Australian Classification Board

The classifications below are unrestricted and may suggest parental advisory, but do not impose any legal restrictions on access to or distribution of material.[15][16]

Classification	Description
Exempt (E)	Only very specific types of material (including educational material and artistic performances) can be exempt from classification, and the material cannot contain anything that exceeds the constraints of the PG classification.[17] The assessment of exemption may be made by the distributor or exhibitor (self-assessed) without needing to submit the product for certification by the ACB. Self-assessed exempt films cannot use the official marking although it is advised that films and computer games that are self-assessed as exempt display, "This film/computer game is exempt from classification".
General (G)	Contains material available for general viewing. This category does not necessarily designate a children's film or game. Although not mandatory at this category, the board may provide consumer information. Consumer advice at G classification usually relates to impacts on very young children. The content is very mild in impact. Themes should have a very low sense of threat or menace, and be justified by context. Violence should have only a low sense of threat or menace, and be justified by context. Sexual activity should be very mild and very discreetly implied, and be justified by context. Coarse language should be very mild and infrequent and justified by context. Drug use should be implied only very discreetly, and be justified by context. Nudity should be justified by context.
Parental Guidance (PG)	Not recommended for viewing or playing by people under 15 without guidance from parents or guardians. Contains material that young viewers may find confusing or upsetting. The content is mild in impact. Themes should have a very low sense of threat or menace, and be justified by context. Violence should be mild and infrequent, and be justified by context. Sexual violence is not permitted. Sexual activity should be mild and discreetly implied, and be justified by context. Coarse language should be mild and infrequent, and be justified by context. Sex, nudity and drug use should be mild, infrequent, "discreetly implied" and "justified by context". Drug use and nudity should be justified by context.
Mature (M)	Recommended for people aged 15 years and over. People under 15 may legally access this material because it is an advisory category. This category contains material that may require a mature perspective, but is not deemed too strong for younger viewers. The content is moderate in impact, although in recent years, the "moderate" indicator prefix is omitted from the consumer advice, e.g. "moderate violence" is referred to as "violence". Themes may have a moderate sense of threat or menace, if justified by context. Moderate violence is permitted, if "justified by context". Sexual violence should be very limited and justified by context. Sexual activity should be discreetly implied, if "justified by context". Coarse language may be used. Aggressive or strong coarse language should be infrequent and justified by context. Drug use and nudity should be justified by context.

By contrast, the classifications below are legally restricted: it is illegal to sell or exhibit material classified to anyone younger than the mentioned minimum age.[15][16]

Classification	Description
Mature Accompanied (MA 15+)	Contains material that is considered unsuitable for exhibition by persons under the age of 15. People under 15 may legally purchase, rent, exhibit or view such content only under the supervision of a parent or adult guardian. A person may be asked to show proof of age before renting or purchasing an MA 15+ film or computer game. The content is strong in impact. Realistic violence of medium intensity is permitted. Violent depictions with a "high degree or realism" is accepted only if "justified by context". Stylised violence, however, can be "more detailed". Strong violence is permitted, although if it is bloody and strong it should be "infrequent" or "justified by context". Sexual violence is permitted only if it is "not frequent, gratuitous or exploitative". Sexual activity may be "discreetly implied" or "simulated". Nudity is permitted, but in a sexual context it should "not be exploitative". Frightening or intense scenes should "not disturb a reasonable adult". Aggressive and very strong coarse language may be used but it should "not be exploitative". Drug use may be depicted, but not in an "advocatory manner". Themes, if strong, should be justified by context.
Restricted (R 18+)	Contains material that is considered unsuitable for exhibition to persons under the age of 18. People under 18 may not legally buy, rent, exhibit or view R 18+ classified content. A person may be asked for proof of their age before purchasing, hiring or viewing an R 18+ film or computer game at a retail store or cinema. Some material classified R 18+ may be offensive to sections of the adult community. The content is high in impact. Realistic and explicit depictions of violence are permitted, but violence that is "frequently gratuitous, cruel, exploitative and offensive to a reasonable adult" is not. Themes can have a "very high degree of intensity" but should not be "exploitative". Sexual violence is permitted only to the extent that it is "necessary to the narrative" and "not exploitative" or "not shown in detail". Sexual activity can be "realistically simulated", but depictions of "actual sexual activity" are not permitted. However, several films containing artistic depictions of real sexual activity such as Romance and Nymphomaniac have been passed with the R18+ classification. Drug use can be shown but "not gratuitously detailed" and should also "not be promoted or encouraged". For computer games, drug use related to "incentives and rewards" is not permitted. Nudity in a sexual context should "not include obvious genital contact". Coarse language is virtually unrestricted.
Restricted (X 18+)	Contains material that is pornographic in nature. People under 18 may not legally buy, rent, possess, exhibit or view these films. The exhibition or sale of these films to people under the age of 18 years is a criminal offence carrying a maximum fine of $5,500. Films classified as X 18+ are banned (via state government legislation) from being sold or rented in all Australian states (but are legal to possess except in certain parts of the Northern Territory) and are legally available to purchase only in the Australian Capital Territory and the Northern Territory. Importing X 18+ material from these territories to any other state is legal (as the Australian Constitution forbids any restrictions on trade between the states and territories). The content is sexually explicit, and the rating cannot be given to video games. This rating applies to films that "depict unsimulated sexual content only". Depictions of sexual violence, coercion and "sexually assaultive" language are not allowed in the category. Fetishes such as body piercing, "golden showers", bondage, spanking or fisting are also not permitted.

