In Australia, under the Commonwealth classification act (the Commonwealth Act) films and videotapes, whether they are made locally or come from overseas, have to be classified before they can be sold, hired or shown publicly. The Office of Film and Literature Classification But what about artistic works which are not intended as pornographic, yet contains some similar ‘high impact’ elements? As the following explains, this is the difficult category into which Ken Park fell. The resulting risk of detriment is obvious when you consider, say, child pornography. Classification laws reflect the view that films depicting, say, sexualised violence or child abuse, when seen by an individual can ‘normalise’ these types of behaviours in that individual (particularly where the individual has a predisposition such behaviours). Like, for example, anti-racist legislation (which is also a restriction on freedom of expression) it aims to reduce the risk of detriment to a society. Although the psychology and broader social issues are complex, it is important to consider some of the reasons why we have it. This article attempts to clarify some of the facts (and some of the myths) surrounding the ‘banning’ of Ken Park in Australia.įreedom of Expression vs Protecting Societyįilm classification is undoubtedly a restriction on freedom of expression. In Australia, it seems, he just wasn’t permitted to say it. He is a seriously regarded filmmaker and few doubt that he has something to say. Ken Park’s co-director, Larry Clark, is widely known for his earlier films Kids and Bully which created impact with their confronting treatment of violence and sex amongst American teenagers.
0 kommentar(er)
