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

[Libby Cone]

Originally Posted by lilac_jive

Did you convert the purse pattern, or are you using the bag as a case?

The bag itself is a good size for a Kindle or a Sony e-reader.

Libby Cone
Author, War on the Margins: A Novel
http://tinyurl.com/5bcta4
http://tinyurl.com/6y973d

[Redcard]

Again, I re-iterate my suggestion for those involved to watch "This Film Is Not Yet Rated."

You'll see how ratings literally have dominated the movie industry and how films are presented. (And even what they say, going all the way back to the HUAC)

Perhaps self imposed content descriptors, no, I don't have a problem with that.

But any ratings that involve an outside board rating things, or that involve requirements to be rated by a specific board or to a specific standard, I'm against.

[i, Podius]

Originally Posted by Redcard

Again, I re-iterate my suggestion for those involved to watch "This Film Is Not Yet Rated."

..

I second this suggestion - I was astonished to discover how substantial the effect of film ratings is, and how abused it is as a system.

The question that I think we should be asking ourselves is - society has survived without rating books (with a few exceptions) for thousands of years; what has changed to suddenly make it necessary? Books, or society?

[Amalthia]

I'm not sure if people are aware but for the last 10 years or so fan fiction writers have been rating their own fiction. It's something everyone decides for themselves. The ratings go from G-NC-17 and while it's nice to know what to expect in the story there have been some downsides.

Fanfiction.net for example used to allow NC-17 stories until too many kids started using the site and they pretty much deleted any story with a NC-17 rating. But many people just changed the rating to R. Then there were debates on what constitutes a R rating in fan fiction. For example some fans thought two males kissing is R rated while other people were rating it PG. But if a guy and a girl were kissing in the story no one complained if it was rated PG.

Some ratings are used to exclude stories from certain sites and mostly in fandom it's had some sucess in helping people avoid stories they really don't want to read. Like anything with rape, slavery, torture, underage sex, graphic violence, or deathfic.

Forget about NC-17 people wanted more than that before they ventured into a story.

Though, I think the warnings kind of got out of control when people started warning for excessive romance, hair cutting, tatooes, wingfic, leather, and etc....I've read warnings that were actually longer than the story.

The downside is that there are some brilliant stories that contain those kinds of warnings and I know many readers avoid the stories due to the warnings, which is fair enough. But I kind of like the idea with published fiction that people read and are exposed to ideas and uncomfortable topics and concepts that make them think.

In fandom, it's voluntary if the author wants to warn and people can post to their own websites but based on my experience in fandom I don't even want to think about what would happen if that translated over to real world fiction. People already shy away from fandoms that frown on bdsm type stories and depicting darker variations of the characters.

So I'm not exactly happy with warnings in fandom (feels too much like spoilers btw) and I can only imagine how much worse it would be if it were mandatory and money were involved. In fandom since there isn't any money involved most authors post to their own site, or LJ and don't care if people skip their stories due to the warnings. So there is a lot more freedom to write controverialy. But if the same author had no place to share their work due to the content in their book because it was rated too high then I can already see many authors who depend on publishing and selling their books to make money changing their story in order to get a lower rating. I don't think this is good for anyone.

[DaleDe]

Originally Posted by empink

So far, the book industry seems to have loosely rated books for younger kids already, according to subject material and so forth. Anything more than that, IMHO, would be overkill, and honestly impossible to ever complete. There are way, way, way too many books in existence for any kind of rating agency to go through. And there is the fact that the books won't all be in the same language, something that can't be gotten around with subtitles or just eyeballing the content.

Yes, in the US children's books are rated age specific like most toys. And Adult only books are already segregated to keep children (under 18) from accessing them. So we are already about 80% there I believe.

Dale

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by i, Podius

The question that I think we should be asking ourselves is - society has survived without rating books (with a few exceptions) for thousands of years; what has changed to suddenly make it necessary? Books, or society?

Answer: Money. It's always money.

Ratings are used to "guide" creators into creating products that will receive the most profitable ratings (like PG), or to avoid creating products that will be the least profitable (G). They are also used to avoid litigation ("My daughter was traumatized by this and that, because of a lack of warning!"), to save money on legal fees and insurance.

As the publishing world tightens its collective belt, they are reacting to anything that will cost them more money/less profit. If they feel ratings will make them more money (or cause them to lose less), they'll jump all over it.

But the thing is, publishers already have a ratings system... it's just that it is largely hidden from the public and not centrally mediated, handled by the editors as manuscripts are submitted. They are using the publisher's profit-based submission guidelines for what to accept, advising writers on how to alter books to meet those guidelines, and assigning those books to specific labels under that publisher that specialize in a certain type of book (children's, romance, SF, horror, etc). Those labels are essentially the public "face" of the rating system... instead of "G", "PG", "R", etc, you get "Scholastic," "Baen," "Apex," "Harlequin," and you generally know based on the label what to expect.

This works, I think, because it provides a lot more choices than the simplistic movie rating system, which would only do literature harm if it was adopted as-is. Literature is much more intellectually involved than movies, it evokes its own images, often different from person to person, and a ratings system based on moving pictures and an occasional swear word isn't going to work on words.

So, printed books are essentially already being rated, but in a very covert and decentralized way. And I submit that this is not hurting the publishing industry, though it is certainly causing some authors to "subvert" their work, willingly or otherwise, in order to stay within the system and make their paychecks.

Should e-books be different? Since I don't see the present covert ratings system as hurting the industry, I don't see e-book ratings doing any harm either. However, as the industry adapts to global availability and distribution, and a wider cultural spread, any ratings system must adapt to fit the times. The present system certainly needs updating.

[griffonwing]

I don't think books should have a rating, no. But there is one thing that might warrant a rating, or at least a list of items to consider.

