Last month, I was interviewed by 4ZzZ’s Zed Games show on the introduction of an R18+ rating in Australia. The show also includes an interview with Gamers 4 Croydon. You can grab the mp3 here: 20100218-ZedGames-R18-EFA-G4C.

Thanks a lot to Ray and Chani for having me on the show. It’s great to see a gaming show on prime-time community radio, and I’m really excited to hear future episodes.

A few weeks ago I lodged EFA’s submission on legitimacy and transparency in Mandatory ISP Filtering, written by myself, Kylie Pappalardo and Irene Graham. We received a lot of negative feedback at EFA for engaging with the DBCDE on this issue, but I think it’s very important. Stepping back from my opposition to the Labor Government’s plan to introduce mandatory filtering, the issue is theoretically quite complex.

I oppose filtering on three main grounds:

1. it’s security theatre – it cannot, in its current form or any currently imaginable forms, provide greater security for Australians, and will certainly not help in combatting child sexual exploitation;
2. the current plan is ludicrously ill-defined; the goals are not clear, and there is no indication of how the filter is meant to achieve those goals;
3. there is a great risk to liberal democratic ideals when the government begins to censor material based on unaccountable procedures and criteria.

I think it’s important to note that I am not ideologically opposed to filtering; I think that there are, at least in theory, legitimate ways in which the government can impose restrictions on the material that is available online. I am acutely opposed to the current plan, but it is important to explain why I am opposed and avoid extremist conceptions that would undesirably tie the hands of democratically elected government in regulating online speech.

This submission addresses the third issue only. It attempts to map a framework for when mandatory filtering may be legitimately imposed. In doing so, as I said, we have received some negative feedback from those who believe it would have been better to maintain absolute opposition to any filtering scheme. I have to disagree here; the framework we set out in this paper sets very high standards of accountability in filtering that would, if reached, mean that my concerns about legitimacy would be greatly alleviated. (As a side note, in terms of the campaign, I believe that it is better to be involved in the development of policy than to maintain a strictly outsider position.)

I think that this paper makes a strong argument in addressing the concerns about legitimacy in Labor’s ill-defined filtering scheme, and I particularly want to thank Kylie Pappalardo and Irene Graham for their crucial help in putting it together.

• EFA’s submission to DBCDE transparency consultation (PDF)

[ Reposted from EFA ]

This weekend I attended and spoke at a rally organised by Ethan Watson in favour of the introduction of an R18+ rating for computer games. Many thanks to Ethan for organising the event, and thanks to the 50 or so people who turned up to show their support.

Photos courtesy of Andrew Wade.

You can view video of the event filmed by Julian on youtube: Part One;  Part Two;  Part Three; Part Four.

The next step in this campaign is to pressure the Commonwealth Minister for Home Affairs, Brendan O’Connor, to release the discussion paper. If you have not already, please take the time to send a letter showing your support. Once this is done, we will work on putting together a submission that addresses the concerns of Australian gamers.

The two main points that I wanted to get across on Saturday are relatively simple, but important. We need to refocus this debate by ensuring that everyone understands that interactive entertainment is an evolving and important legitimate expressive medium. I think an R18+ rating is important for two main reasons:

• An R18+ rating empowers adults and parents to make better decisions about the games they want to play and the games they want to allow their children to play.
• An R18+ rating for games, consistent with ratings for films, would enable Australians to create more complex and expressive stories that deal with adult themes – games are not just for children, and we do significant harm to freedom of expression by limiting the material that we deem acceptable in games to that which we find acceptable for children.

See our campaign page on our wiki for more details about how you can help.