[WITHDRAWN] Media Content Rating Act

[Quadrimmina]

Dear colleagues,

Neutonica would like to suggest that instead of using arbitrary numbers to rate the amount of sex, violence, etc, the WARB could test movies on different focus groups, and publish any objections those focus groups might have on some international forum.

However, Neutonica still cannot see any important argument being made in this act's preamble besides the "Think of Our Children" line. This delegate does not know of any definite case where children are indeed being affected by what they see or hear in the media around them. Perhaps, a better justification for this act could be provided.

Dr. Isaac Corrigan
Delegate of Neutonica

The argument is that ratings can be misconstrued. And any media content rating system is based on a "think of the children" line.

And the focus groups were the ones who would rate the sex/violence/etc. The problem remains that this has to appear on the packaging, so it has to be an arbitrary system to some degree.

[Mousebumples]

Tourism and business trips are not sufficient reason to micromanage what don't need micromanaging. That is what tourist brochures and taking a bit of responsibility to educate yourself about the nation you are visiting are for. This really isn't something which needs WA hand-holding.

Agreed. While I can see a potential benefit, I find it difficult to believe that many nations don't already have some sort of system in place. Further, if parents or individuals are concerned about the content of a particular piece of media that they are considering viewing, I would presume that in this wonderfully inter-connected world, some nation (if not their own) would have such details or descriptions available via the internet for their perusal.

As this doesn't seem to add much of anything to WA law, I shall have to oppose this matter at this time.

[Quadrimmina]

Tourism and business trips are not sufficient reason to micromanage what don't need micromanaging. That is what tourist brochures and taking a bit of responsibility to educate yourself about the nation you are visiting are for. This really isn't something which needs WA hand-holding.

Agreed. While I can see a potential benefit, I find it difficult to believe that many nations don't already have some sort of system in place. Further, if parents or individuals are concerned about the content of a particular piece of media that they are considering viewing, I would presume that in this wonderfully inter-connected world, some nation (if not their own) would have such details or descriptions available via the internet for their perusal.

As this doesn't seem to add much of anything to WA law, I shall have to oppose this matter at this time.

So you're opposing ensuring that people are informed about their media choices because they might be able to possibly find details by looking for some article some guy might have written online?

Sounds like a great plan!

Every nation treats things differently.

[Enn]

There is no reason, whatsoever, to regard this as appropriate for the World Assembly. If different nations having different ratings systems, then what's the problem? If you enter another country, then you ought to be subject to that nation's laws, customs and in this case ratings.

This is the World Assembly. Please keep to topics that are relevant to world affairs.

Angelo Lanerik,
Acting WA Ambassador for Enn

[Quelesh]

And any media content rating system is based on a "think of the children" line.

Then there shouldn't be one. That said, while we would vote against this proposal, we would not oppose it too strenuously, as its current form would allow us to easily ignore it as irrelevant to our society.

[Quadrimmina]

While we respect the views of the honorable delegations from Enn and Quelesh, Quadrimmina has always been an advocate for consumer rights. Every consumer has the right to be informed about their purchase. This is simply ensuring that a significant industry has easily accessible and understandable information provided to consumers.

There is no reason, whatsoever, to regard this as appropriate for the World Assembly. If different nations having different ratings systems, then what's the problem? If you enter another country, then you ought to be subject to that nation's laws, customs and in this case ratings.

This is the World Assembly. Please keep to topics that are relevant to world affairs.

Angelo Lanerik,
Acting WA Ambassador for Enn

Says the delegation who not too long ago tried to repeal the Appropriate Punishments Act of 2010 with a ban on the death penalty?

Not to mention the fact that while you are subject to the nation's laws, like I said earlier, a 15 in a conservative state is nowhere near a 15 in Quadrimmina. Expecting people to be educated concerning this is quite a stretch of the imagination.

And any media content rating system is based on a "think of the children" line.

Then there shouldn't be one. That said, while we would vote against this proposal, we would not oppose it too strenuously, as its current form would allow us to easily ignore it as irrelevant to our society.

Since most if not all rating systems are involuntary, of course. It's typically pressures in a market that force producers to rate their products (i.e. venues require ratings, people don't buy nonrated stuff, etc.)

[Grays Harbor]

While we respect the views of the honorable delegations from Enn and Quelesh, Quadrimmina has always been an advocate for consumer rights. Every consumer has the right to be informed about their purchase. This is simply ensuring that a significant industry has easily accessible and understandable information provided to consumers.

