Example candidate answers from the June 2010 exam
Candidate One
The British Board of Film Classification have been certifying films since 1912. regulating films means that content is monitored but audience is still being targeted. However the video recording Acts (1913) meant that all films being released had to be reclassified before release.
A criticism to this however is if the BBFC certify & regulate films in the cinema then those underage are protected from the content which is why it was certified in the first place. But if the BBFC then release the film to home viewing then the film must be re classified. If the film is given the same rating as cinema release or higher than those younger and unable to see the film will still be protected. If the BBFC classify the film lower then what is the justification for the original regulated certificate? Content in the film is still the same as original. However regulation can be seen as effective as if the film gets a lower classification then cuts and edits must be made for the release. This allows those underage to now view the film legally rather than encouraging them to break the law.
If the film released on dvd is a high certificate there is a chance underage people may view it in their own home (with parents). This means that children are not being protected by the BBFC anymore but by their parents. It is parents decision to enforce the BBFCs regulation onto their children.
When a film is being released in the cinema then trailers are used to advertise the film which the BBFC also regulate. However if the content is lower than the film certificate itself then the trailer will receive a low certificate. Effectively then the BBFC are allowing those to young an audience to see the film advertised and then want to see it illegally. Is there any justification for advertising a film with a high certificate in the cinema to then receive a low certificate trailer. The BBFC are allowing film production companies to attract outside their target audience which is then harming those underage viewers.
The BBFC are not effectively regulating media as they are controdicting their certificates and laws by allowing those underage to be forced to break the laws they set in the first place.
The BBFC originally regulated video games before the PEGI company certified video games. The PEGI’s certificates are 3, 7, 12, 18. These certificates are different to the BBFC’s original guidlines so in infact who is able to say what content is appropriate for viewers. Shouldn’t the people viewing the content be able to decide for themselves? How is a group of people able to decide what is appropriate compared to PEGI’s regulators. Everyone has different perspectives on what is sufficient depending on age, gender and status. There are individual differences amongst everybody so everyone is unique.
It could also be argued that every viewer of media is different. Some may be mature others not. What may harm some people of one age may not effect an other. However with the BBFC regulation the audience are now able to see what content is in some certificates. This gives people of that age to decide for themselves.
Overall the BBFC regulation of contemporary media can be argued for an against. However the BBFC effectively regulates films to protect those going to see it but the BBFC does not take into account individual differences and maturity rates. It could also be argued that the BBFC contradicts itself by enforcing laws on films but allowing trailers to be advertised to those under the age of the certificate. This encourages the breaking of regulation which they enforced originally so the BBFC could be seen as ineffective of regulating contemporary media in Film and Video Games.
Candidate Two
Contemporary media can be regulated well by the ‘BBFC’ or ‘PEGI’ but times are changing and so is society;
Pegi rates games based on the language used, blood and gore and weapons etc but just because they rate a game 18 it doesn’t mean a twelve year old isn’t going to play it somehow, even if it means getting a parent to buy it or a friend/stranger or they may just download it.
I think that games, films are rated fairly by the BBFC and PEGI and I feel that a lot of people would agree with that but kids/teenagers of today will always find a way to play or watch something which is not for their eyes to see because of the content involved for example the film ‘shrooms’ is rated an 18 as it contains drug use, strong language, blood & gore and because it is rated so highly and contains a high amount of content a kid between the ages of 13-15 will want to see it because it sounds cool however when and if they did see the film they could be disturbed as they are not mature enough to handle what they have just seen and the BBFC and Pegi will get the blame even though they have rated is correctly and everyone can clearly see the 18 certificate.
I think that the BBFC and Pegi rate and regulate all their items correctly but it is the society who struggle to understand as to why a rating is there; it won’t be till after that they find out why.
Examiners Comments about the paper
Regulation Question
The questions were not always directly answered, and this will be penalised in the marking as adapting understanding to a specific question features in the marking criteria at levels 3 and 4. Equally, candidates need to make connections and synthesise between their case studies and examples of reading, rather than treating things as discrete. There was a strong bias towards film and the BBFC with, sadly, some rather old case studies dominating such as Natural Born Killers and Child’s Play which can hardly be relevant in candidates’ lives other than as historical examples. However, when games were used for contrast, GTA and PEGI made the answers more contemporary. It is very important that candidates a) get their facts right about case studies and b) contextualise them in theoretical debates, such as the effects debate and notions of protection and the balance of rights and responsibilities for citizens.
Most candidates managed to comply with the obligation to make at least one reference to the past and one prediction for the future and all managed to discuss more than one medium. However, if anything, the past is TOO prominent and centres are reminded that examiners will be expecting the majority of answers in section B to be dealing with media from the last five years, hence ‘Contemporary Media Issues’.
Overall this report should be received in the context that most candidates were under-prepared for this examination given its synoptic demands but my primary objective for future sessions is to remind centres that the theoretical requirements for this sole A2 exam are considerable and that candidates will need a range of skills across the three sections with the common requirement being a strong, referenced and substantiated understanding of a range of theoretical ideas about the relationship between people, media and life.
No comments:
Post a Comment