are assigned a green or yellow rating label. Restricted films are assigned a red classification label.

In early 2013, some DVDs and Blu-rays released in New Zealand have had the rating label printed on the cover to prevent the removal of the labels, which is illegal.

New Zealand has used a colour-coded labelling system since 1987. The colours are intended to convey the messages conveyed by a traffic light: a green label means that nothing in the film, video or DVD should inhibit anyone viewing it; a yellow label means proceed with caution because the film, video or DVD may have content younger viewers should not see; and a red label means stop and ensure that no one outside of the restriction views the film, video, DVD or computer game. The New Zealand classification system currently uses the following labels:

Label Name Definition
G General Suitable for general audiences (awarded by the Film and Video Labelling Body and the Office of Film and Literature Classification)
PG Parental Guidance Parental guidance recommended for younger viewers (awarded by the Film and Video Labelling Body and the Office of Film and Literature Classification)
M Mature Suitable for (but not restricted to) mature audiences 16 years and up (awarded by the Film and Video Labelling Body and the Office of Film and Literature Classification)
R13 R13 Restricted to persons 13 years of age and over (awarded by the Office of Film and Literature Classification only)
R15 R15 Restricted to persons 15 years of age and over (awarded by the Office of Film and Literature Classification only)
R16 R16 Restricted to persons 16 years of age and over (awarded by the Office of Film and Literature Classification only)
R18 R18 Restricted to persons 18 years of age and over (awarded by the Office of Film and Literature Classification only)
R Restricted Restricted to a particular class of persons, or for particular purposes, or both, specified by the Office of Film and Literature Classification

Red labels have been available for non-film publications such as magazines and video games since 2005.

Classification law[edit]

The OFLC classifies material based on whether it is likely to be "harmful" or "injurious to the public good". Specifically (from the FVPC Act): "a publication is objectionable if it describes, depicts, expresses, or otherwise deals with matters such as sex, horror, crime, cruelty, or violence in such a manner that the availability of the publication is likely to be injurious to the public good." In 2000, the Court of Appeal of New Zealand decided in Living Word Distributors Limited v Human Rights Action Group (Wellington) [2000] NZCA 179 (a case involving two videos produced by Jeremiah Films) that the collocation of the words "sex, horror, crime, cruelty or violence" tends to point to activity rather than to the expression of opinion or attitude. On this interpretation, the OFLC had jurisdiction to restrict or ban publications describing or depicting sexual activities, but not those describing only an attitude or opinion about sex. The same interpretation required publications to describe or depict horror activities, criminal activities, cruel activities and violent activities, rather than just an opinion or attitude about those things, for the OFLC to be able to classify them.

The Court of Appeal explicitly ruled that the phrase "matters such as sex" is strongly indicative of sexual activities and does not include sexual orientation. This made it more difficult for the OFLC to restrict or ban, for example, publications that simply exploited the nudity of children or that portrayed classes of people as inherently inferior but that did not show any of the specified types of activity, notwithstanding the fact the FVPC Act directs the censors to give "particular weight" to these things when deciding whether or not to restrict or ban a publication. It also made it difficult for the OFLC to restrict publications simply containing offensive language or to ban videos of persons taken without their knowledge or consent, such as "upskirt" videos, on the ground of invasion of privacy, again because neither type of publication shows any of the specified types of activity. In 2005, Parliament amended the FVPC Act, and commenced amendment of the Crimes Act, to restore the OFLC's jurisdiction over all of these matters except for publications that simply portray classes of people as inherently inferior.

Under the FVPC Act, material that promotes, supports, or tends to promote or support the following is, by its nature, deemed objectionable (banned):

The Censorship Compliance Unit of the Department of Internal Affairs is responsible for the enforcement of the FVPC Act.

List of Chief Censors[edit]

The Chief Censor is the Chief Executive Officer and Chairperson of the Office of Film and Literature Classification.

Research[edit]

The OFLC regularly conducts research into a variety of issues concerning media regulation.

