Grace Watson A2: June 2021

Grace Watson
25 June 2021
Media Studies
Week 18 - Media Regulation Essay

•

MEDIA REGULATION

“Changes in society have been reflected by changes in media regulation. Discuss this view.”

---

Indeed, changes in society have been reflected by changes in media regulation. Over the years, audience consumption patterns and the ways in which audiences consume media have completely evolved.

We see this in the transition of audiences from being united to them now being majorly fragmented across various platforms and devices.

With not as much programming choice years back, nuclear families watched movies all together, and parents would monitor what their children consumed visually, ensuring it was safe and appropriate.

Now, audiences are fragmented, and this change in consumption patterns has meant greater responsibility on regulation bodies such as The Office of Film and Literature (OFLC) to ensure that what children are being exposed to online is safe. This again points back to the change in society where people are now, more than ever, far more verbal about their thoughts and opinions on matters. The chief censor of the OFLC described how the advancement of apps such as YouTube have led to the young people of New Zealand consuming "a concerning amount of media depicting sexual violence through non-traditional platforms", which his department continuously work towards fighting against.

Not only are these regulatory bodies having to regulate media, but actual media producers are also under pressure to be mindful of their content because it's likely going to be watched by children without adult supervision - because nowadays children have free access to anything they like. There’s pressure on them to protect children safety and well-being. If they don’t do so, they’ll most probably receive great backlash. According to a source, its herd for these movie producers, because if they don’t worry too much about their film’s content and decide not to censor it, they receive complaints, but then, if they do censor it, they still receive a great amount of backlash as well. Either way, they’re in trouble.

With the rise in technology and Web 2.0, there has now been a great increase in the number of devices available to audiences to consume media – from iPads, to kindles (for reading), laptops and computers, cell phones and televisions…options are endless. Additionally, there are now countless platforms and subscription video on demand (SVOD) services as well for audiences to very conveniently watch whatever they’d like too – such as Netflix, Neon, Disney + and many more, leading to a decrease in the amount of people watching linear television. This is evident in the stats: Linear television has faced a 14% decrease in viewing minutes, whereas Netflix had 207.64 million subscribers internationally as of the beginning few months of 2021 and continues to rapidly grow. The vast number of avenues available to audiences has enabled them to interact with content to a far greater degree, the effects of this discussed below.

Audiences have transitioned from being more passive consumers who accept whatever they hear and see as being the truth (explained under the Hypodermic Needle Theory of the 1930s) to being more active and engaged viewers who analyse, interpret and comment on the media through blog posts, reviews, YouTube videos etc. This has put pressure on media regulators as audiences are no longer afraid to voice their opinions and angers.

Instead of being immediately and directly affected by the media they consume as if it were being injected into them (Hypodermic Needle Theory), audiences now decide whether they agree with it or not, and react accordingly. This audience response supports the Uses and Gratifications Theory created in 1974 which describes how audiences have minds of their own, and the ability to think beyond face value. This transition is also described in Stuart Hall's Reception Theory which refers to the fact that every piece of media has a Dominant reading (where the audiences understand the director's idea/thoughts accurately, and agree), a Negotiated reading (where they understand what the director believes, don't feel the same way, yet can watch the media without it bothering them), and the Rejected reading where audiences simply do not understand and/or disagree with the media, verbalising their opposition to it.

Another societal change that’s occurred is globalisation - spurred on by internet accessibility, which has led to the world being more connected and increased the need for online security to protect the safety of children online.

Censorship is a form of media regulation which has increased over the years, and questions are being raised as to how necessary and safe it really is.

While people recognize the insensitivity and harm of certain content, there are individuals who believe that censoring out vital elements of history (even the uncomfortable and confronting ones) can simply lead to us, as a generation, forgetting and then repeating history again later on. These people believe that instead of simply censoring something out completely, the media product should rather just be accompanied with a warning so that then audiences are provided with the necessary information to then decide whether or not they’re going to consume the media. This debate is ongoing, void of a definite answer.

An example of censorship is in the case of China. With 1.398 billion citizens as of 2019 - 1.1 billion more than that of the USA - China is a massive attraction for American movie producers who are aware of the large scope of success available to them if they're able to get their film in there - I mean imagine the viewing numbers with a population of that size! Because of this, film producers have begun making their films in such a way that is pleasing and acceptable to the Chinese government (and similar other governments). This is dangerous because the real truth is withheld and hidden from viewers, feeding bias worldviews whilst trying to keep the Chinese government happy.

An example of where a film did not try impress is in the case of The Interview, directed by Seth Rogen and Evan Goldberg. As one would expect, this film did not end up not doing very well at all, which was ultimately because the North Korean government considered certain scenes to be unacceptable, with a group known as the “Guardians of the Peace” even threatening terrorist attacks against any theaters who showed the film. Clearly, the need to impress China is influencing and increasing the censorship of certain films.

Additionally, countries have become concerned of the mental health and safety of their citizens and for this reason, censorship departments have been established to watch and filter every film, music composition or video game that aims to enter the country. An entire classification system was established in New Zealand in the 1920s because the Legislative Council felt the need to “strengthen and make more drastic the censorship of cine-films … with the object of eliminating the noxious elements which are tending to destroy the moral sense of so many young persons". Essentially, the regulatory bodies, two examples being NZ On Air and the Office of Film, Literature and Music (OFLCM), felt the urge to knuckle down on what New Zealanders were exposed too to protect them and the interest of all of society. Where years ago media was more traditional in the form of books and publications and discussed more wholesome content, it has become somewhat warped where things such as pornography are posted to the internet. This has meant regulation of the internet and what is posted to it has needed to increase.