There is no reason, whatsoever, to regard this as appropriate for the World Assembly. If different nations having different ratings systems, then what's the problem? If you enter another country, then you ought to be subject to that nation's laws, customs and in this case ratings.

This is the World Assembly. Please keep to topics that are relevant to world affairs.

Angelo Lanerik,
Acting WA Ambassador for Enn

Says the delegation who not too long ago tried to repeal the Appropriate Punishments Act of 2010 with a ban on the death penalty?

Not to mention the fact that while you are subject to the nation's laws, like I said earlier, a 15 in a conservative state is nowhere near a 15 in Quadrimmina. Expecting people to be educated concerning this is quite a stretch of the imagination.

And any media content rating system is based on a "think of the children" line.

Then there shouldn't be one. That said, while we would vote against this proposal, we would not oppose it too strenuously, as its current form would allow us to easily ignore it as irrelevant to our society.

Since most if not all rating systems are involuntary, of course. It's typically pressures in a market that force producers to rate their products (i.e. venues require ratings, people don't buy nonrated stuff, etc.)

None of which make for a valid reason as to why this is a worldwide issue, something the WA needs to control.

[Linux and the X]

Says the delegation who not too long ago tried to repeal the Appropriate Punishments Act of 2010 with a ban on the death penalty?

I don't believe that was ever passed, fortunately.

As to the resolution at hand, we would likely support it if all references to age were removed.

[Enn]

There is no reason, whatsoever, to regard this as appropriate for the World Assembly. If different nations having different ratings systems, then what's the problem? If you enter another country, then you ought to be subject to that nation's laws, customs and in this case ratings.

This is the World Assembly. Please keep to topics that are relevant to world affairs.

Angelo Lanerik,
Acting WA Ambassador for Enn

Says the delegation who not too long ago tried to repeal the Appropriate Punishments Act of 2010 with a ban on the death penalty?

You really consider ratings as equal in importance for discussion as capital punishment? I'm certainly never going to Quadrimmia now. I'd be rather worried by what laws I might break that equate completely incomparable actions.
Well, quite aside from that proposal never becoming a resolution, as noted by the ambassador from Linux and the X, you are attributing statements made by my honoured predecessor here to me. Stephanie Fulton is on paid leave until further notice; I have been Acting in her stead for well over a month now. I would have thought people would notice the difference in both appearance and sound by now.
Another note
Also, looking through Ms. Fulton's papers, I see no reference whatsoever to any supposed repeal attempt. She may well have opposed said proposal; that is not tantamount to planning any repeal.

Not to mention the fact that while you are subject to the nation's laws, like I said earlier, a 15 in a conservative state is nowhere near a 15 in Quadrimmina. Expecting people to be educated concerning this is quite a stretch of the imagination.

So? You think I should be worried by what another nation chooses to rate a particular film? I fail to understand your concern - and with it, your motivation for taking up the World Assembly's time.

Angelo Lanerik,
Acting WA Ambassador for Enn

OOC: I've been using a different ambassador for some time now, and it certainly wasn't intended as a mere cosmetic update. Enn's politics have changed, so the messages given out here have too.

[Manticore Reborn]

URGESproducers of media as defined by this act to have their media checked by the WARB, but does not mandate it.

Do not the highlighted clauses render this entire proposal optional and thus render it useless? It does all well and good to impose this sort of rating system on nations, but if the media companies are not required submit their products for review, my government does not believe any would. Besides the obvious cost of submission, there is also the cost of labeling their products with this rating system. As any person will recognize companies will not incur optional costs.

The humble representative from the Kingdom of Manticore Reborn yields the floor.

[Linux and the X]

URGESproducers of media as defined by this act to have their media checked by the WARB, but does not mandate it.

Do not the highlighted clauses render this entire proposal optional and thus render it useless?

For mild-strength resolutions, it is considered permissible to only URGE (and not MANDATE) actions. Optionality refers to saying things such as "nations may ignore this proposal if they want".

It does all well and good to impose this sort of rating system on nations, but if the media companies are not required submit their products for review, my government does not believe any would. Besides the obvious cost of submission, there is also the cost of labeling their products with this rating system. As any person will recognize companies will not incur optional costs.

The humble representative from the Kingdom of Manticore Reborn yields the floor.