In February 2020, the board proposed to remove the reference to 15 years for PG and M classifications and simply just refer to the severity of the material. This is due to a confusion that is caused by each of the categories citing to a 15-year-old, in addition to both the PG and M content not being recommended for persons under 15 years. The age reference created confusion for parents and guardians, creating some questions, such as why an M level film can still be accessed by a person under 15 without guidance because it is not a legally restricted category, when the impact of its material is higher than that of PG material. There is a confusion for people that comes from knowing the suited audience for PG, M and MA 15+ films and games due to their definitions that revolve around 15 years of age. The notes in the guidelines that come with the PG, M and MA ratings should be read like this:[18]

• PG: "Content classified PG may not be of interest to a child or young person. Some content may contain material which some children and young people may find confusing or upsetting and parental guidance is recommended."
• M: "Content classified M is not suitable for children. Parental guidance may be required for young people."
• MA 15+: "Content classified MA 15+ is legally restricted to people aged 15 year and over. However, young people aged under 15 years can legally access this content when accompanied by an adult who may need to provide guidance. "

In February 2020, the board had suggested the adoption of a PG-13-type classification category, which is a rating aimed at young teens (between PG and M), that addresses the mild+ impact level material. Its adoption was suggested because many films in recent years surpass what conforms to the PG rating and are, consequentially, pushed up into an M ("moderate impact") rating category due to their dark themes and peril, despite being films aimed at younger teens. The mild+ category, if introduced, could excel the mild impact level (PG), but not so as to require a mature perspective (M classification) and it could be relevant for films with a more significant amount of action or fantasy violence. If the rating is implemented, the non-restricted classifications would read like this:[18]

• G – General (very mild impact)
• PG – Parental guidance (mild impact)
• Young person (mild+ impact)
• M – Mature (moderate impact)

This would mean the age restrictive numbers (15 and 18) would only be present for the legally-restricted categories of MA 15+, R 18+ and X 18+. The ACB is not suggesting that the new PG-13 rating would be applied retrospectively, but rather prospectively, as was the case when the MA 15+ category was initiated and when the R 18+ was adopted for video games. The ACB is also not planning to use the PG-13 title for the new classification category, but a title that does not reference any age, such as YP for "young person" (or, likely, T for "teenager").[18]

The ACB considers the present classification categories for publications to be redundant, complex, and inappropriate for the digital world. Therefore, the board has proposed the creation of the equivalent film and games classifications of M, R 18+ and X 18+ for publications, like:[18]

• Unrestricted publication classification – M
• Category 1 Restricted publication classification – R 18+
• Category 2 Restricted publication classification – X 18+

