Film and Publication Board

Last updated

Film and Publication Board
FPB Logo 2023.svg
FPB logo
Film ratings, online regulation overview
Formed
  • 1996;28 years ago (1996) - Publication Board
  • 1996;28 years ago (1996)
Headquarters Centurion, Gauteng
South Africa
Annual budget R  125 million 2022/23 [1]
Minister responsible
Film ratings, online regulation executive
Parent department Department of Communications and Digital Technologies
Key document
Website fpb.org.za
Map
Film and Publication Board

Since its inception 28 years ago, the FPB has had the responsibility of classifying films, games and certain publications in line with South African values and norms under the overarching application of the Bill of Rights. This approach has a distinct difference from the censorship regime used by the Apartheid government to advance the then state’s discriminatory and dehumanising political agenda.

Contents

The role of the FPB has previously been distinct as regulating the distribution of content, which was easily identifiable, falls within the jurisdiction of FPB. Films were either distributed via VHS, disc (DVD and Blu-ray) and in cinema format, games were likewise distributed in disc format whereas publications were in pre-packaged magazines and books. With developments in technology however, content has moved to online streaming or digital platforms. Consumers, and particularly children, now can access content which may not have been appropriately classified and labelled through such online streaming and digital platforms.

The Film and Publications Amendment Act, 11 of 2019 (FPA Act) as amended came into operation on 1 March 2023. The purpose of the amendments in the FPA Act therefore is to close the regulatory gap that currently exists in the expanded market. Consumers, and children in particular, run a risk of exposure to harmful content which is distributed on online streaming and digital platforms. It is important to note that what is deemed to be harmful content may differ from one jurisdiction to the next. Harmful content is a value laden concept and it is important for it to reflect the societal values and norms of that country. The amendments therefore extend the current rating system and content regulatory regime to digital and online content providing services. This enhances the protection of children and limit consumer concerns and confusion.

In addition to objects captured in section 2 (a) to (c) of the FP Act, the FPA Act inserts the following objects of the legislation: criminalising the possession, production and distribution of child pornography; and creating offences for non-compliance with the FP Act.

It must be acknowledged that there is a need to improve coordination in regulating the creation, possession and distribution of audio-visual services and certain publications and by same ensure the protection of children and consumers from harmful and illegal digital and online content on all platforms. Co-ordination and collaboration amongst and between organs of state and industry is required to ensure future-proof regulation regime for the audio-visual services and publication sector.

History

The Film and Publication Board was established directly under the directive set out in the Films and Publications Act of 1996, shortly after South Africa achieved independence from apartheid rule. The Board's function would be to receive complaints, or applications to evaluate a film or publication, and classify it according to its suitability for different audiences. These publications could include movies, television programs, computer games, and music.

The classification of a film or publication would trigger various prohibitions on possessing, exhibiting, distributing or advertising the film or publication. Different ratings were devised, the most serious of which was "X18", which prohibited anyone without a specific licence from distributing the content, which had to be conducted within "adult premises".

Certain key exemptions from prohibitions were made to the scientific community (in regard to bona fide scientific, documentary, dramatic, artistic, literary or religious films and publications), and the media (in that those holding a broadcasting licence were exempt from the duty to apply for classification).

An appeals process was also defined under the Act, allowing rulings made by the FPB to be contested and challenged.

On 3 March 2020, Netflix agreed to obey the FPB's classification rules in the distribution of content in South Africa. [2]

Ratings

The FPB has the following rating guideline:

IconRatingDescription
FPB - A.svg AAll ages allowed (not used on video games).
FPB - PG.svg PGAll ages allowed, but some parental guidance is recommended for younger or sensitive viewers
FPB - 7-9 PG.svg 7-9 PGMaterial is not suitable for children under 7, but a caregiver or parent may decide if children between 7 and 9 years old may access the material (used only for films and games).
FPB - 10-12 PG.svg 10-12 PGMaterial is not suitable for children under 10, but a caregiver or parent may decide if children between 10 and 12 years old may access the material (used only for films and games).
FPB - 13.svg 13Not suitable for persons under the age of 13.
FPB - 16.svg 16Not suitable for persons under the age of 16.
FPB - 18.svg 18Not suitable for persons under the age of 18.
FPB - X18.svg X18Adults only. Only licensed, adults-only designated businesses may distribute this content, and never to minors. X18 content may not be broadcast on public media such as television or radio.
FPB - XX.svg XXCannot be legally sold, rented or exhibited anywhere in South Africa. The FPB has the authority to classify any content as XX if it contains extreme violence, cruelty, extreme sexual violence, bestiality, incest etc...
refused classificationBanned. It includes child pornography, incitement to hatred against people of an identifiable group etc...

