On Film and TV Rating
"Don't rush. Let the bullets fly for a while." -- Zhang Mazi
--------------------------------------------------
Twenty-four hours have passed since the incident.
Over these twenty-four hours, I have exchanged views with people of different ages. Here, I will discuss my understanding of this incident only from the perspective of film and TV rating.
On September 24, 2021, some netizens reported that Ultraman Tiga had been removed from platforms across the entire internet. As soon as the news came out, young viewers complained loudly.
Some netizens connected this takedown with an article published five months earlier by the Jiangsu Consumer Protection Commission, "Protect Every Child! An Animation Rating System Is Imperative!" They took the survey result for "Which cartoon does your child usually like to watch?" out of context (p2), twisting it into "a survey aimed at parents about works that most seriously harm minors." (p3, p4) This stirred up conflict between students and parents, and between students and the government.
Because previously I described everything as the work of overseas forces and was harshly criticized, this time I will uniformly classify them as "netizens." These are not the main points this article wants to discuss. Friends who are interested may explore them on their own.
Returning to the incident itself, there are many suspicious points:
Why did platforms remove the work Tiga?
After some exploration, I found that platforms also removed some other works. What common points do these works share?
What exactly is the connection between the takedown incident and the Consumer Protection Commission's article?
Let us turn the clock back eight years.
On the evening of April 6, three boys under the age of ten were playing and imitated a scene from an animated show. Two brothers were tied to a tree with rope by another child, who then set fire to the weeds under their feet. Both suffered severe burns.
Afterward, CCTV criticized popular animated shows such as Pleasant Goat and Big Big Wolf and Boonie Bears for violent and vulgar content, which sparked discussion in China about an animation rating system. Although the result of the discussion was merely changing "stinky bear" to "little bear," treating the symptoms rather than the root cause, this discussion undoubtedly promoted the development of a rating system.
Regrettably, in the eight years that followed, the rating system was not further implemented. To this day, China still applies a "review" system to film and television works, causing audiences of different ages to be able to watch only the same works. This is unfair to adult citizens and also causes more or less harm to young children. The current situation urgently needs change.
Until March of this year, a draft for public comment from the National Radio and Television Administration seemed to break the deadlock. Article 23 of Chapter 3 proposed several measures concerning the physical and mental health of minors. The film and television rating system, long sunk like a stone in the sea, once again returned to public attention.
What is a film and TV rating system? What function does film and TV rating serve?
For the same work, people of different ages have different levels of suitability. Therefore, a film and TV rating system is needed: all cultural and entertainment works are divided into levels according to age suitability, with restrictions imposed at the legal level, and viewers who do not meet the age requirement are prohibited from watching.
I remember that back then there was an anime called Attack on Titan. Because it was too bloody and conflicted with China's values, it was tragically banned, and the internet was full of angry denunciations.
Looking back at it, Attack on Titan is rated R-18 even in Japan itself, meaning minors are prohibited from watching it. Yet at that time on the Chinese internet, people of any age were allowed to watch it. In fact, that did not fit reality.
But because China lacks a complete film and TV rating system, it had to be banned.
This is the function of film and TV rating. It is difficult to guarantee that all minors will definitely be unable to see R-18 content, but it can prevent some situations such as "someone originally did not want to watch unsuitable content, accidentally saw it, and then went astray." And while achieving this, it does not affect adults' right to watch R-18 content.
How has film and TV rating developed historically?
The United States established a film and TV rating system in November 1968; Japan began using a film rating system in 1976. Developed countries basically all have a complete rating system, which is worth learning from.
It is worth mentioning that China implemented ratings for a period in the 1990s, but later, because the practical results were poor, it was abolished in 2003. Since then, proposals related to film rating have without exception been rejected. Interested friends can learn more on their own.
Is there hope for China to implement a film and TV rating system?
Judging from the difficult development of film and TV rating in China, establishing a complete rating system in the short term is relatively unrealistic. But I believe policy shows a tendency to shift in this direction. Regarding the takedown of Tiga, although one cannot say it has much connection with improving ratings, if events in the next few years confirm my speculation below, then this can also count as a brave attempt.
Returning to the three questions from the beginning:
Why remove Tiga?
My guess is that this is an experiment in rating children's channels. After the relevant rules have been discussed and completed, it will be put back online.
Some other works were removed. What common points do these works share?
My guess is that these are all relatively popular works that are deeply loved by young people and are suitable for an initial attempt at rating. As for whether they can all be put back online in the short term, that is unknown; I estimate there is not much hope.
What exactly is the connection between the takedown incident and the Consumer Protection Commission's article?
When I wrote this section, the Consumer Protection Commission had already responded: this was an independent platform action, not government intervention. But I personally believe that platforms, in removing works, more or less referred to official guidance. Because they were not clear about what was unsuitable, they temporarily removed everything first. The news that platforms removed the works on their own also increases the possibility that some works will be put back online after discussion.
Of course, many netizens believe that a rating system does not fit China's national conditions and is unnecessary. For arguments that are relatively reasonable, I will place links below.
There are also netizens who believe that removing Tiga and other works is simply an intensification of ideological confinement for young people, with no foresight at all. This view may also be possible; people will judge differently. But after all, this is only platform behavior. Whether it is good or bad still depends on the government's next move.
Feel welcome to share your thoughts in the comments. I wish everyone a pleasant life.
References:
"Protect Every Child! An Animation Rating System Is Imperative!"
Three boys imitate Pleasant Goat and play a "roast sheep" game; two are burned
What is a film and TV rating system?
Why has China still not established a rating system?
