From AVN

According

U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales recently said that law enforcement must learn to out-smart criminals bent on using the Internet to perpetrate crime, including obscenity.

After the announcement that the FBI had begun forming an anti-obscenity task force to crack down on illegal porn operations, some media reports indicated that some FBI agents were not thrilled with the move.

Gonzales countered that by explaining the reasoning behind FBI involvement and referring to a long history of Congress pushing for prosecution of obscenity cases.

They've made the decision that dollars should be spent to fight obscenity, Gonzales told the Miami Herald. When they appropriate money in order for the department to fight crime, we have an obligation to do that. And that's what we're doing here.

People get the idea that somehow the department with all of its talent can't do more than one thing at a time. In fact, we can fight the war on terror, and at the same time, we can go after corruption, we can go after corporate fraud, we can go after drugs, we can go after violent gun crimes and we can go after obscenity.

From Christian Today

The Premier Christian Media Group and Christianity Magazine have joined forces to call on the BBC to give a clearer definition of the opinions of Christian leaders. The two Christian groups have criticised the BBC for allowing an individual Christian’s opinion be perceived by the public as the views of a majority of Christians.

In a press release the call has been stated to have been prompted after Stephen Green, the National Director of the “fundamentalist movement” Christian Voice was asked to attend the BBC’s political programme Question Time.

In light of the BBC’s reputation of news coverage, the press release expressed fears that the general public would take the BBC’s decision to bring Green on the show as evidence that his views were the opinions of a majority of Christians.

In an open letter to the BBC, the Chief Executive of Premier Christian Media Group, Peter Kerridge said, There are currently 41 million British citizens that consider themselves Christians (according to UK 2001 Census). Around 4 million of these attend church (according to Religious Trends 2005). Various organisations seek to represent practising Christians such as Churches Together and the Evangelical Alliance who speak on behalf of millions while the Christian Voice, is a fundamentalist Christian organisation with only an estimated 1500 followers (Premier state that the Christian Voice were unwilling to divulge membership numbers, but at a recent protest against Jerry Springer; The Opera 1500 supporters were present).

Kerridge continued, Stephen Green has a right to speak freely about his views and the views of Christian Voice, but we believe it is only fair that the public be made aware these are not the views of the majority of Christians in the UK.

Kerridge continued, From previous experience, the BBC are aware of Stephen Green's reputation for making inflammatory comments and we are concerned that the motivation to have him as a panellist on Question Time is to provoke further provocative and extreme comments which BBC viewers may assume represent mainstream Christian opinion.

We believe that the BBC and the Mentorn Television Corporation have a clear responsibility to make sure viewers appreciate that Stephen Green and Christian Voice are a small group and not necessarily representative of the Christian community as a whole.

From Christian Today

The Vatican has demanded that more weight be afforded for churches and Christians in the arrangement of Europe. The Vatican’s “foreign minister” Archbishop Giovanni Lajolo, said at the weekend, that Europe’s Christians must work against the pressures to push faith as a private affair into the social background, reported the Swiss Livenet.

Archbishop Giovanni stressed the enormous contribution of the church to the social and cultural life of Europe in the areas of health and education: It would therefore be political err if Europe were to reduce the phenomena of ‘church’ or ‘Christians’ to an internal aspect of human experience, and thereby to a purely private affair.

Lajolo urged that Christians were underrepresented in political committees, the media and in cultural institutions, despite that four fifths of EU citizens are Christians.

The Archbishop said that they are at best tolerated, if not completely pushed back, as if they do not fit to a modern, secularised culture or as if their convictions were not “politically correct”.

Archbishop Lajolo urged that Christians should not allow their potential to influence to be simply pushed out or ignored under the pretext of the so-called Laizity of political society.

There are claimed to be around 368 million Christians currently living in Europe.

From The Nation

Film fans may have noticed that not a single new movie has been released on DVD or VCD over the past two weeks.

Following setbacks due to the transfer of the task of censorship from the Culture Ministry to the Royal Thai Police, more than a hundred home entertainment movies are waiting to be censored, resulting in the lack of new releases on the market.

The delays have led to complaints from the body of movie production companies known as The Thai Motion Picture Industry Association (THAMPA), who say that the setbacks are having a devastating effect on the home entertainment business which THAMPA president Worachart Rodthanom reported is worth Bt10 billion per year.

With more than 300 movies released each month, it usually takes just three days for the censorship board at the Interior Ministry’s Royal Thai Police to censor and give authorisation to distributors to release movies onto the market.

However, it has been two weeks since the shift and not a single movie has passed the new censorship team.

Following discussions among its members, THAMPA will today submit a letter to Interior Minister, ACM Kongsak Wantana, to ask the ministry to take on the censorship work again for at least six months to a year to restore the flow of business. It will also suggest the Culture Ministry’s Culture Watch group, who is responsible for the censorship, take guidance from the Royal Thai Police to enable them to work faster.

Worachart added the delay has caused estimated damage to the industry worth Bt100 million during the past two weeks.

Worachart said the hold-up at the Culture Ministry is being caused by the complicated censorship process. He said censorship teams at the Royal Thai Police were able to authorise the home entertainment products for release onto the market immediately and that there was more than one team. However, he said the Culture Watch group is just one team and has to go through three processes before handing the censored products to Ladda Tangsupachai, Culture Watch director and the sole authority who has the last word on censorship.

We’re really suffering, said Kitti Pakdevijit, a telemovie director. When one movie can’t sell, we can’t move on to making a new one because we haven’t got the money. It’s a domino effect.

However, Culture Minister Uraiwan Thienthong, said the work was not being delayed as much as it appeared and that preparations had been underway since March this year and the facilities were already in place. He said the only problem was the censorship officers, mostly police officers, had failed to opt for transfers due to concerns about losing various benefits including their chances of promotion, if they were relocated.

Don’t assume the worst just yet, said Uraiwan. We just need time to adjust, this is new to all of us. She said she understood the delays were causing damage to the industry which is why she had split the working board into two groups and urged them to work faster.

The recent Ofcom programme guidelines make it crystal clear that only softcore as per that rated 18 by the BBFC can be shown on UK licensed TV. Yet Ofcom have been continually allowing snippets of hardcore material that would be rated R18 by the BBFC. What is more, they refuse to investigate complaints about this deviation from their own published standards.

One can only assume that they have agreed private, non-published guidelines with the adult channels. Presumably because keeping to the commercially unacceptable softcore guidelines would be a commercial wipeout for the UK adult TV industry.

Thanks to Gawth on  The Melon Farmers' Forum

Dear [Gawth]

Complaints about various programmes on adult channels

I refer to your recent complaints about the content of certain programmes transmitted on licensed adult channels.

As you are clearly aware, the Broadcasting Code (Section 1.25) states that BBFC R18 rated films or their equivalent may not be broadcast on UK television. And I note your assertion that - in your view - some particular films may have included very brief shots that might have gone beyond what is normally acceptable in BBFC 18 rated sex works.

I am sure I do not have to explain to you that much of the material broadcast on the licensed adult channels involves films originally certified at R18, and subsequently cut down for UK transmission. The cut down versions are not subsequently submitted to the BBFC for re-classification - nor is there any legal requirement for them to be re-classified for television. In other words, compliance with the broadcasting code is - in the first instance - a matter for the broadcaster alone.

