Should e-Books be Rated (like movies and video games)?

[desertgrandma]

I just gotta add......

Movies have rating to keep 'kids' from seeing what some think is objectionable. So two versions are released. The theater versions like posted above, are watered down versions. Then, a few months later, they are released in DVD form for anyone to buy, and the labels scream,

"Uncut version!!! Scenes that were to horrible, etc to be shown on the screen!!"

[ShortNCuddlyAm]

Originally Posted by lilac_jive

Oh, FYI I was being facetious :giggle:

I highly doubt it'll ever get to that point. DVDs, music, sure, but books? It smells to much like oppression.

I guessed as much - although you do have a point - make something forbidden and suddenly it's much more interesting!

Originally Posted by Over

I've voted the 3rd option, but I'm wondering why people here say it's okay to rate movies and videogames, but not books. Dual criteria?

I certainly didn't say that.

Originally Posted by Nergal

I think it is the first task of the parents to know what a child reads to understand what it asks or fears or admires. It would make it too easy to classify literature. Children are not at the same maturity with the age of 12 or share the same fears. All readers are individual human beings, not machines.

Hear sodding hear. It really annoys me when people let others take the responsibility for bringing children up away from their parents.

Originally Posted by desertgrandma

And on a personal note, if I ever found out someone was allowing access to my grandchild any of the above mentioned, they would have to deal with me, not the government.

And again, hear hear. That is how it SHOULD be. Even in this flawed world in which we live, that is how it should be.

[yargoflick]

Who would rate the books, that's the crux.

The problem I see is the same as with the motion picture rating situation. The ratings eventually have tremendous effect on sales, and so the raters end up with a crazy amount of sway. In the movie industry a G rating will kill you in the box office as surely as an NC-17, no matter how good your movie is.

check out this article on the problems with movie ratings:
Debating the MPAA's mission

[mojochris]

I'm actually all for it. Some things are for kids and some things are for adults. If a rating system can help parents make sure their children have age appropriate materials then all the better. Now the risk is that it be used for censorship which I'm 100% against. If it's labeled correctly then there shouldn't be a need for censorship of any material, labeling things should actually remove the desire to censor things because the user can clearly see that this is/isn't the type of material they'd like to read. This works well for the video game industry. I played Gears of War 2 this morning and several times thought I was glad my 8 year old nephew wasn't playing...although I was having an absolute blast. ;-)

[HarryT]

"Rating" is not "censorship". "Rating" is simply providing information about (say) sexual or violent content so that the viewer/reader can decide whether they wish to view/read it.

Providing additional information about a product can only be a good thing in helping people to make an informed choice.

[CCDMan]

Agreed with most of the above. Too many people want to pass a law or a regulation so as to have the government or a corporation do the policing that they should be doing themselves. If you are a parent, this is your bloody JOB.

The other problem is, of course, that any rating system inevitably uses the standards of others. These may not be, and probably are not, the standards that yourself or your family would prefer.

Freedom of the press is critical to a free society, and like it or not, a rating system would restrict this freedom, whether directly or indirectly (by making some content less economically viable).

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

I personally don't have a problem with a ratings system, when it is applied to inform the public about the content of a piece of work (be it a movie, music, or literature). I already have notices informing customers of the type of content in each of my books as a matter of course. That way, they know in advance whether or not a book of mine contains the kind of subjects or language they want to be exposed to, and can make an intelligent buying decision for themselves (or for someone they care about).

Ratings at their best are used to inform, not just to restrict. Of course, in America we already use ratings to restrict--"not for sale to minors" comes immediately to mind, generally applied to soft or hard porn. Beyond that, American booksellers seem to be pretty unconcerned about exposing minors to anything else (such as language or death), so I doubt a rating system would change that significantly.

[Alisa]

Originally Posted by Jellby

I am against any kind of rating of the type: "adults only", "for children above 6 years old", "parental guidance", etc.