Title Year of Publication
Young People's Research 2013
Comparing Classifications 2010 and 2011
Attitudes towards classification labels 2013
What people think about film classification systems 2012
Guidance and Protection: What New Zealanders want from the classification system for films and games 2011
Understanding the Classification System: New Zealanders' views 2011
Parents and Gaming Literacy 2010
Report of a Public Consultation about The Last House on the Left 2009
A Review of Research on Sexual Violence in Audio-Visual Media 2009
Public Perceptions of a Violent Video Game X-Men Origins: Wolverine 2009
Viewing Violence: Audience Perceptions of Violent Content in Audio-Visual Entertainment 2008
Public Perceptions of Highly Offensive Language 2007
Public Understanding of Censorship 2007
Young People's Use of Entertainment Mediums 2006 and 2010
Underage Gaming 2005
The Viewing Habits of Users of Sexually Explicit Movies in Wellington and Hawke's Bay 2004 and 2005
A Guide to the Research into the Effects of Sexually Explicit Films and Videos 2003
Public Consultation on Sexually Explicit Videos 2001 and 2002
Public and Professional Views Concerning the Classification and Rating of Films and Videos 2000

The OFLC also regularly convenes panels that are demographically representative of New Zealand as a whole to assist it with the classification of particular publications. It has convened public panels to assist it with the classification of films such as Baise-moi, Salo, Monster's Ball, Irréversible, Silent Hill, Du er ikke alene, Lolita, 8MM and Hannibal. More frequently, the OFLC consults experts to assist it with the classification of various publications. For example, religious experts were consulted to assist with the classification of The Passion of the Christ, experts in road safety were consulted on Mischief Destroy, the Children's Commissioner on Ken Park and The Aristocrats, homeopathic practitioners on drug manufacturing books written by Steve Preisler[citation needed], various human rights organisations and the Vicar of Gisborne on a publication entitled Against Homosexuality[1], and rape crisis centres and psychologists on Irréversible and an edition of the University of Otago student magazine Critic.

Each year, the OFLC consults media studies students in its high school programme called Censor for a Day during which an unreleased film is shown to high school students who are then asked to classify it applying the criteria in the Films, Videos, and Publications Classification Act 1993. The students' classification is compared with, and usually identical to, the film's actual classification. Films used for Censor for a Day have included There's Something About Mary, American Pie, Road Trip, Final Destination 3, V for Vendetta, Thirteen, Crazy/Beautiful, Garage Days, The Notorious Bettie Page, Atonement, Charlie Bartlett, Defiance, Jennifer's Body, Daybreakers, Animal Kingdom, Tucker & Dale vs. Evil, Attack the Block, Trance, The East, The Grand Budapest Hotel and Housebound.

Criticism[edit]

The Society for the Promotion of Community Standards (SPCS) has repeatedly criticised the OFLC for not banning films such as Baise-moi, Irréversible, Takashi Miike's Visitor Q and Lies which it classes as highly pornographic and violent.

SPCS has recently targeted films scheduled for exhibition in the Beck's Incredible Film Festival and the New Zealand International Film Festivals. SPCS criticisms fail to note that New Zealand censorship laws have required censors to consider artistic and literary merit since the debate over Stanley Kubrick's first cinematic adaptation of Vladimir Nabokov's Lolita in 1960.

Having apparently exhausted its avenues of appeal over censorship decisions, in 2006 the SPCS began to criticise the financial management of the OFLC. It complained to the Auditor General that the OFLC was inefficient and mis-managed taxpayer funds. The Auditor General dismissed the SPCS' complaint, stating that "no evidence of waste was found during the course of the audit" of the OFLC.[2]

In June 2007, Exit International Director Dr Philip Nitschke described the decision by the Classification Office banning The Peaceful Pill Handbook as "very disappointing" while recognising "that the Censor was under intense political pressure over this decision".[3] The book was banned because it promotes and encourages criminal activity by offering instruction in how to smuggle and manufacture controlled drugs in violation of a number of statutes, not because it advocates reform of the law to permit the seriously ill and elderly access to pentobarbital.[4]

See also[edit]

Further reading[edit]

  • Angela Carr: Internet Traders of Child Pornography and Other Censorship Offenders in New Zealand: Department of Internal Affairs: Wellington: 2004 (available from the Department of Internal Affairs [2]
  • David Wilson: Censorship In New Zealand: The Policy Challenges Of New Technology. Social Policy Journal of New Zealand 19 2002.[5]
  • David Wilson: Responding to the challenges: recent developments in censorship policy in New Zealand. Social Policy Journal of New Zealand 30 2007.[6]

References[edit]

External links[edit]