Ofcom, of course,is not a film classification body, and it would be entirely inappropriate for us to seek (and we do not seek) to usurp the role of the BBFC in that regard, and "classify" individual shots. Nevertheless, we expect cut-down films shown on UK television services to be broadly in-line with the national classification system, and not to stray into R18 territory. For that reason, we are engaged in a dialogue with the broadcasters to ensure that they are fully aware of their responsibilities.

In the meantime, I note your previously stated position that you are not personally offended by any of this material, and that you would - in fact - prefer to have access to much stronger material on UK television. In other words, your motives for making these complaints are not straightforward.

I am aware that a small number of specialist internet sites / forums are currently urging contributors to make multiple complaints of this kind for nuisance value - in protest at the continued restrictions on the transmission of R18 material. In such circumstances, Ofcom may take the view that such complaints are vexatious and/or generate an unjustified and greatly disproportionate burden on Ofcom`s limited resources.

Although I have responded to your complaint on this occasion, you should be aware that if Ofcom considers complainants to be vexatious, either due to their submission of multiple complaints or for any other reason, it is Ofcom`s policy not to respond to them.

We will, of course, continue to regulate the adult industry as appropriate and in accordance with our duties under the Act.

Yours sincerely

John Glover
Senior Programmes Executive.

From The Scotsman

A hotel guest who showed an "abhorrent and shocking" video of an Iraqi hostage being beheaded to an appalled worker was yesterday jailed for 60 days.

Subhaan Younis showed Charlotte McClay the footage on his mobile phone while chatting to her in the shop where she worked at the Moat House Hotel in Glasgow.

A concierge assistant reported the matter to the police after spotting McClay looking pale and shaking minutes after she saw the clip.

Lawyers last night said the case highlighted the danger of forwarding graphic material by e-mail or mobile phone - and warned that even "joke" e-mails sent to work colleagues could be viewed as a criminal act.

Younis, who downloaded the clip from the internet, had been staying in the hotel at the time of the offence on 27 September last year.

Defence solicitor Dominic Sellar told Glasgow District Court his client, who was found guilty of breach of the peace last month, accepted the images were "abhorrent and shocking in the extreme". Younis had shown McClay the footage during a conversation about the Iraq war after offering to let her see something that would "cause her a sleepless night", said Sellar.  The solicitor said his client thought McClay realised she was about to see a video of a hostage beheading.

Passing sentence, the magistrate told Younis: You chose to let her view the images on your telephone and told her that she might have nightmares. In my view, the woman had no idea about what she was about to view. No reasonable person might have anticipated viewing such dreadful and distressing images in such circumstances. I struggle to understand why any decent individual would have images showing the degradation and death of another human being, regardless of their race, political or religious persuasion."

Donald Findlay, QC, one of Scotland's top lawyers, said the case served as a warning to people who send work colleagues and friends graphic material by e-mail or mobile phone. He said: What this case shows is that sending a video clip that contains something that is either offensive, distressing or alarming can be considered a breach of the peace.

Media lawyer Campbell Deane, a partner at Bannatyne Kirkwood France in Glasgow, said as far as he was aware the case was the first time that disseminating offensive material has been prosecuted as a breach of the peace under Scots law. He said: The test for breach of the peace is putting somebody in a state of fear and alarm and that depends on the sensitivities of the person concerned.

From Digital Spy

Radio 1 has been rapped for a foul-mouthed tirade on an early evening broadcast.

At the start of Most Punk, broadcast at 7pm on a Thursday night in June, show host Zane Lowe welcomed listeners with: Hello ladies, boys and girls, I thought that you might like to know - in the spirit of punk rock – the following show includes, what we often refer to as language. So if, like me, you are offended by such words and phrases as: arse; bollocks; tit, wank; tit-wank; rotter; mother licker; mother sucker; mother fucker; twat; minge juice; bottler and of course bastard – then you might wish to turn over, or fuck off – thank you.

Two listeners complained to Ofcom over the incident. The BBC maintained that the programme was preceded by a warning and that the "carefully considered" clip was designed to be "thought-provoking".

Broadcasters have the right to transmit, and listeners the right to receive, material which may offend some people but uses strong language to explore artistic and creative themes, said Ofcom, who ruled that R1 had contravened the code. However, the right to deal with such subject matter comes with the responsibility of ensuring material is appropriately scheduled with the potential child audience in mind. While this was a legitimate approach, its application here was seriously misguided.

The regulator added that, although the BBC had pointed out that under 15's accounted for less than 1% of the radio audience at the time, the figure for Radio 1 was a more significant 14%. Given the potential child audience for Radio 1 at this time, we believe that the use of such strong language, with such intensity, at the start of the programme was inappropriate.

Typical tabloid bollox. Presumably the films are distributed electronically as per the Internet (or an Intranet) and hence are not covered by the VRA which governs physical media nor by broadcasting considerations.It is perfectly legal to view R18 type material distributed by the Internet so why shouldn't hotels take advantage. Besides that, a hotel room is considered as an extension of ones home rather than a public space, hence one can buy drinks from the night porter outside licensing hours etc.

I wonder when the Daily Mail will pick up on the challenge of legal hardcore distribution to anybody who wants it via the Internet. And just to make it easier for all, the Internet computer can be hidden away in a neat and easy to use set top box.

Based on an article from Hotels

Major hotel chains are showing hardcore pornography, rated R18 on sets in guests' bedrooms.

The Mail on Sunday claimed that this was enabled by a legal loop hole and that pay-per-view sex movies are on offer in luxury hotel groups including Hilton, Intercontinental and De Vere.

Last night the Government announced a belated inquiry into why the hotels should be immune from a rigidly-enforced blanket ban on the broadcast of hardcore films on terrestrial, satellite and cable television channels.

Ironically, the hotel TV porn system the Government is set to investigate is readily available in at least one of the two Hilton hotels being used by the Prime Minister and Cabinet colleagues at this week's Labour Party Conference in Brighton.

The films now on offer in many British hotels would carry the special 'R18' certificate, which is issued by the BBFC, primarily 'for explicit works of consenting sex between adults.' R18 films can only be purchased by over-18s from licensed sex shops or viewed in specially-licensed cinemas where the age of every ticket purchaser can be verified.

The Hilton Group, whose hotels offer the 'adult' channel at Pounds £12.95 per 24 hours, said yesterday it had consulted the Department for Culture, Media and Sport before making the R18 material available.

When The Mail on Sunday first approached the DCMS to ask what it planned to do to shut down the legal loophole, a spokesman said it was ultimately for the hotel chains to decide what television services they provide for their customers but obviously they have to do operate within the parameters of the law.

The hotels showing hardcore porn insist they can put an electronic block on adult TV channels in guest rooms and say there are onscreen warnings that the viewer is about to access explicit material unsuitable for minors.

Last night a spokeswoman for Hilton, which offers the films in 60 of its 70 UK hotels, said: We started to introduce these films in our hotels in April, which was after some of the other major chains. We took advice from leading counsel and the DCMS before we did so and we are satisfied that it is within the law. Our supplier, Acentic, has also assured us that we are not breaking any regulations. There is also no question of children accessing this material.

