Few Bother To Contribute To Government's Official Classification Debate

[Cozi]

If you've ever wondered why government and legislators so routinely ignore the numerous protestations and objections made by gamers and those against internet filtering, you'd be well advised to look at the Australian Law Reform Commission's (ALRC) list of public submissions. The Issues Paper has been published since May 20 and as yet only 80 public submissions have been made - 80 per cent of them from people who believe in government intervention for the sake of child protection. Considering, the furious debates within Australia's technology communities, does this reflect the national balance? One can hardly blame the ALRC for the low, one-sided turnout either. It joined Twitter and Facebook and has regularly engaged with and promoted articles that deal with the matter. Yet, for all the huffing and puffing and commenting online about how much people can't stand the existing classification system, there are hardly any official complaints.

This begs several questions. Is it any wonder that technology enthusiasts and gamers get ignored by politicians and legislators when they don't voice their concerns in the right place? Or is it, that for all the ALRC's attempts at asking for public submissions, it should be using comments on internet message boards as a gauge for Australian community standards?

That second question is a joke, by the way. Ugh. Can you imagine?

In reality, it's likely down to the media for failing to inform the public on the matter, although the media will say that it hasn't been marketed to in the usual ways. It's a vicious, yet pathetic circle.

Ultimately, if you do care about internet filtering, games classification and general classification in any way, you'd do well to heed that the ALRC's classification review closes in just a few days on July 15. To get involved go to the official website, read the Issue Paper's questions. Answer them. And remember to submit them! The ALRC states, "We can see that many of you have begun answering the questions, and saved the form, perhaps intending to complete it at a later time."

http://www.abc.net.a.../06/3262712.htm

Make an online submission here. Done many of these submissions before so I don't see much happening but what the hell another one cannot hurt right? Only 3 days left to submit.

[R31Nismoid]

Well no-one does it as you have to "register" which is a load of fken shit.

I've done it either way. Fken BS GOVT

[.:: GimpS-R34 ::.]

Well no-one does it as you have to "register" which is a load of fken shit.

I've done it either way. Fken BS GOVT

That's so they have a register of those pro 18+ gamers who are obviously terrorist and will one day be a threat to the nation and it's children

[R31Nismoid]

EIther way - fill it out and complain.

SIF internet filter from a Gov't who's rep (Conroy) doesn't even know what the Internet is!

[TerminalWraith]

There is like 800 non confidential aside from mine

[TerminalWraith]

Also if you click make a submission you don't need to register

[*LOACH*]

Also if you click make a submission you don't need to register

Doesn't matter how easy the government makes it, most of the gamers who aren't happy about it would rather whinge on a forum and have interaction from other people than make a submission which they don't see directly affecting anything. Realistically though the submission is what will be taken into consideration by the people that have the power to initiate change. The government will never make everyone happy and in this issue it seems to me like they are doing all they can to make the majority happy (if they spend a fortune on advertising the issue the majority of Australians will complain, if they called a national vote almost everyone complains). Maybe the solution is some kind of government moderated internet forum but I imagine that would be extremely difficult to sort out. That's my 2 cents anyway.

Edited July 13, 2011 by *LOACH*

[TerminalWraith]

It was not advertised. That is the problem. There are plenty of gamers who would fill it out. Saying most would rather a forum is generalising.

[*LOACH*]

It was not advertised. That is the problem. There are plenty of gamers who would fill it out. Saying most would rather a forum is generalising.

The article makes the point that the government has tried to get the involvement of gamers by various means including Facebook, Twitter and promoting related articles. If the government has to pay to advertise in mass media etc every time public submissions are sort for every bit of legislation that is under review the cost would be phenomenal. If they only advertise a small percentage of the requests for submissions I cant imagine the issue of game classifications being prioritised. Public health, education, foreign policy etc etc would be seen as requiring the funds. There has to be a point a which individuals make the effort to affect change rather than just blaming the government. In this issue, at this time, my opinion is the government has done its part in trying to get public input.

[Cozi]

The article makes the point that the government has tried to get the involvement of gamers by various means including Facebook, Twitter and promoting related articles. If the government has to pay to advertise in mass media etc every time public submissions are sort for every bit of legislation that is under review the cost would be phenomenal. If they only advertise a small percentage of the requests for submissions I cant imagine the issue of game classifications being prioritised. Public health, education, foreign policy etc etc would be seen as requiring the funds. There has to be a point a which individuals make the effort to affect change rather than just blaming the government. In this issue, at this time, my opinion is the government has done its part in trying to get public input.