There would be a cost, yes, but if this were a standard many people would refuse to rent or buy movies that were not rated.

[Charlotte Ryberg]

The Honoured Ambassador from Charlotte Ryberg is concerned that the scope of the resolution is too small for the World Assembly to handle. Even if this is a good idea, member states should be able to keep their established national systems.

Considering the complexity, however, that could result with national systems vs WA system in regards to compliance and micromanagement I may be unable to support this draft.

[Manticore Reborn]

There would be a cost, yes, but if this were a standard many people would refuse to rent or buy movies that were not rated.

My government disagrees with this statement. Companies will not submit themselves to costs that they do not have too. Profitability is the key to the game. I realize that any cost of this would be negligible against the budgets of any big production, but it is a cost they do not need to incur and therefore will not.

[Linux and the X]

There would be a cost, yes, but if this were a standard many people would refuse to rent or buy movies that were not rated.

My government disagrees with this statement. Companies will not submit themselves to costs that they do not have too. Profitability is the key to the game. I realize that any cost of this would be negligible against the budgets of any big production, but it is a cost they do not need to incur and therefore will not.

Why would it be unnecessary? If people refuse to consume unrated movies, it would be necessary for studios to have films rated.

[Manticore Reborn]

There would be a cost, yes, but if this were a standard many people would refuse to rent or buy movies that were not rated.

My government disagrees with this statement. Companies will not submit themselves to costs that they do not have too. Profitability is the key to the game. I realize that any cost of this would be negligible against the budgets of any big production, but it is a cost they do not need to incur and therefore will not.

Why would it be unnecessary? If people refuse to consume unrated movies, it would be necessary for studios to have films rated.

Business will not submit themselves to rating to avoid the cost. If all studios do so, which this government believes all too likely, no movies will be rated and people will have no choice in the matter.

[Linux and the X]

There would be a cost, yes, but if this were a standard many people would refuse to rent or buy movies that were not rated.

My government disagrees with this statement. Companies will not submit themselves to costs that they do not have too. Profitability is the key to the game. I realize that any cost of this would be negligible against the budgets of any big production, but it is a cost they do not need to incur and therefore will not.

Why would it be unnecessary? If people refuse to consume unrated movies, it would be necessary for studios to have films rated.

Business will not submit themselves to rating to avoid the cost. If all studios do so, which this government believes all too likely, no movies will be rated and people will have no choice in the matter.

Should even one studio submit movies (either as a marketing gimmick or because a national government requires it), all other studios would be forced to also submit movies.

[Cameroi]

ratings are an attempt to appease pseud-religious and ideological fanatics and serve little or no other useful purpose. they make possible the denying of reality's diversity.

that doesn't have to mean they are a major source of harm.
the degree to which they are is difficult to determine.

so i suppose have mostly harmless fun with them

cameroi will attempt to remain mostly neutral.
neither supporting nor strongly opposing the concept.

[Linux and the X]

ratings are an attempt to appease pseud-religious and ideological fanatics and serve little or no other useful purpose. they make possible the denying of reality's diversity.

that doesn't have to mean they are a major source of harm.
the degree to which they are is difficult to determine.

so i suppose have mostly harmless fun with them

cameroi will attempt to remain mostly neutral.
neither supporting nor strongly opposing the concept.

One need not be an ideological fanatic to wish not to see certain content. Ratings would inform them of the various forms of content people consider objectionable.

[Manticore Reborn]

Should even one studio submit movies (either as a marketing gimmick or because a national government requires it), all other studios would be forced to also submit movies.

That is true, but I believe this is an area where we will be forced to disagree with our esteemed colleague from Linux and the X.
We are also concerned of the impact this will have on artists self-censorship in order to get the larger audiences lower ratings will achieve.

[Quadrimmina]

Says the delegation who not too long ago tried to repeal the Appropriate Punishments Act of 2010 with a ban on the death penalty?

I don't believe that was ever passed, fortunately.

As to the resolution at hand, we would likely support it if all references to age were removed.

I believe that is a reasonable request. References removed.

There is no reason, whatsoever, to regard this as appropriate for the World Assembly. If different nations having different ratings systems, then what's the problem? If you enter another country, then you ought to be subject to that nation's laws, customs and in this case ratings.

This is the World Assembly. Please keep to topics that are relevant to world affairs.

Angelo Lanerik,
Acting WA Ambassador for Enn

Says the delegation who not too long ago tried to repeal the Appropriate Punishments Act of 2010 with a ban on the death penalty?