There are warnings on every stage of the menu process on the pay-TV screen and when families check in to our hotels it is our policy to ask the parents if they want the adult channel blocked. A spokeswoman for De Vere, which has 19 four-star and fivestar hotels in the UK, confirmed they were also showing R18 films. We understand from our suppliers that it has been legal for two years,'she said.

We offer this service because it has become standard throughout the industry and it is a service that our guests demand. At the Intercontinental Group, which has around 300 hotels in the UK, including the Holiday Inn and Crowne Plaza brands, a spokeswoman confirmed it began showing R18 films in the spring of this year after taking legal advice.

In a second statement issued late yesterday afternoon, the DCMS said: 'The Government takes very seriously extreme pornographic images and the protection of children. We are grateful to The Mail on Sunday for drawing this to our attention. It may be that the present legislation creates a loophole for new technologies to provide pornographic material that was not intended under existing legislation. We are therefore examining with the Home Office what action needs to be taken to ensure that the law as intended is complied with. The DCMS spokesman added that he was not aware whether any of the hotel chains contacted them before installing the film system.

From The Guardian

Despite effectively being a home-from-home for violent videogames and adult entertainment, it appears Japan isn't immune from the anti-publicity surrounding Rockstar's Grand Theft Auto series. Kanagawa prefecture has already enforced a mandatory 18-rating on the original GTA3 for the PS2, and now Saitama prefecture has followed suit. The game is published by Capcom in Japan, and the publisher challenged Kanagawa's crack-down citing freedom of speech fears and suggesting that the legal restriction undermines existing voluntary ratings. Whether Capcom will now challenge Saitama's decision is unknown, but Capcom will be concerned that action at a national level is looming.

Unlike Europe, Japan - like North America - currently has no national framework for limiting the sale of adult games to minors, though trade body CESA is currently trying to introduce voluntary censorship in order to halt any wider concern which could spark government attention.

I've seen the game myself and it's far too violent and obviously harmful, Saitama governor Kiyoshi Ueda told the Mainichi Daily News. Freedom of expression is one thing, but the wholesome upbringing of youths is also important and this was the only option.

Retailers in Saitama (which borders Tokyo) will be fined 300,000 Yen (about 2,800 USD) if caught selling GTA3 to those under 18 years of age. GTA: San Andreas is currently awaiting a release in Japan, more soon.

...those that speak in his name certainly aren't

From The Guardian

One of Britain's leading conceptual artists has accused the Tate gallery of 'cowardice' after it banned one of his major works for fear of offending some Muslims after the London terrorist bombings.

John Latham's God Is Great consists of a large sheet of thick glass with copies of Islam, Christianity and Judaism's most sacred texts - the Koran, Bible and Talmud - apparently embedded within its surface.

The work was due to go on display last week in an exhibition dedicated to Latham at London's Tate Britain, but gallery officials took the unprecedented decision to veto it because of political and religious sensitivities.

Latham, a star of the Sixties avant garde and maverick role model to a generation of Young British Artists, is so dismayed by the ban that he last night called on Tate Britain to relinquish God Is Great, which he made more than 10 years ago, from its permanent collection and return it to him. The civil rights organisation Liberty also condemned the gallery's decision.

Tate Britain says that it had to take the 'difficult decision' to avoid its motives being misunderstood given the attacks, which killed 52 people in July, and the present political climate. However, it admitted it had not consulted the Metropolitan Police or the Muslim Council of Britain.

Last night Latham who insists that the piece is not anti-Islamic, told The Observer: Tate Britain have shown cowardice over this. I think it's a daft thing to do because if they want to help the militants, this is the way to do it. It's not even a gesture as strong as censorship: it's just a loss of nerve on the part of the administration.

In the exhibition an innocuous sculpture has taken the place of God Is Great, which is in storage at Tate Britain.

Shami Chakrabarti, director of Liberty, supported the artist. We share his concern,' she said. 'I don't know what precise thought processes were going on at the Tate but I am concerned about the signal this sends at a time when we see free speech quite significantly under threat. I think that after 7 July we need this kind of artistic expression and political expression and discourse and disagreement more than ever, which is why this is worrying. Is three holy books in a piece of glass going to incite controversy? Frankly, whether it does or doesn't, controversy is what we have in a flourishing democracy.

Stephen Deuchar, director of Tate Britain, defended the gallery's decision to hold back the piece. The artist and curator discussed the exhibition and wanted to include it. We had every intention of doing so but in the light of events in London in July we felt we should exercise a little caution, so we altered our plans towards the end of August. It was a very difficult decision, but we made it due to the exceptional circumstances of this summer and in the light of opinions that we value regarding religious sensitivities.

From The Guardian

China announced a fresh crackdown yesterday on the internet amid further revelations of a plan by Hu Jintao, the president, to suppress dissent.

The state bans the spreading of any news with content that is against national security and public interest, said a statement from Xinhua, the official news agency. The announcement called for blogs and personal web pages to be directed towards serving the people and socialism and insist on correct guidance of public opinion for maintaining national and public interests.

The statement was just one of a series of initiatives by the government to root out politically sensitive news from domestic and foreign media. On Thursday a Chinese journalist and former professor was given a seven-year sentence for "inciting subversion" by writing hundreds of articles for banned overseas news websites.

Last month the government tried to implement a scheme to pay journalists according to how much Communist party officials liked, or disliked, their articles. In July a political activist was given five years for posting a punk song on the internet deemed to be subversive, and in April a journalist was sentenced to 10 years for sending an email overseas about restrictions on freedom of speech.

Providing further evidence of an organised national crackdown, the New York Times reported yesterday that Hu called for a "smokeless war" against "liberal elements" in China during a secret leadership meeting in May.

The government employs a cyberspace police rumoured to number 30,000 and has spent lavishly on internet filters. Journalists and human rights organisations say the "smokeless war" amounts to a transformation of the government's tactics from violence, open harassment and the closing of newspapers to more covert methods of maintaining control. Journalists who try write on forbidden topics are rarely attacked directly, but are discredited by charges such as corruption, sexual harassment and extramarital affairs.

They claim confiscation of notes, address books and mobile phones happen secretly beneath a facade that nothing is wrong, so as to defend the image of the party and its leaders. They are trying to safeguard the welfare of the regime, while simultaneously providing for the illusion of a free liberal press, said Law Yuk-kai of the Hong Kong-based Human Rights Monitor. But the internet provides a new way to organise people and is therefore a mounting threat to the government.

From the BBC

Uzma Saeed is campaigning for the repeal of Pakistan's controversial Hudood laws, which rule that all extra-marital sex is illegal.

"Hudood laws are a tool in the hands of men - with these laws they can rape women and be totally unaccountable. Under Hudood if a woman makes a rape allegation she must provide four pious male witnesses or face a charge of adultery herself.

So a woman is in the ridiculous position of having to produce four Muslim adult male eyewitnesses, men who just stood there and watched.  If sex by force is not proved, this woman can be charged with "zina" - sex outside of marriage.

About 60% of women in our jails have been imprisoned as a result of Hudood laws. I know many cases where a husband has wanted to marry again and so accused his wife of illicit relations with another man. A repeal is essential.

