Australia's Bizarre Classification System For Internet Censorship

stavros-59 writes "Australia's internet censorship watchdog, ACMA, uses an internet classification system originally intended for children's PC filters. ACMA has now made what must be the most amazing recent decisions of the whole bizarre censorship debate. The Register today has a story about ACMA's decision to force Apple to withdraw their ITMS gift feature from Australia on the basis that MA+ (over 15 and maybe sex) rated movies could not be given to children using the gift cards. The films are also banned on the internet but not at local video/DVD stores as detailed in this Whirlpool Forum post. At the same time, the photographic work of Robert Mapplethorpe (not for the fainthearted) has been classified as PG (Parental Guidance) by the Classification Board — which is not part of ACMA, but an agency under the Attorney General's Department."

Comments

Maplethorpe

[OzPeter]

Maplethorpe had an "interesting" career documenting the gay S&M culture of NYC, but as such he is a canonical 20th century photographer. Some of his pics can be very disturbing (ie genitalia mutilations) but he has also taken some fantastic classical nude images. But in a twist of reality he has also taken some of the most beautiful photos of flowers that I have ever seen. Hopefully the flowers are not being censored.

One ironic thing about Maplethorpe is that as a teen he struggled to win his fathers approval because of Maplethorpes artistic leanings and his struggle with his obvious gay sexuality. In order to "prove" himself to his father, Maplethrpe joined the most hardcore ROTC unit at his college and the irony was in the hazing routine - pure homoerotic S&M. So he seemed to be doomed! It all makes for his biography to be an interesting read

Re:Maplethorpe

[sexconker]

No they aren't. They're perfectly complementary.

What qualifies as art is subjective.
There is no single measure for what is or what is not art.
As such, just because you view something as art doesn't mean it is art.

Continuing on, my opinion that the subject matter in question is not art is just as valid as that of the artist and subjects.

I merely pointed out that I think his "art" is attention-seeking, gross-out trash. And that most people agree.

You can can compare any individual works you want, and have any opinion you want. Just know that your opinion isn't some sort of standard. In this particular case, know that your opinion is nowhere near that of most people's.

Many "artists" attempt to protect their art from popular criticism (i.e., most people thinking it sucks) by designating it as avante garde, post modern, high expressionist, etc.
You can't put shit in a special box and expect people not to call it shit. You can make something that's in the category of "shit" that is actually good. (The categories often used for this tactic are valid, and are not made invalid or sullied by the sue of the tactic.)

Using a particular label as a "Pfffft, then you just don't get <label> art" shield is all too common of a dismissive "defense" used by artists who refuse to accept criticism or consider popular opinion as being as valid as their own.

Re:Why is that the solution?

[Attila Dimedici]

So, my understanding is that Apple decided that it wasn't worth doing business in Australia (at least that particular form of business) and disabled the gifting feature for Itunes in Australia.