Former ratings include:

Additionally, the FPB provides the following content classifications: [3] [4]

IconRatingNameDescription
BBlasphemy"insensitive, demeaning, derogatory,

disrespectful, or irreverent expressions about any religion" that are not considered hate speech

CICompetitive Intensitythe degree to which a player gets personally involved, and the level of excitement created in the players as they engage with the various game levels in order to gain incentives and rewards
CTCriminal Techniquesinstructional details of illegal and dangerous acts that may be life-threatening and that are detailed enough to be re-enacted or self-instructional
FPB D (Substance abuse).svg DDrugsscenes of substance (drugs and alcohol) abuse
FPB H (Horror).svg HHorrorscenes of horror
IATImitative Acts or Techniquesdangerous acts or techniques that may be copied or imitated, especially by children
FPB L (Bad language).svg LLanguageuse of bad language
LFNLow frequency noisenoise below a frequency of 100 to 150 hertz
FPB N (Nudity).svg NNudityscenes involving nudity
FPB P (Prejudice).svg PPrejudicescenes or language that is biased or prejudiced with regard to race, ethnicity, gender, religion, sexual orientation or other identifiable group characteristics
PPSPhoto Pattern Sensitivitymotion sickness and reactions to low frequency sound
FPB S (Sexual activity).svg SSexscenes involving sex, sexual conduct or sexually-related activity
FPB SV (Sexual violence).svg SVSexual Violencescenes involving sexual violence
FPB V (Violence).svg VViolencephysical and psychological violent scenes

Criticism

The Spear

In 2012, the Goodman Gallery in Cape Town, showcased a painting by artist Brett Murray. It depicted President Jacob Zuma in a pose reminiscent of Lenin, but with fully exposed genitalia. The painting drew swift condemnation from the ANC ruling party, who condemned the artist, the artwork, and all media outlets who had published images of the painting. [5] [6] Shortly after, the Film and Publication board sent five assessors to provide a rating for the artwork, [7] a move that was harshly criticized for being well outside its mandate, and beyond the remit of the purpose of the FPB. Despite this, the FPB issued an "16N" rating, which meant that the Gallery could no longer publicly show the painting if there were children in the building.[ citation needed ]

During the classification proceedings, there were allegations that the FPB was acting outside its statutory remit, and that specific members had made statements or asked questions implying that it was entitled to censor political opinions and restrict freedom of the press. [8]

This decision was later appealed following a public backlash, and amidst accusations of state-led censorship. Upon appeal in October 2012, the FPB set aside its original rating, thereby effectively de-classifying the painting. This had taken place after the painting was famously defaced and sold, which rendered the ruling moot on practical terms. [9] [10] [11]

Online Regulation Bill

In March 2015, the FPB gazetted a notice inviting public comment on a Draft Online Regulation policy, which sought sweeping new powers to police and regulate all aspects of content on the internet. [12] In this draft policy, the FPB sought to classify all manner of content, including, for instance, user-submitted videos to sites such as YouTube, which would require all such content to first be classified by the FPB at a charge and labelled as FPB-approved before it would be allowed to be legally published online. [13]

Specifically, the following sections from the draft detail the broadness of the powers FPB seek:

The Electronic Frontier Foundation described the proposed legislation as follows:

Only once in a while does an Internet censorship law or regulation come along that is so audacious in its scope, so misguided in its premises, and so poorly thought out in its execution, that you have to check your calendar to make sure 1 April hasn't come around again. The Draft Online Regulation Policy recently issued by the Film and Publication Board (FPB) of South Africa is such a regulation. It's as if the fabled prude Mrs. Grundy had been brought forward from the 18th century, stumbled across hustler.com on her first excursion online, and promptly cobbled together a law to shut the Internet down. Yes, it's that bad.