An example of this is in the case of the '3 Reasons Why’ series which released its second season on Netflix on the 18th of May 2021 and graphically discusses themes such as drug abuse, suicide, rape, and depression. Such content in films definitely was not as common centuries ago when nuclear families were more reserved and traditional in how they went about life, or at less open about and exposed to 'taboo' topics such as rape. The OFLC in New Zealand feels audiences deserve to be warned about such content which is why David Shanks, the Chief Censor of New Zealand, decided to give this series a completely new and unique RP18 rating because they considered “the existing classification distinctions” to be inadequate. The levels of censorship and how ‘protective’ (one could perhaps say?) different countries are really does vary...for example, the USA only gave this series a 15 years old age rating - one much lower than that of New Zealand’s rating for the film - which goes to show how certain countries are de-sensitized in so many areas.

As society has become more more sensitive to un-politically-correct (un-PC) content, media regulation has had to increase. The entire Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement that has been happening globally since 2020 has proven that people are waking up to racial injustices. This entire societal issue has seen people of colour crying out for equality and fair treatment, and filmmakers are trying to respect that by censoring out any offensive scenes. Films such as the cartoon DUMBO, are being edited to suit the new acceptable standards before being released on platforms such as Disney +. In this case, the scene of the crows is considered to be racist and “offensive”, with one of the crow’s even having the name ‘Jim Crow’. Similarly, films such as ‘Song of the South’ are also being banned, with comments from fans such as “sorry racists, Song of the South is not going to be on Disney +” being made as a jab towards any person who supports the film. Essentially, films that are considered to be racially insensitive and offensive are being edited or banned as a whole as an act of respect towards those who have experienced racial injustices in the past.

This censorship has not only crept into the film industry, but into the videogame and social media sides of things as well. Videogames such as ‘Manhunt’ have been banned from New Zealand because of its gruesome imagery and the fact that it promotes aggression and murder – a game “where the only thing you do is kill everybody you see” according to the chief censor of 2004, Bill Hastings. Similar video games such as the one of 2019 which mimicked the terrorist attack on the Mosques in Christchurch in March of that year have also been banned for being totally unacceptable. Evidently, that societal event of the terrorist attack, has caused media regulation on videogames to sharpen and improve for the safety of the people in New Zealand, another example of how changes in society are definitely being reflected by changes in media regulation, which seems to be improving and increasing quite substantially.

Where social media apps such as Instagram and Facebook, with 1 billion and 2.85 billion users respectively, were created with the intention of being platforms for people to express their views and what they’re up to etc, the cancel culture (“a modern form of ostracism” where “someone is thrown out of social or professional circles - whether it be online, on social media, or in person”) and increase in censorship on these apps has caused them to become publications rather than platforms where people who do not believe the same as the minority groups are silenced, cancelled and judged which raises the important question of power - who actually holds the power to censor/regulate?

Public figures such as Donald Trump who has 24 million followers on Instagram are being banned from such apps in an effort to protect the people, but people are questioning how safe and reliable this form of media regulation really is. Why should someone be silenced for expressing how they feel (as long as it isn’t harming anyone else, of course)? Certain posts on social media are shadow banned if they contain content that Instagram doesn’t deem as being ‘acceptable’, but why does Instagram get to make this decision? For some, this form of censorship is an example of inequality where certain beliefs are essentially being silenced. This form of censorship emphasises the negative effects discussed in the Spiral of Silence Theory where those who hold a minority opinion remain silent to avoid social isolation because the pressure to adopt the dominant position grows more and more…again pointing to cancel culture and the fear it instils within audiences to agree with what the mainstream media says, or suffer the consequences of being ‘cancelled'.

In conclusion, changes in society have definitely lead to and been reflected by changes in media regulation. Whether these media regulation changes are positive or negative really depends on who you ask, however it is very clear that as society has become more PC, media producers are having to truly consider and closely examine their content to ensure that it is not hurtful or offensive before releasing it, because if they fail to do so, they'll face backlash. Mind you, they'll face backlash either way. We live in interesting times.

Grace Watson A2

Tuesday, June 29, 2021

Week 19 - Representation in New Zealand TV and Film

Sunday, June 27, 2021

Week 19 - Evolution of black representation in film

Thursday, June 24, 2021

Week 18 - Media Regulation Essay

Tuesday, June 22, 2021

Week 18 - Videogame Censorship in New Zealand: Case Study

Monday, June 21, 2021

Week 18 - Media Effects Theory

Tuesday, June 15, 2021

Week 17 - Media Regulation Case Studies - '13 Reasons Why' and Manhunt

Monday, June 14, 2021

Week 17 - Censorship

Thursday, June 10, 2021

Week 16 - Creating a social media page for my artist

Tuesday, June 8, 2021

Week 16 - How to build an artist profile & Branding

Week 16 - Why I chose Instagram over Facebook for my social media page

Tuesday, June 1, 2021

Week 15 - Media Regulation in NZ

More Media Regulation notes - Gatekeepers, and other key terms

Report Abuse

Labels