Excessiveness

What I mean by that is this. Take a fantasy fiction romance book. Most include a deep plot, revenge, betrayal, adult situations, and possibly an act of "invasions of personal space" This book is geared towards the adult market, and even though these are in the book, the book should not be rated as they are not excessive.

On the other hand, take Beauty's Release series, another book geared to the adult market, also a fantasy fiction romance, yet this one is full of adult situations and many acts of personal invasion. This excess would call for it to be rated because even though the book jacket may say what the book is about, the average adult reader who would be interested would most likely be disgusted by so much it.

Or perhaps, not a rating so much as a caution label.

[Libby Cone]

This excess would call for it to be rated because even though the book jacket may say what the book is about, the average adult reader who would be interested would most likely be disgusted by so much it.

Or perhaps, not a rating so much as a caution label.[/QUOTE]

Wow, Griffonwing! I think you're crossing the boundary into style. I mean, my tastes aren't very esoteric, but I can't seem to finish a Cormac McCarthy book. Does it need a rating? If you asked someone who likes McCarthy to write it it would say one thing. If you asked me to write it, I'd label "All the Pretty Horses" with CAUTION:This book starts off badly, with a young hired hand falling for the beautiful, haughty daughter of his employer and being warned off her by her grandmother...zzzzzzzzzzzz.

"Blood Meridian" - CAUTION: All the characters kill Indians en masse, with hugely, almost Biblically descriptive prose that makes no distinction between pus and a sunset. After they commit mass murder, they get drunk, go whoring, and then repeat the whole cycle. No one, murderer or victim, has an inner life, whose narrative might make the book worthwhile.

...or a book that I liked - "Freddy and Fredericka" by Mark Helprin- CAUTION: Even though this book is unevenly edited, it is so hysterically funny in places that you should probably wear a Depends while reading it. It has sex and bad words, but who cares?

Somebody who didn't like "Freddy and Fredericka" might say something like CAUTION: Poorly edited, with unbelievable plot twists, sex, and bad words.

I think that when you beging to talk about "excesses," you are commenting upon style and not content. W. G. Sebald seldom goes into detail about the murders that took away the people he reminisces about, but if you understand what he is talking about, it can seem just as grisly as Cormac McCarthy.

[TallMomof2]

No descriptors, labels or warnings. I might possibly go for a single letter system V for violence, S for explicit sex etc... but who the heck is going to read all the books and apply the labels? Would this only apply to new publications, it would be a Herculean task to do that. Does it apply only to fiction? What about the Bible? That would definitely get a V and S rating. What about non-fiction? History books? Lots of violence.

Definitely watch "This Film is Not Rated" it'll open your eyes. It's available through Google videos if you're interested.

[ShortNCuddlyAm]

[QUOTE=Steve Jordan;316301
But the thing is, publishers already have a ratings system... it's just that it is largely hidden from the public and not centrally mediated, handled by the editors as manuscripts are submitted. They are using the publisher's profit-based submission guidelines for what to accept, advising writers on how to alter books to meet those guidelines, and assigning those books to specific labels under that publisher that specialize in a certain type of book (children's, romance, SF, horror, etc). Those labels are essentially the public "face" of the rating system... instead of "G", "PG", "R", etc, you get "Scholastic," "Baen," "Apex," "Harlequin," and you generally know based on the label what to expect.[/QUOTE]

I see that more as categorisation (and sub categorisation) than rating. Film and game ratings are about controlling what age groups can see what content. Book categorisation simply makes it easier to go into a bookshop and go to the section you're interested in. Although with some authors, like Alexander McCall Smith, it pays to check both Crime and General sections as he gets filed in both. (Crime in UK bookshops is a sub-section of fiction. True Crime is the real life stuff.).

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by ShortNCuddlyAm

I see that more as categorisation (and sub categorisation) than rating. Film and game ratings are about controlling what age groups can see what content.

Well, since bookstores and publishers haven't been too concerned about whether or not 13-year-olds could buy novels that had descriptions of sex and violence in the past, I honestly don't know why they would need a film and game-type ratings system now. I reiterate that a ratings system similar to those used by films and games would be wholly inappropriate to literature, and would only do it a disservice.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by TallMomof2

No descriptors, labels or warnings. I might possibly go for a single letter system V for violence, S for explicit sex etc... but who the heck is going to read all the books and apply the labels? Would this only apply to new publications, it would be a Herculean task to do that. Does it apply only to fiction? What about the Bible? That would definitely get a V and S rating. What about non-fiction? History books? Lots of violence.

And according to whose standard? We have the problems now when Apple iPhone book applications are refused due to the content. See e.g.: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-10127333-37.html. They are probably just using word matching software...

Definitely watch "This Film is Not Rated" it'll open your eyes. It's available through Google videos if you're interested.

I am watching it now and it started very interesting.

[Daithi]

I think this would be an extremely bad idea.

We already have publishers acting as the gate keepers as to what gets published or doesn't get published. As it is now, authors have to tailor their writing to fit within the established markets publishers believe are profitable. I really don't want to see authors further confining their creativity to fit within some arbitrary ratings guideline.

[pilotbob]

There's was talk on another thread about someone doing this. However, what he was doing was creating an interface that book store sites would have to support.. which is why I will think it will fail. Books stores don't want you to easily be able to comparison shop.

Other than that, no I don't think there is anything like that. You should probably send an email to price grabber and tell them they should support ebooks as products.

BOb

EDIT: Opps... as Zelda pointed out. Wrong thread. Can this be moved to the correct thread?

[jenieliser]

I don't think it should be strictly enforced (like 18 or over show id to buy a book...that'd be lame) But I wouldn't mind having an idea of the content.