But I could appreciate some hints about the content of movies, books, games... whether there is a large dose of violence, sex, stupid jokes, philosophical thoughts, or whatever. Be descriptive, not prescriptive.

I agree. I don't want a group of people sitting down and deciding categories of appropriateness for me just so people can have a little extra convenience. I'd be happy if the people who wrote and edited the book put a little list on there of things some folks might find objectionable or unsuitable. Of course, it would have to be painfully clear that this was an opinion and not a promise that readers wouldn't take offense at something not mentioned. Here in the US, folks have gotten so litigious that it could end up being a nightmare. It's probably easier to say nothing than say something and have it perceived as some sort of guarantee.

[sianon]

Just had a read of the challenged books. Why would we want anyone rating books if it could even possibly, no matter how remotely lead to books not being available.

On the positive side of that list, I was reminded of a book whcih I read as a child whcih I absolutely loved but had forgotten the name of. could remember character names though, A winkle in time was a lovely book and I recall nothing about it which shocked my 7 year old mind

Karen

[tompe]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Providing additional information about a product can only be a good thing in helping people to make an informed choice.

Only if the additional information is accurate and consistent and not based on values. So a simple rating is often more harmful then nothing at all. And it influences the creative process in a bad way as pointed out above. It is also conservative as it cements the values we have now and it becomes harder to change them.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by tompe

Only if the additional information is accurate and consistent and not based on values. So a simple rating is often more harmful then nothing at all.

You shouldn't use a "simple rating" system, as when you set your intended or restricted audiences into mass groupings the ratings become inherently inaccurate for individuals. Specify: "This book contains subjects of sex and violence," "this book depicts adult themes and death," "this book depicts unconventional sexual behavior," etc. Let the consumer decide themselves, a much more efficient and fair method than using general ratings tied to arbitrary ages.

[ProDigit]

I'm a little less for rating ebooks on age, however rating ebooks by 'format', 'layout', 'storyline',etc is not a bad idea.

You could stamp an ebook with an R rating (or 14+ age stamp), but if you want to create some sort of control system, you will need to limit downloading these ebooks to accounts with an age-rating higher than eg: 12/14/18 years of age.
But even then it's easy to get the file despite...

A personal rating (good storyline, formatting,...)of users reading the books will be something I'd appreciate!

[tompe]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

You shouldn't use a "simple rating" system, as when you set your intended or restricted audiences into mass groupings the ratings become inherently inaccurate for individuals. Specify: "This book contains subjects of sex and violence," "this book depicts adult themes and death," "this book depicts unconventional sexual behavior," etc. Let the consumer decide themselves, a much more efficient and fair method than using general ratings tied to arbitrary ages.

This is better but I think even this is too simple. If it then can be shown that children or YA books containing "death" will sell less then authors will take this into consideration. Also for example "death" can be handled in many ways so it is unclear what a simple description like "depicts death" will give.

But if you describe the content you should also have things like "contains peudo-science", "contains atheism", "contains description positive to religion", and so on.

I think reading a review of the book is much better then using these simplified descriptions.

[Redcard]

My answer is definitely no.

But , I think anyone who votes yes, or just anyone who is curious, needs to watch "This Film Is Not Yet Rated."

You'll learn that the ratings commission regarding movies (at least in the US) has been guiding social and political norms for at least the past ten to fifteen years.

Now, magnify that to books.

The thought frightens me. If it occurs, we might as well go straight to the two minutes hate and talk about Eastasia right now.

[Jellby]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

Specify: "This book contains subjects of sex and violence," "this book depicts adult themes and death," "this book depicts unconventional sexual behavior," etc.

"This books contains religious fanaticism", "this book considers evolution as a fact", "this book includes black characters", "this book quotes lyrics by the Beatles"... Where to stop? It seems people are mostly concerned about violence and sex... personally, I find it more important (in a book) to know if it has philosophical/psycological digressions, lots of Latin and Greek untranslated quotes, etc.

(This post may contain nuts.)