You really consider ratings as equal in importance for discussion as capital punishment? I'm certainly never going to Quadrimmia now. I'd be rather worried by what laws I might break that equate completely incomparable actions.
Well, quite aside from that proposal never becoming a resolution, as noted by the ambassador from Linux and the X, you are attributing statements made by my honoured predecessor here to me. Stephanie Fulton is on paid leave until further notice; I have been Acting in her stead for well over a month now. I would have thought people would notice the difference in both appearance and sound by now.
Another note
Also, looking through Ms. Fulton's papers, I see no reference whatsoever to any supposed repeal attempt. She may well have opposed said proposal; that is not tantamount to planning any repeal.

Not to mention the fact that while you are subject to the nation's laws, like I said earlier, a 15 in a conservative state is nowhere near a 15 in Quadrimmina. Expecting people to be educated concerning this is quite a stretch of the imagination.

So? You think I should be worried by what another nation chooses to rate a particular film? I fail to understand your concern - and with it, your motivation for taking up the World Assembly's time.

Angelo Lanerik,
Acting WA Ambassador for Enn

OOC: I've been using a different ambassador for some time now, and it certainly wasn't intended as a mere cosmetic update. Enn's politics have changed, so the messages given out here have too.

The Appropriate Punishments Act of 2010 is the bill that allows all provinces in Quadrimmina to use capital punishment. It would have been repealed by the WA Compliance Commission had your resolution passed. And to use the argument that people should abide by nations' laws when they enter the nation when you tried to subvert our nation's laws is a weak argument.

None of which make for a valid reason as to why this is a worldwide issue, something the WA needs to control.

We are not advocating WA control, we are simply submitting the idea that a universal ratings system would be much more effective than a rating system that is different among nations, that requires nations to each independently rate other nations' materials, and that confuses those who travel to other nations.

The Honoured Ambassador from Charlotte Ryberg is concerned that the scope of the resolution is too small for the World Assembly to handle. Even if this is a good idea, member states should be able to keep their established national systems.

Considering the complexity, however, that could result with national systems vs WA system in regards to compliance and micromanagement I may be unable to support this draft.

Member states are able to keep their established national systems in tandem with the WA system. Both ratings would appear in that case.

The MPAA and ESRB systems in the United States, another nation we found when exploring a parallel dimension, are optional systems, and yet almost all their media is rated by them. This is because it is more profitable for the companies to do so, because many people would not purchase unrated content. Also, many stores may refuse to sell unrated content.

Should even one studio submit movies (either as a marketing gimmick or because a national government requires it), all other studios would be forced to also submit movies.

That is true, but I believe this is an area where we will be forced to disagree with our esteemed colleague from Linux and the X.
We are also concerned of the impact this will have on artists self-censorship in order to get the larger audiences lower ratings will achieve.

If the artist's appeal is the objectionable content, then higher ratings would boost audience numbers.

ratings are an attempt to appease pseud-religious and ideological fanatics and serve little or no other useful purpose. they make possible the denying of reality's diversity.

that doesn't have to mean they are a major source of harm.
the degree to which they are is difficult to determine.

so i suppose have mostly harmless fun with them

cameroi will attempt to remain mostly neutral.
neither supporting nor strongly opposing the concept.

Ratings are a method of informing consumers about content. Not only are low ratings considered good content (because of the "think of the children" rule that we don't necessarily subscribe to), but high ratings can be considered good content as well. For instance, a lot of people would enjoy shows that receive a 10 for sex or a 10 for violence, and would look for such shows.

[Quadrimmina]

Also, it has been updated for Linux and the X's concerns, and for flow. Please review and provide remarks.

[Lyndiana]

I have no idea whatsoever I am doing here.

[Quadrimmina]

I have no idea whatsoever I am doing here.

Here in this thread or here in the World Assembly?

[Freeoplis]

We feel no Nation is being forced to do anything with regards showing films but this proposal merely creates a universal guide across all WA Nations as to the content of films.

[Quadrimmina]

We feel no Nation is being forced to do anything with regards showing films but this proposal merely creates a universal guide across all WA Nations as to the content of films.

Exactly, this simply creates a system that a company or a nation can subscribe to if they choose, but don't have to. And if consumers pressure a company into rating their media, then they wanted the ratings anyway, which means that this resolution is meaningful.