I'm working on a legislative watch programme - the first of its kind in Pakistan. We are lobbying parliamentarians, media and political parties to raise awareness.

We are engaging village mullahs in this process. Rather than going on the defensive against extreme religious groups, we are playing on their own pitch.

Many religious scholars are producing research which says that these laws are not in accordance with the Holy Koran. They are political tools to control women in our country".

However mathematically strong encryption is, it will probably prove very weak against those that really want to break the code. A threat to break your legs or bang you in prison for 10 years usually extracts one's password. However a good encryption system will keep the prying eyes at PC World at bay

A meeting is being held to discuss the Government's proposals to criminalise the possession of violent pornography on October the 10th at 19.30 in the Sports bar at Central Station in Kings Cross, all interested parties are welcome. Further details will be announced shortly here and at

www.backlash-uk.org.uk

Paul Tavener from Ofwatch will also be attending this meeting

From NewIndPress

An eight-year-old film by an Indian director is among several Nepali movies that are bearing the brunt of a new censorial attitude for their political overtones.

The new government has apparently banned Tulsi Ghimire's film Balidaan - meaning "sacrifice" in Nepali. Cinemas in Nepal have been asked not to show it, the film's producer Shyam Sapkota said. It has fallen out of favour with the current government for its depiction of a mass movement for democracy 16 years ago.

The plot revolves around a young student who after completing his studies goes to the villages to start a mass movement against the repressive administrative system. Though the film does not spell out the political affiliation of the martyr hero, he is generally regarded as a communist reformer.

One of the songs in the film - "Gaon gaon bato utho, basti basti bato utho" (Arise from the villages, arise from the slums) - has been adopted by the largest communist party in the kingdom, the Communist Party of Nepal-Unified Marxist Leninist with its mass meetings often ending with the rendition of the popular song.

After King Gyanendra sacked prime minister Sher Bahadur Deuba and seized power by force in February, Nepal's opposition parties say the king is trying to re-introduce the autocratic system of government practised by his father, the late King Mahendra. Besides banning criticism of the palace and the army, the king-headed government has also cracked down on the media.

Now the Nepalese film industry too has been subjected to censorship, film directors say. The government has also banned Aago, a film by director Narayan Puri. Though Aago doesn't name any party by name, it is thought to be influenced by the Maoist insurgency. Aago ran into trouble with the censors even before the royal takeover and was released only after the director agreed to cut out several scenes. Now, despite the cuts, theatres have been asked not to screen the film.

A third film based on the mass movement of 1990 that finally clipped the powers of the palace and ushered in multi-party democracy has also been virtually banned. Bir Ganesh Man Singh, based on the role played by one of the leaders of the movement, Nepali Congress leader Ganesh Man Singh, was screened twice during the National Film Festival organised by the government last month but has run into problems after that. We wanted to screen it in Pokhara city as a charity show, said Bijay Ratna Tuladhar, co-director of the film. However, the authorities 'requested' us not to show it now.

Also banned is director Prakash Sayami's Hatiyar, another film that shows people revolting against an oppressive regime and being forced to take to arms.

From The Sun

The Filipino version of Big Brother has been taken off air for a week - because there is too much sex and nudity.

Head of censorship, Maria Consoliza Laguardia, pulled the plug on the show and wrote to its producers to complain. She said she considered the kissing scene between housemates Chx and Sam, gyrating dances in skimpy bikini, double entendre dialogue and use of skimpy bikini, to be beyond the parental guidance classification and not suitable for television viewing.

The show's producers complied with the suspension but insisted they had stuck to guidelines. They said in an statement: We understand that ‘Pinoy [Filipino] Big Brother’ represents a new, unprecedented expression of Filipino reality, a microcosm of human behaviour that opens valuable studies and insights into social interaction, relationships and discipline.

From Stuff

New Zealand student magazine, Critic, could face legal action following its latest controversial issue.

The Office of Film and Literature Classification (OFLC) has been asked by police, members of the public and the Society for the Promotion of Community Standards to rule on whether the University of Otago magazine's "Offensive Issue" was objectionable.

The issue has attracted an outcry from police and Rape Crisis, who said one article was a "how-to guide" for rapists. The police request is the first step in a possible prosecution.

The company responsible for Critic could be liable for fines of up to $30,000 if prosecution goes ahead, but its chairman of directors is backing editor Holly Walker.

OFLC information unit adviser Deborah Gordon said police could submit an article for classification, and depending on how it was classified, could prosecute under the Films, Videos and Publications Classification Act.

Penalties could be "quite severe". However, because Critic published before its publishers were aware it could be objectionable, they are likely to be less so.

Otago University campus Constable Andy Ferguson said he had sent a copy of the magazine to the OFLC to be classified. When I get a response from them I will seek advice from my superiors whether charges will proceed.

The university's deputy vice-chancellor, Professor Gareth Jones, said through his secretary the matter would be discussed at a vice-chancellor's advisory group meeting on Monday.

Is it a coincidence that both the UK and US have decided to 'do something about extreme porn'?

From AVN

According to a story in the Washington Post, the FBI's Washington Field Office, at the urging of the Attorney General's office, began recruiting in late July for a new "anti-obscenity squad" that will allegedly target bestiality, urination, defecation, as well as sadistic and masochistic behavior.

They're going to look for cases like Extreme Associates, the rape and the fisting and all that kind of stuff, summarized attorney Paul Cambria.

But given the squad's stated objective, what are the chances it could accomplish what it wants? It wouldn't hurt the real target, the mainstream adult industry, Cambria opined, because it would just be a bunch of garage people they'd be arresting; you know, people shooting in their backyard garage, putting this stuff out. If they're really interested in the major companies, which they say they are, none of them produce this kind of material, so they're either going to have to expand their horizons or be happy knocking out a bunch of inconsequential operators.

That contradiction isn't lost on the FBI agents themselves. According to anonymous sources within the Bureau who talked to Washington Post reporter Barton Gellman, joining the squad would not be considered a career enhancement.

Those assessments jibed with attorney Clyde DeWitt's experiences when he was a prosecutor in Texas: A Justice Department attorney who I knew some years back and who was involved in high-level drug cases in Washington during the '80s, indicated to me that the obscenity unit was the laughing stock of the whole department. Apparently that hasn't changed. Imagine a young FBI recruit, tackling the obstacle course at Quantico and thinking, 'After I have conquered all of the great challenges here, I too will be qualified to spend endless hours sleuthing for images of 'bestiality, urination, defecation, as well as sadistic and masochistic behavior'.

From Reuters

Inspectors for U.S. Customs and Border Protection at Logan International Airport say they are trying to keep bizarre pornography out of the state.

Our main focus is on terrorism, Ted Woo, spokesman for the CBP's Boston office, told the Boston Herald, but this is something our agents are definitely on the lookout for. If it's so-called normal pornography, it's not going to be an issue, especially if it's for personal use.

The confiscated material is sent to U.S. Attorney Michael Sullivan's office, where it is ultimately destroyed unless someone is willing to fight for the sordid contraband in court.

Sullivan's spokeswoman Samantha Martin said no one caught with porn involving consenting adults has been prosecuted in recent memory. Virtually any material exploiting children, however, is expressly illegal.