Electronic Frontier Foundation

The EFF also went on to point out that the FPB had effectively put the burden on South African ISPs to remove offending content, or replace said content with FPB-approved (and labelled) content, even on platforms such as YouTube, Vimeo and Vine. [14]

In the response to what is understood as one of the most draconian pieces of internet legislation seen in the world, the FPB has been on the receiving end of a growing online backlash, proliferated through social media such as Facebook and Twitter. In particular, the Right2Know coalition, who advocate open government and whistleblowing, have championed the cause against FPB's draft proposal. [15]

Related Research Articles

A motion picture content rating system classifies films based on their suitability for audiences due to their treatment of issues such as sex, violence, or substance abuse, their use of profanity, or other matters typically deemed unsuitable for children or adolescents. Most countries have some form of rating system that issues determinations variously known as certifications, classifications, certificates, or ratings. Age recommendations, of either an advisory or restrictive capacity, are often applied in lieu of censorship; in some jurisdictions movie theaters may have a legal obligation to enforce restrictive ratings.

PG, P.G., P&G, pg, or Pg, or similar, may refer to:

<span class="mw-page-title-main">R18 (British Board of Film Classification)</span> BBFC content rating used for hardcore pornographic films

R18 is a film or video classification given by the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC). It is intended to provide a classification for works that do not breach UK law, but exceed what the BBFC considers acceptable in the 18 category. In practice, this means hardcore pornography.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Classification Office (New Zealand)</span> Media classification agency in New Zealand

The Office of Film and Literature Classification, branded as the Classification Office, is an independent Crown entity established under Films, Videos, and Publications Classification Act 1993 responsible for censorship and classification of publications in New Zealand. A "publication" is defined broadly to be anything that shows an image, representation, sign, statement, or word. This includes films, video games, books, magazines, CDs, T-shirts, street signs, jigsaw puzzles, drink cans, and slogans on campervans. The Chief Censor, Caroline Flora, is the chair of the Office.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Pornography laws by region</span> Legality of pornography

Pornography laws by region vary throughout the world. The production and distribution of pornographic films are both activities that are legal in some but not all countries, as long as the pornography features performers above a certain age, usually 18 years. Further restrictions are often placed on such material.

Censorship in Singapore mainly targets political, racial, religious issues and homosexual content as defined by out-of-bounds markers.

A content rating rates the suitability of TV shows, movies, comic books, or video games to this primary targeted audience. A content rating usually places a media source into one of a number of different categories, to show which age group is suitable to view media and entertainment. The individual categories include the stated age groups within the category, along with all ages greater than the ages of that category.

In Canada, appeals by the judiciary to community standards and the public interest are the ultimate determinants of which forms of expression may legally be published, broadcast, or otherwise publicly disseminated. Other public organisations with the authority to censor include some tribunals and courts under provincial human rights laws, and the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, along with self-policing associations of private corporations such as the Canadian Association of Broadcasters and the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Film censorship</span> Films that are banned in a particular country

Film censorship is the censorship of motion pictures, either through the excising of certain frames or scenes, or outright banning of films in their entirety. Film censorship typically occurs as a result of political or moral objections to a film's content; controversial content subject to censorship include the depiction of graphic violence, sexual situations, or racial themes. Censorship standards vary widely by country, and can vary within an individual country over time.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Video game content rating system</span> System used for the classification of video games into suitability-related groups

A video game content rating system is a system used for the classification of video games based on suitability for target audiences. Most of these systems are associated with and/or sponsored by a government, and are sometimes part of the local motion picture rating system. The utility of such ratings has been called into question by studies that publish findings such as 90% of teenagers claim that their parents "never" check the ratings before allowing them to rent or buy video games, and as such, calls have been made to "fix" the existing rating systems. Video game content rating systems can be used as the basis for laws that cover the sales of video games to minors, such as in Australia. Rating checking and approval is part of the game localization when they are being prepared for their distribution in other countries or locales. These rating systems have also been used to voluntarily restrict sales of certain video games by stores, such as the German retailer Galeria Kaufhof's removal of all video games rated 18+ by the USK following the Winnenden school shooting.

The Byron Review, titled "Safer Children in a Digital World", was a report ordered in September 2007 by the then prime minister Gordon Brown and delivered on the 27 March 2008 to the UK Department for Children, Schools and Families. It was authored and overseen by Tanya Byron. The report focussed on the use of video games and the Internet by children, and discussed the use of classification and the role of parenting in policing these.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">British Board of Film Classification</span> British film classification organisation

The British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) is a non-governmental organisation founded by the British film industry in 1912 and responsible for the national classification and censorship of films exhibited at cinemas and video works released on physical media within the United Kingdom. It has a statutory requirement to classify all video works released on VHS, DVD, Blu-ray, and, to a lesser extent, some video games under the Video Recordings Act 1984. The BBFC was also the designated regulator for the UK age-verification scheme, which was abandoned before being implemented.

