This Saturday 12th March 8-9 PM on It’s A Question Of Balance we are featuring Out And About – thought-provoking conversations on the street. We consider ‘Should We Have a Ratings System For Films?’ According to the US Classification and Rating Administration “Movie ratings provide parents with advance information about the content of movies to help them determine what movies are appropriate for their children at any age.” Are movie ratings necessary? And if so, do they achieve what they set out to accomplish? Other countries have more categories of ratings; the UK for example has U (universal, suitable for children 4 or older), PG (should not unsettle a child 8 or older), 12, 12A (must be accompanied by an adult), 15 (no one under 15), 18 (no one under 18), R18 (basically pornography, can only be shown at special cinemas or sold in sex shops). There is a big developmental difference between 13 and 18. With no rating between PG13 and R in America, are younger teens possibly seeing content they shouldn’t? Or conversely are older teens being shielded from content that could be appropriate for them? Would it be useful to have more ratings categories in America or are broad categories good enough? In the US, young children can see PG-13 and R-rated films if accompanied by their parents, unlike in other countries where the age ratings are strictly enforced. Should we aim to protect children from irresponsible adults by having enforced age ratings or is this interfering too much? Sex is censored much more strictly than violence in US cinema. What does this say about our society? With extreme sexual and violent content readily available on the internet are film ratings obsolete or do they still have a place to guide and inform?
What do you think? Ruth Copland gets the views of people on the street for our Out and About feature. Join us on Saturday 8-9 PM! For more info on the show and to hear past shows visit www.itsaquestionofbalance.com