I understand that but its not hard to get free publicity. the article says that only 80 submitted at the time of its posting we are now in the hundreds and almost cracking the 1000's. If this article started back on the 20 may just think of the submission count it would be at if it was advertised there from the start.

All it would have taken is 1 little email to a major online/gaming site and the submissions would be a lot more than what they are at now.

Edited July 14, 2011 by Cozi

[TerminalWraith]

I'm with Cozi. I didn't read about it on any gaming website or magazine and they would spruik it if it was advertised. All it takes is the government to email a notice out to the gaming media. They didn't because they don't want our opinion.

[*LOACH*]

But how do the government select which privately owned media groups to inform? The ones that aren't informed will complain they weren't informed. The mass media may hear about it and research it and find out that at some point in time a government official had shares or something in one of the companies that were informed. Then the mass media run it as an issue of corruption in the government. I could be wrong but I think that when magazines etc notify readers about government issues it is through the magazines research that the information is found. I imagine it is government policy not to directly contact individual companies but instead to use the means they have already tried in the classification review. There are many avenues available for individuals to attempt to impact political party's policy.

[TerminalWraith]

That's rubbish. Next publishing owns several mags. As you are not a journo, its expected you won't understand. You imagine but government does press conferences... how does the press know to turn up? They don't just sense politician fear and nibblies....

[*LOACH*]

That's rubbish. Next publishing owns several mags. As you are not a journo, its expected you won't understand. You imagine but government does press conferences... how does the press know to turn up? They don't just sense politician fear and nibblies....

You might want to check your facts first. The press release for the review of classification laws was issued on the 21 December 2010 which included an invitation for public comment by the Attorney-General’s Department . At around that time you could also subscribe to receive regular updates on the progress of the review.

The point I was arguing is that if the government was to send an email to 1 major online/gaming site (as suggested by Cozi) then the government is seen to be showing favoritism. You suggested "email a notice out to the gaming media". Specifically who are they supposed to email? Whoever gets left out will claim it is unfair and that their product/website suffered by not having access to the same information at the same time.

Edited July 15, 2011 by *LOACH*

[Cozi]

I really don't think any gaming site would see it as favoritism though more so just trying to get the word out. Most people that hang around the major gaming sites are generally apart of multiple not just one so the word would spread fairly quickly. One thing that all major online gaming sites do agree on is that a change is needed to the current system because it is wrong. If one of them ran with an article that "we didn't get a direct email so we are now pissed" I think they would get flamed fairly quickly because at the end of the day all the government was trying to do was get word out to the people that really care.

[TerminalWraith]

Loach maybe you don't get it. A press conference doesn't populate itself, invites are sent. Do you realise the government knows of every registered commercial magazine and news body... they do tax after all?

[Birds]

The government would certainly have the power to get it out there if they really wanted to. All it would have taken is a mailout to the database of a single popular gaming website and it would spread like wildfire. This article alone will do more for a response than any of the government's initiative towards it.

Have a look at the way it's setup though...most gamers ARE lazy people. If we weren't we'd be playing sport instead of sitting on a chair pointing and clicking. Game classification is also not a life threatening issue, not for us...we complain about it, but we aren't passionate enough that we're going to actively seek out a form we have to register for just to notify the government of our opinion that they may or may not listen to. The people who WILL do that are, surprise surprise, the 80% of submissions who are your typical sad case "think of the children" nothing better to do than devote hours of time towards campaigning a non issue. Which is why we have problems with classification in the first place. Yet it may still weigh in as a key factor for electoral decisions when us gamers are forced to get off our asses and vote for a politician, to have our say then. So, government SHOULD heed warning and make the process both simpler and better known. Seems to me all they wanted was a blame vehicle: "we set up something for you and you didn't do anything with it, and those who did were against you."

As for favouritism...it's not a prize, it's a community announcement. I highly doubt they are going to care, particularly if attempts are made to contact a few of the biggest ones...and really, I could achieve that for the government in the space of 2 hours and I'll charge them all of $500 to do it. Even still, so one news source gets a 24 hour head start on it...this happens with news of any kind anyway. Games websites are read by the owners and researchers of other games websites. They inter-report and most of the clientele aren't just loyal to one website.

[TerminalWraith]

I don't agree with you're 2nd paragraph but well said with the rest, Birds.