The Washington Post reported this week FBI headquarters has put out a call to agents to join a new national anti-obscenity squad targeting the manufacturers and purveyors of porn.

Based on articles from AVN

Several churches throughout the state of California have announced that they will take part in an event called “National Porn Sunday,” which is intended to raise concerns and start a dialog around the issues surrounding “the problem of pornography.” The one-day, nation-wide event, scheduled for Oct. 9, will attack “America’s dirty little secret” through what is termed an “explosive” program designed for churches.

Mike Foster and Craig Gross, the nutters and founders of XXXchurch.com, will officially announce the event on Monday when they drive their Porn Sunday Message Mobile—a 20 x 10-foot rolling billboard—down Sunset Boulevard in front of the Hollywood Hustler store.

Foster and Gross have stirred up a bit of a fuss with their Web site, and their program for Porn Sunday will follow suit with their offering of the National Porn Sunday Kit, which features books, software, Web sites, speakers, access to the best recovery facilities in the country and, of course, Foster and Gross’s feature-length documentary film Missionary Positions. It is scheduled for wide release following Porn Sunday.

We have to respond to this devastating problem, Gross posits in a statement released Friday. We are sick of watching people lose everything to porn, and the church needs to lead this effort. We hope National Porn Sunday will become the launching pad for the discussion about pornography.

It is expected that seven churches throughout the state of California, as well as 70-plus churches across the world, will participate in National Porn Sunday.

From Christian Today

The Evangelical Alliance and the African & Caribbean Evangelical Alliance in calling on its combined membership, consisting of more than a million Christians, to protest next month against the proposed Racial & Religious Hatred legislation.

Rev Joel Edwards, General Director of the Evangelical Alliance is firmly opposed to the Bill as it stands. (www.micahchallenge.org)

The Alliances are urging their members to take time off work next month to as part of the protest, and calling for huge numbers of people to gather outside the Houses of Parliament on 11 October, the date that the Bill’s first full debate is scheduled to take place at the House of Lords.

More than 100 Christian groups, churches and denominations are planning a full weekend of prayer and protest against the legislation, which has been seen by many critics as a threat to freedom of speech as well as a threat to evangelism for religious groups.

The weekend will commence with a prayer rally taking place near the famous ‘Speakers’ Corner’ in Hyde Park in central London on Saturday 8 October 2005 at midday. The Evangelical Alliances are calling for as many people to gather for this as possible, and this will be followed by a day of prayer in local churches throughout the nation on Sunday 9 October.

The protest will conclude with a mass protest rally on Tuesday 11 October in Parliament Square at 1pm.

We continue to oppose this Bill as a matter of principle because it affects the freedom of speech of every UK citizen.

The Chief Executive Officer of the ACEA, Rev Katei Kirby said, The impact of the proposed legislation will form part of the legacy that we will leave for our children and our children’s children. This is an opportunity for the Church to unite with one voice in prayer and protest to make a difference.

The Evangelical Alliance is in unity with many other faith organisations and groups, as well as entertainers and secularists, that fear the proposed legislation will greatly restrict the right to freedom of speech in Britain.

Despite large protests, the legislation has already passed through the House of Commons, and now it just remains for the House of Lords to approve the Bill for it to come into effect as law in Britain.

The General Director of the Evangelical Alliance, Rev Joel Edwards said, We continue to oppose this Bill as a matter of principle because it affects the freedom of speech of every UK citizen.  We are committed to defending religious liberty and precious freedoms like free speech. This protest is about pulling people together to be a united voice in opposition to this proposed law.

Backing this view, Don Horrocks, the Head of Public Affairs at the Evangelical Alliance stated, Many observers believe the Government is so committed to getting the measures through Parliament that the Bill will inevitably pass into statute law. However, opposition to the Bill, even at this late stage, is not futile. It is quite possible that the Lords may press for amendments that the Government will feel obliged to accept and which could make the Bill less destructive. I therefore urge everyone who believes in the principles of free speech to do everything they can to join the thousands of Christians and others at the rally in Parliament Square on Tuesday.

From News From Russia

With Sania Mirza, a national tennis hero after her recent success in the US Open, is now surrounded by an unprecedented security apparatus after Islamic groups threatened her over her tennis skirts, which they say "offended" the religious sentiments of Muslims.

Hundreds of uniformed security agents and plain-clothes officers including women, were stationed at the Netaji stadium in the Indian city of Kolkata (formerly known as Calcutta) where she competed in the Sunfeast Open international tennis tournament.

As well as private security staff, the Muslim tennis star has also been assured of 24-hour police protection, according to a local police executive. Anywhere she goes she will also be followed by a commando, ready to shield her against any possible actions by militant organisation, Jamaat-e-Ulema-e-Hind or other Islamic groups that have threatened Mirza for her on-court apparel.

Certain Islamic leaders have said that if she showed up in her usual tennis skirts that leave her legs uncovered together with her tight-fitting t-shirts, she will be prevented from playing.

A women should wear a veil, without showing her hands or feet, according Maulana Siddidullah Chowdhry, the secretary of the Jamaat-e-Ulema-e-Hind group, and in Islam, there is not specific indication as to what should be worn to the market or when playing.

Police in the state say that they are not taking any chances this time after the incident some months ago in which the Bangladeshi writer, Taslima Nasreen, was stopped by such groups as she was addressing a seminar on fundamentalism.

Based on an article from Refused Classification

The complaints made against the TV showing of Big Brother Uncut back in June have resulted in the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) finding that C10 breached the code of practice.

From an ACMA press release:

ACMA  has found Network Ten licensees in Adelaide, Brisbane, Melbourne, Perth and Sydney breached the Commercial Television Industry Code of Practice for broadcasts of Big Brother Uncut.

Breaches were found in two of the three episodes of the program investigated by ACMA. The breaches were of clause 2.4 of the code, which requires that material be classified in accordance with the Television Classification Guidelines in the code.

Big Brother Uncut is classified MA, meaning it is suitable for viewing only by persons aged 15 years and over and may only be screened after 9 pm. The investigation found material was screened that was in excess of the MA classification.

Other material broadcast in Big Brother Uncut was considered to approach the limit of content permitted at the MA classification level.

MA classified material is the strongest permitted on free-to-air television. Because of this, broadcasters are obliged to exercise particular care in selecting material for this category, said Lyn Maddock, Acting ACMA Chair. ACMA has found that on two of the occasions it investigated, Network Ten did not take sufficient care in selecting material for Big Brother Uncut.

One breach, in the episode broadcast on 30 May 2005, involved what ACMA considered a gratuitous and demeaning portrayal of nudity. This scene depicted a male participant in the program massaging a female participant’s shoulders. The female was unaware that the male’s penis was exposed and near the back of her head.

The other breach, in the 13 June 2005 episode, was for very coarse language that was not suitable for persons aged 15 years or over. A group of males composed a song containing references to fetishistic and degrading sexual behaviour. The impact of the language was such that it was not considered suitable for 15 year olds.

ACMA is aware that Network Ten has taken steps to review the program’s production process in response to criticism about some of the behaviour of male participants in the 2005 series. Network Ten has offered to advise ACMA of the outcomes of that review including any new procedures that may be implemented as a result.