The Australian Classification Board is an Australian government statutory body responsible for the classification and censorship of films, video games and publications for exhibition, sale or hire in Australia.

Internet censorship in South Africa is a developing topic.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Internet censorship in South Korea</span>

Internet censorship in South Korea is prevalent, and contains some unique elements such as the blocking of pro-North Korea websites, and to a lesser extent, Japanese websites, which led to it being categorized as "pervasive" in the conflict/security area by OpenNet Initiative. South Korea is also one of the few developed countries where pornography is largely illegal, with the exception of social media websites which are a common source of legal pornography in the country. Any and all material deemed "harmful" or subversive by the state is censored. The country also has a "cyber defamation law", which allow the police to crack down on comments deemed "hateful" without any reports from victims, with citizens being sentenced for such offenses.

<i>The Spear</i> (painting) Satirical painting by Brett Murray

The Spear is a 2010 painting by Cape Town-based South African artist Brett Murray. Put on public display in 2012, it depicts the then South African President Jacob Zuma, his genitals revealed, in a standing pose reminiscent of Russian revolutionary Vladimir Lenin. The painting triggered a defamation lawsuit by Zuma's party, the African National Congress (ANC).

Media regulation in the Republic of Singapore is carried out by the Info-communications Media Development Authority (IMDA) and effected by various laws.

In the Philippines, censorship involves the control of certain information.

A micro movie is a type of short film characterized by a low budget and distribution via social media.

<i>The Wound</i> (2017 film) 2017 film

The Wound is a 2017 South African drama film directed by John Trengove. It was screened in the World Cinema Dramatic Competition at the 2017 Sundance Film Festival and the Panorama section of the 67th Berlin International Film Festival. The film opened the Tel Aviv International LGBT Film Festival 2017. It was selected as the South African entry for the Best Foreign Language Film at the 90th Academy Awards, making the December shortlist.

References

  1. "FPB Annual Report 2022/23" (PDF).
  2. Duncan McLeod (3 March 2020). "Netflix agrees to abide by FPB rules in South Africa". TechCentral. Retrieved 6 May 2020.
  3. "Educator's Manual Online Safety for Children" (PDF). Western Cape Education Department . Retrieved 5 August 2024.
  4. "Classification". Film and Publication Board. Retrieved 5 August 2024.
  5. Mosomane, Phuti. "Zuma painting against Ubuntu, African morality, culture". The New Age. Archived from the original on 26 May 2015. Retrieved 19 May 2012.
  6. "ANC to go to court over Zuma painting". News24.com. Retrieved 19 May 2012.
  7. Film and Publication Board (South Africa) (22 May 2012). "FPB Classification of 'The Spear' Artwork as Displayed at the Goodman Gallery (PDF document)". FPB.gov.za. Centurion, Gauteng, South Africa: Film and Publication Board. Retrieved 1 June 2012.[ permanent dead link ]
  8. de Wet, Phillip (30 May 2012). "'The Spear': It's classified, and now up to the ombud". mg.co.za. Johannesburg, South Africa: Mail & Guardian. Retrieved 1 June 2012.
  9. City Press Staff Reporter (10 October 2012). "Appeal tribunal declassifies The Spear". Citypress.co.za. Johannesburg, South Africa: City Press. Archived from the original on 10 October 2012. Retrieved 11 October 2012.
  10. South African Press Association & Witness Reporter (11 October 2012). "The Spear: Classification of painting overturned on appeal". Witness.co.za. Pietermaritzburg, South Africa: The Witness. Archived from the original on 11 November 2013. Retrieved 11 October 2012.
  11. South African Press Association (10 October 2012). "'The Spear' declassified". TimesLive.co.za. Johannesburg, South Africa: Times Live. Retrieved 11 October 2012.
  12. "Government Gazette Notice for Comment - 182 of 2015". www.fpb.co.za. Film and Publication Board. Archived from the original on 13 May 2015. Retrieved 26 May 2015.
  13. Oxford, Adam (10 March 2015). "Plans to censor SA internet called out as unconstitutional". htxt.africa. Retrieved 25 May 2017.
  14. Jeremy, Malcolm (21 May 2015). "Africa's Worst New Internet Censorship Law Could be Coming to South Africa". eff.org. Retrieved 26 May 2015.
  15. "Stop the Film and Publications Board's attempt to censor the Internet!". Right2Know. 10 March 2015. Retrieved 26 May 2015.