What is the nature of contemporary media regulation compared to previous practice? (FILM) Changing social attitudes mean changes to the nature of the key issues and how they are dealt with by BBFC – sex, drugs, violence etc Our culture and society has changed and the law has been changed and modernised to reflect this In light of the internet and changing nature of audience consumption, traditional regulatory practices are perceived as less relevant Audiences worry more about the internet and children now, and less about films at cinema or on dvd Classification rather than censorship – the Board’s title has changed More relaxed about nudity, sex and language Tightened up on sexual violence , imitable use of weapons (knife crime), self-harm The guidelines are revised and published every 5 years now eg 2009 addition of discrimination to reflect a diverse society The Board has changed its attitude to the public and public opinion More openness, less secrecy. More information about reasons for classification than the past – eg PBBFC Better range of examiners at the BBFC to reflect social equality The Harm Test is critical now; enshrined in law Introduction of 12A - parents encouraged to decide

What are the wider social issues relating to media regulation? (FILM) Government and society using the media as scapegoat for societies ills Reinforcement of social norms through moral panics (press headlines) Rights and responsibilities in society – who is/should be in control? Comparison of our own system with other nations Changing media consumption habits and changing audience expectations As the media converges and the world shrinks, does regulatory practice need to change? The future of film regulation is in serious doubt The ‘nanny state’ - consideration of protection, the harm test and the belief in negative effects, desensitisation etc Issue of teenagers – the reality of their evolving lifestyles and expectations not enough of a consideration – talk to them, a real study of the nature of teenagers lives today essential Better understanding of the nature of audience consumption especially with children. Arguments about fantasy/reality The need to protect the film industry to make ‘challenging’ films. Film as art should be allowed to push boundaries- not be sanitised ‘just in case’.

How effective are regulatory practices? (Film) Perhaps as effective as they can be in the current climate Less effective as a result of internet – audiences can consume what they want and control own consumption Limited or no evidence that age classifications actually work or are enforced successfully to protect audiences Strict regulation should in theory lead to low crime rates, but not the case in practice Global approach to film consumption – audiences can illegally download pretty much anything and pass it on Technology is way ahead of regulation practice Nature of internet difficult regulate as global/ international not local/ national Starting to take on websites, some efforts are already being made by BBFC and sites for children Film regulation likely to become advisory for audience in the future Examples of legal and illegal downloading and costs to industry Digital Economy Act hopes to address this but audiences may feel criminalised and may stop paying altogether

What are the arguments for and against specific forms of contemporary media regulation?