While welcoming the steps already taken by the licensee, ACMA will further discuss appropriate measures with Network Ten. Action requested of Network Ten by ACMA will be geared towards ensuring future breaches of the MA classification provisions do not occur, said Lyn Maddock.

If Network Ten fails to provide appropriate undertakings, ACMA will consider imposing a licence condition on the Network Ten licensees.

From Reuters

A Paris-based media watchdog released a handbook on Thursday to help cyber-dissidents and bloggers avoid political censorship in countries as far apart as China, Iran, Vietnam and Cuba.

The guide, published by Reporters Without Borders (RSF) with the backing of the French government, identifies bloggers as the "new heralds of free expression" and offers advice on how to set up a blog and run it anonymously.

Bloggers are often the only real journalists in countries where the mainstream media is censored or under pressure, wrote Julien Pain, head of RSF's Internet Freedom Desk. Only they provide independent news, at the risk of displeasing the government and sometimes courting arrest.

The "Handbook for Bloggers and Cyber-Dissidents" can be downloaded from the RSF website, www.rsf.org,  and the media organization says it is available in English, French, Chinese, Arabic and Farsi.

The guide is based on technical advice from experienced bloggers and experts, and provides personal accounts by bloggers such as Arash Sigarchi, who received a 14-year-jail sentence in Iran last February but is free pending an appeal.

Blogs get people excited. Or else they disturb and worry them. Some people distrust them. Others see them as the vanguard of a new information revolution, RSF said on its Web site. Because they allow and encourage ordinary people to speak up, they're tremendous tools of freedom of expression.

The handbook offers advice on how to establish credibility by observing basic ethical and journalistic principles.

One chapter offers advice on technical ways to get around censorship. Others feature bloggers' experiences from such countries as Nepal, Iran, Bahrain and Hong Kong.

Publication of the handbook follows moves in some countries to crack down on Internet use.

RSF said countries which were trying to control what their citizens read and do online included China, Vietnam, Iran, Iran, Cuba, Saudi Arabia and Uzbekistan.

Based on an article from Refused Classification

An Australian film based loosely on the disappearance of Peter Falconio and the Ivan Milat murders was given an R rating by the OFLC ahead of its November release.

But Roadshow Films, the local distributor of Wolf Creek, appealed against the rating decision so the horror film can be seen by a younger audience.

However Roadshow Films failed in their attempt to get the R18+ rating of  Wolf Creek lowered to MA15+. Once again the Review Board has deemed it necessary to change the consumer advice. It has gone from 'High Level Violence, Coarse Language, Adult Themes' to 'High Level Realistic Violence, Strong Coarse Language'.

A 3-member panel of the Classification Review Board determined, in a unanimous decision, that the Australian film, Wolf Creek, is classified R 18+ with the consumer advice, “High level realistic violence, Strong coarse language.”

Unlike typical horror movies, Wolf Creek does not employ the usual tension-releasing devices, nor the stylized approaches to depictions of violence, instead striving for a tone of realism that takes it out of the realm of fantasy, said Classification Review Board Deputy Convenor, The Hon Trevor Griffin. This very realistic tone results in a film of high impact.

Griffin also said that in the opinion of the Classification Review Board, the level of realism created by the documentary-style approach heightens the impact of the violence, which is frequent and, in some scenes, prolonged.

From Mediawatch-UK

Commenting about the availability of hardcore on 3G phones, John Beyer, director of mediawatch-uk said: The complete answer to this problem is to strengthen the law against pornography so that much of the imagery that is now available becomes illegal in line with Parliament’s intention in the 1959 Obscene Publications Act.  The 3G mobile phones make more urgent the need for an international agreement on unacceptable Internet content.

From The Herald Tribune

With the advent of advanced cellular networks that deliver full-motion video from the Internet - and the latest wave of phones featuring large, bright color screens - the U.S. pornography industry is eyeing the cellphone, like the videocassette recorder before it, as a lucrative new vehicle for distribution.

In recent months, that prospect has produced a cadre of entrepreneurs hoping to follow the lead of counterparts in Europe and Asia, where consumers already spend tens of millions of dollars a year on phone-based pornography.

The major American cellular carriers have so far been adamant in their refusal to sell pornography from the same content menus on which they sell ring tones and video games. But there are signs that they may soften their stance. The cellular industry's major trade group is drafting ratings for mobile content - akin to those for movies or video games - signaling that phones, too, will be a subject of viewer discretion.

Roger Entner, a wireless-industry analyst for Ovum, a market research firm, said the emergence of content ratings, coupled with easier use of the Internet on phones, made it inevitable that phone-based pornography would become a fixture. It has every component that has proven conducive to the consumption of adult entertainment - privacy, easy access, and, on top of it, mobility.

For the carriers, it is a tricky proposition. Offering pornography would stir a tempest over indecency and possible pressure from regulators or Congress. But conceding the field to third parties, capable of reaching consumers through Web browsers in phones, would leave millions of dollars on the table.

At present, sales of pornography over mobile phones in the United States amount to virtually nothing. But cellphone commerce is on the rise, with sales of ring tones alone expected to reach $453 million this year, according to the Yankee Group, a research firm. The company estimates that by 2009, sales of pornography for phones will hit $196 million, still meager compared with a projected $1.2 billion for ring tones.

But the likelihood that pornography will be increasingly accessible by phone has children's advocacy groups mobilizing. This month, the National Coalition for the Protection of Children and Families, a Christian nonprofit group, met with leaders of the wireless industry to voice concern that phones could provide minors with all-too-easy access to inappropriate material. The Internet hit us blindsided, said Jack Samad, a senior vice president with the advocacy group, referring to the slow reaction of children's advocacy groups to the advent of online pornography. We are attempting to stay ahead of the curve with regard to mobile phones, pressing cellphone carriers to give parents the ability to block access.

The Federal Communications Commission has its own concerns, said David Fiske, a spokesman for the U.S. regulator. The commission takes very seriously the issue of inappropriate material reaching cellphones that are in the hands of children, he said. But he declined to comment on what actions the commission might take.

To some extent, though, the agency's hands are tied in that mobile phone carriers, like other telecommunications companies, are not responsible for what Internet sites consumers visit. But the carriers could be held accountable, experts said, if they take part in selling pornography to minors.

From BetaNews

MSN plans to remove mature and adult rated communities from its MSN Groups service in late November. The groups would be moved to a third-party site, WorldGroups, who will handle mature and adult categorized groups for the service after the transition.

Users will be unable to create or change a group's classification as "adult" or "mature" after October 19. This would be followed by a lockdown of content on these groups on November 2, and then removal of the groups from MSN on November 28.

At that time, it will be prohibited to either post or upload anything that expresses pornography or obscenity according to a draft of the announcement obtained by BetaNews. MSN services are used by a broad audience and we need to ensure that content is appropriate for all viewers, the draft reads. To meet these needs, MSN prohibits content and language that is sexually explicit from many MSN sites. We are also unable to provide access to additional adult content and services desired by many of our users."

WorldGroups will offer many of the same features that MSN Groups offered, however users will have unlimited storage as well as streaming video capabilities, privacy controls, and opportunities to use the groups to generate revenue.

Two types of communities will be offered: Adult WorldGroups, which will allow for the posting of mature content; and Unfiltered, which does not carry the restrictions on dialogue that are directed at an adult audience.

MSN's move would follow Yahoo's shuttering of user chats in June. A report on a local TV station in Houston showed that many of the chat rooms were being used for illegal purposes, which prompted several large companies to pull their advertising from the service.

Based on an article from the BBC

An Israeli couple being married in India have found that you may not kiss the bride - the pair were fined $22 for indecency for their wedding embrace.

A court in Rajasthan imposed the fine after Alon Orpaz and Tehila Salev had decided to get married in a traditional Hindu ceremony in Pushkar. The couple, who had met in India while travelling separately, paid the 1,000-rupee fine for "committing an act of indecency" to avoid a 10-day jail sentence.

The apologetic couple said they were unaware public kissing was banned.

Predictably tolerant priests were offended when the couple kissed and hugged during the chanting of religious verses. Some of the priests were upset by their actions at the wedding and filed a case claiming Hindu sentiments had been hurt. SN Garg, president of the Priests and Pilgrimage Society, said: It is a matter of concern for the priest community. We want the government to ensure that tourists visiting Pushkar must respect Indian culture. Garg said the couple had now been forgiven after they apologised for their behaviour.

The couple said their public embrace was done according to their own culture and was not intended to be hurtful.

Pushkar, on the banks of Pushkar Lake, is a popular (presumably now a little less popular) pilgrimage spot for tourists, Hindus & nutters.

From an editorial  on Yorkshire Today

A man attempting to walk the length of Britain stark naked for a second time was arrested once again -- seconds after walking out of jail, police revealed on Monday.

"Naked Rambler" Stephen Gough was stopped by officers as he left the gates of Edinburgh's Saughton prison on Friday and taken to the city's Sheriff Court. The former royal marine was released on bail and will appear in court in December.

He was thrown in jail on September 9 after being found guilty of breaching of the peace just south of the Scottish capital on September 1.

On Monday, Gough vowed that the Naked Rambler will not be stopped in his quest to make it to John O'Groats on the north-east tip of Scotland, accompanied this time by his girlfriend: I think the thing that we are standing for is really something everyone should be concerned about -- how we feel about ourselves. We talk about human rights and the dignity of man, and yet man in his natural state is locked up. It's crazy. It does not make sense. We are supposed to be reasonable, our justice system is based on reason, and yet I'm being put away as if I'm some sort of disgusting animal. I'm just a human being.

Public nudity is illegal in Britain but that has not stopped Gough attempting a second trek wearing nothing but boots, a hat and a rucksack.

He walked the 1 363km length of Britain from Land's End in south-west England to John O'Groats in 2003 and 2004 and was arrested 14 times during the trip, serving two jail terms.

The journey to mainland Britain's most northerly settlement should take another two weeks -- providing he is not arrested again.

Perhaps the will destroy their own country as effectively as they have destroyed Iraq

From Monsters & Critics

The Bush administration reportedly is getting help from the FBI in its war on porn, a campaign that has also become the subject of mischievous humor.

Early last month, the FBI`s Washington Field Office began recruiting for a new anti-obscenity squad, reports The Washington Post. The initiative has been designated as one of the top priorities of Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales, says the Post.

I guess this means we`ve won the war on terror, one exasperated FBI agent told the newspaper. We must not need any more resources for espionage.

The squad will divert eight agents, a supervisor and assorted support staff to gather evidence against 'manufacturers and purveyors' of pornography directed at consenting adults.

The effort comes at a time when popular acceptance of hard-core pornography has come a long way, says the report.

The Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation`s top priority remains fighting the war on terrorism, said Justice Department`s Brian Roehrkasse. However, it is not our sole priority. In fact, Congress has directed the department to focus on other priorities, such as obscenity.

From The Independent, Thanks to Marc
See also CleanFilms, CleanFlicks & ClearPlay

What are decent-minded middle-American Christian conservatives to do if they abhor sex, bad language, illicit drug use and gut-spilling violence but still have an urge to see Saving Private Ryan? Or Goodfellas? Or The Amityville Horror? The beginnings of an answer came a few years ago with the advent of CleanFlicks, a kitchen-sized Utah company that decided to offer videos and DVD for rental - after they had been edited to remove all content likely to be offensive to the local Mormon population.

Today, that kitchen-sized enterprise has turned into a veritable industry, spanning numerous states and attracting the attention of both lawyers and politicians all the way to Washington. CleanFlicks is going from strength to strength, offering its services on a monthly subscription basis much like the wildly successful mainstream company Netflix. And a second, even more sophisticated, company called ClearPlay, also based in Utah, has sprung up.

ClearPlay doesn't edit the films as such, but rather offers a series of filters so individual consumers can decide how much sex or violence they want to tolerate. Want to see a gritty urban drama like the recently released Crash, which examines racism in Los Angeles, but without the "implied premarital sex"? Just press the appropriate button on your DVD menu and you can relax in the knowledge that all suggestions of illicit nookie have been purged ahead of time.

The service has not only proved popular in conservative states such as Utah. There is some evidence it appeals to a much broader range of movie consumers, particularly families concerned about the content Hollywood is throwing at their children, even at a tender age. The sanitising companies have even set to work on Shrek and Shrek II, finding the animated smash hits replete with squirm-inducing sexual innuendo and language that may not be cursing as such but is still too salty for their puritan tastes.

The film industry, as might be expected, has not reacted well. Starting three years ago, when CleanFlicks started making its first serious commercial inroads, the Directors Guild and the Writers Guild have been railing at what they see as a straightforward infringement of intellectual property.

For while their work is modified and edited all the time - for broadcast on television or on commercial plane flights, for example - the difference is that these modifications are done with their permission, through formal licensing agreements. CleanFlicks and ClearPlay don't ask for permission from anyone, arguing instead that their adjustments and amendments fall under the category of "fair use".

The two sides quickly fell into a predictable legal dispute, which dragged on until earlier this year when the Bush administration itself decided to get involved and passed the Family Movie Act, which sanctioned what the sanitisers were doing and was signed into law explicitly to make the legal challenge from the Hollywood bigwigs vanish into the judicial ether.

As far as the White House was concerned, the law was an easy way of appealing to the Republican Party's fundamentalist Christian base and bashing one of its favourite targets - Hollywood's free-speech liberals. Quite a few Democrats jumped on board as well, partly because of a perceived need to defer to the conservative "family values" agenda and partly because the Bill also embraced a handful of anti-piracy provisions that the film industry was keen to see entered into law.

The hypocrisies of excessive puritanism have been an irresistible spectator sport for centuries, not just in the United States, and the advent of the DVD profanity police is no exception. Part of the fun of visiting the ClearPlay website, over and above the intriguing categories available for censorship (what, one wonders, qualifies as a "non-graphic injury/wound"?), is seeing where the content police were forced to give up. The site's listing for Crash, for example, includes this line: "Filter settings not available: ethnic and social slurs." In a film preoccupied to the point of obsession with racist attitudes and behaviour, one would think not. But surely someone somewhere will still take offence? The CleanFlicks site ("It's about choice!" screams the banner headline) is even funnier when it delves into the technical minutiae of censorship. The list of profanities the company says it systematically excises includes "the B-words, the H-word when not referring to the place, the D-word, the S-word, the F-word etc ..." It also includes references to deity (G-word and JC-words etc), only when these words are used in a "non-religious context". One could spend an afternoon figuring out exactly what all these forbidden terms are, or else marvel at how conversant those easily offended clearly are with the objects of their offence.

Saving Private Ryan

The notorious 24-minute opening scene involving D-Day death and gore on the Normandy beaches is made far more palatable, as is the generally brutal depiction of battle throughout. Despite director Steven Spielberg's insistence that these images are critical in showing the sacrifice of troops and the true nature of warfare, CleanFlicks finds them too much to take.

The Godfather

In the sanitised version of The Godfather, Sonny Corleone (played by James Caan) does not die in a hail of bullets pounding relentlessly into his car. He just... well, he's sort of there one minute and gone the next. And the notoriously gory horse's head bit? Eighteen seconds is cut from one of the most famous scenes in recent cinema history

Opinion from Ian G

The Violent Pornography Consultation seems to be coming under attack from all quarters and I wonder just why this is? After much consideration I'm beginning to see that the whole premise behind this piece of nonsense is simply criminalizing material on the basis of taste.

The question from the consultation that really eats at me is this: In the absence of conclusive research results as to its possible negative effects, do you think that there is some pornographic material which is so degrading, violent or aberrant that it should not be tolerated?

As I've stated many times on the forum, and what will be the main point in my response to the consultation, is that this question is extremely leading because the first statement belies the fact that all evidence shows that there are beneficial effects from such material. However, that point aside, the question then simply asks a matter of opinion based on personal sexual tastes and preferences. What we have here is criminalization of material based purely on one's feelings toward that material. At least with legal obscenity there has to be some indication that the material possesses the power to corrupt and deprave, which most juries take as actual harm being present or perpetrated against the participants. But the material now being targeted is make-believe fantasy violence that many people enact in the course of their own sex lives.

This is clearly an attempt at implementing thought crime. If passed into law it will be an utter affront to Freedom of Expression. As I said on the forum some weeks ago, I personally dislike piercings and tattoos and this proposed bill is tantamount to making it a criminal offence to own piercings and tattoos based on my personal feelings of such things. Indeed, with the terms of reference being used it could be argued that genital piercings or intimate tattoos are sexualised GBH as they do 'break the skin'. Pictures of such things could become criminal to own and view!

This doesn't seem to represent a 'slippery slope' as many Melon Farmers have stated, its more like a vertical drop into puritanical totalitarianism. The Government are not elected to dictate what the people can or cannot do. They are supposed to represent our views and form sound policy to represent the majority of opinion and ensure no discrimination based on sexual orientation, sex, beliefs, age or colour marginalizes any section of our society. Clearly this proposal goes against all those principles. It is not even necessary, there is no pressing social need and, there is a plethora of evidence to show that such law would actually create more harm in our society. There's no way any of this can be justified and so it cannot in any way be Just. I'm afraid this Government have turned into a bunch of control freaks who simply want to pass laws which allow them to pry into people's lives like Peeping Toms and persecute anyone who doesn't tow their puritanical line.

Nobody is going to take seriously the arrogant views of someone who thinks they know better than you how to bring up children. Perhaps his views would be better heeded if he suggested advice rather than threat.

From Scoop

The New Zealnd Office of Film and Literature Classification and the Department of Internal Affairs have released a research report showing that the majority of teenagers surveyed had played computer games that cannot legally be supplied to them. The report, Underage Gaming Research, was released today and is based on a survey of 331 secondary school students aged 15 to 17.

The survey was designed and analysed by UMR Research Limited. The two agencies commissioned the report after receiving anecdotal evidence of underage gaming. While the results of the survey cannot be used to show what proportion of young people in the whole country have played restricted games, they indicate that underage access to these games is common.

The survey asked the participants whether or not they had played any of the 26 games listed in the questionnaire. Twenty-four of the games listed were R18 and are therefore illegal to supply to the subjects of the study.

Two of the games, Manhunt and Postal 2, were objectionable and therefore illegal for anyone to possess or supply. The study found that 62% of participants had played at least one restricted or banned game. The Grand Theft Auto series were the most popular games amongst those surveyed. A small number of subjects reported having played the two banned games Manhunt and Postal 2. In almost half of cases, the young people had bought the games themselves while, in a further third of cases, parents had bought them.

The results suggest that some parents and retailers are illegally supplying restricted games to underage players. Chief Censor Bill Hastings said the Classification Office doesn’t ban or restrict games lightly. We do it to protect the greater public good from injury caused by young people playing games developed for an adult audience.

Only about 10 per cent of all games on the market are restricted, meaning that there plenty of games available that are suitable for young people. I encourage parents to take an interest in their children’s game playing and to ensure that they only play games that are legally available to them.

Parents who allow their underage children to play restricted games are breaking the law and doing their children a disservice. Mr Hastings said. Department of Internal Affairs Deputy Secretary Andrew Secker said that the Department's focus is on the stores selling and hiring games. Censorship Inspectors carry out inspections at between 400 and 500 stores each year.

The industry has suggested that it would be helpful to have point of sale material from the Department about the law. We are producing that and providing it to stores free of charge,  Secker said. We have found that stores responded well when we raised any concerns after inspections.

We have not yet prosecuted any stores but that is an option if problems continue. The Department of Internal Affairs has prosecuted a New Zealander trying to distribute Manhunt in this country. The Manhunt prosecution seems to have greatly helped with compliance. Since that case, sellers contacted by the Department have cooperated very quickly.

From The Guardian

Theatres across Britain have united in defiance against a threat of prosecution from an evangelical Christian group to save the national tour of the controversial musical Jerry Springer the Opera.

Christian Voice, which organised street vigils on the evening of the BBC broadcast of the opera in January, successfully petitioned to have Arts Council funding of the regional tour axed after damning the show as "blasphemous".

It sent letters to theatres up and down the country which said: We are at this moment preparing charges of the criminal offence of blasphemy for service upon those responsible for broadcasting the show on BBC2, and those responsible for staging it at the Cambridge Theatre. Should any regional theatre stage Jerry Springer the Opera this autumn, we shall be looking to prosecute them as well.

Some theatres bowed to the pressure and the national tour suffered a 30% loss of venues as a result. Yesterday, however, it was announced that the tour will reopen in Plymouth on January 23 and tour cities such as Glasgow, Edinburgh, Birmingham, Liverpool, Cardiff, and Nottingham.

Richard Thomas, the show's composer and co-writer, said: I am overjoyed Jerry Springer the Opera is going on tour in spite of such extreme protest. I am also buying a flak jacket. And sticking close to the shadows. The show's producer, Jon Thoday, said: I'm delighted that a small minority have not prevented the public from seeing this brilliant show. Freedom of speech and artistic freedom have prevailed.

 The musical has been seen by 425,000 theatregoers and had 2.4 million viewers when it was broadcast on BBC2 on January 8, a record figure for a televised musical or opera.