• Pasolini's Salò, or the 120 Days of Sodom has twice been banned in Australia. The Home Affairs Minister, Brendan O'Connor, asked the Classification Review Board to reassess the decision;[19] however, the review failed to find any fault in the classification. The film was banned in 1997, and was released after two failed attempts in September 2010, when the ACB classified an uncut version of Salò R18+, mainly due to extra material providing greater context.
• In 1992, Island World Communications Ltd and Manga Entertainment Australia Ltd had Urotsukidoji: Legend of the Overfiend submitted to the OFLC. It was the first animated feature to be banned in Australia and the feature was banned outright, similar to Violence Jack. Urotsukidoji was then censored to meet the OFLC's standards. The Australian version is the most censored in the Western world. Many fans of anime imported uncensored versions of Urotsukidoji: Legend of the Overfiend from the UK. The rest of the Urotsukidoji series was censored in Australia, with many still importing or downloading the American versions.
• Ninja Scroll was originally released in 1994 in Australia by Manga Entertainment Ltd. It originally had the MA15+ rating on the VHS, but this was overturned in 1997 when Phillip Ruddock had the anime reviewed after an uncut screening of the movie on the SBS. A few months later it was given an R18+ rating and was uncut, then edited again, eventually using the BBFC cut of it. This was overturned in 2003 when Madman Entertainment and Manga Entertainment Ltd. released the uncut version.
• Romance, a new crop within the arthouse genre, which features short scenes of actual sex began to attract closer scrutiny. The film was initially refused classification in Australia, before it was awarded an R18+ on appeal.[20] It single-handedly paved the way for actual sex to be accommodated in the R18+ classification in Australia.[20]
• Baise-moi, a French film about two prostitutes who take violent revenge after being raped.[21] In 2000, the film was classified as R18+. On 10 May 2002, The film was subsequently banned and pulled from cinemas and still remains prohibited in Australia to this day due to exploitative and offensive depictions of sexual violence, extreme violence and depictions of behavior and fetishes that are considered offensive or abhorrent.[22]
• Ken Park, an American film about teenagers that features a scene of autoerotic asphyxiation, amongst other sexually explicit scenes.[23] The ban, however, is actually due to exploitative sexual depiction of minors, which is a criminal offence in Australia. In response to the ban, a protest screening was held which was shut down by the police.[24]
  • Prominent movie reviewer Margaret Pomeranz, then host of The Movie Show on the SBS, was arrested (and later cautioned and released) along with several others after attempting to screen at a hall what she described as "a wonderful film".[25] Tom Gleisner, host of The Panel (a prime-time comedy show), openly stated on the show that he had downloaded and watched the film.
  • Former New South Wales Premier Bob Carr stated that he thought the banning of Ken Park and other films was inappropriate, and that his attorney-general, Bob Debus, would discuss changing the laws with other state attorneys-general at an upcoming meeting.[26]
• In October 2017 the classification board was described as homophobic by Luke Buckmaster on flicks.com.au for classifying the film Tom of Finland as R18+ for high impact sexualised imagery and nudity. The board disputed the allegation, stating that it had classified the film in accordance with its published guidelines and that the distributor had sought R18+ conditions for its screenings at the 2017 Scandinavian Film Festival. Buckmaster also compared what he perceived to be the board's heavy-handed approach unfavorably to Netflix, which he argued was permitted to regulate its own content. The board disagreed with this comparison, noting that it was piloting a scheme to streamline the classification of Netflix content in Australia.[27]

Video gaming censorship in Australia is considered to be one of the strictest in the Western world.[28] Such controversial and noteworthy cases include:

• Grand Theft Auto III was withdrawn from sale for allowing players to have sexual intercourse with prostitutes; the game was later reinstated when this action was removed. Specifically, the player could solicit intercourse from a prostitute, and then kill her. The ability to solicit sex from prostitutes in the game was the action that was removed, but in-game characters and pedestrians could still violently murder them. Grand Theft Auto: Vice City was also pre-censored for the same reasons. Though, in 2010 Vice City was classified uncut again receiving an MA15+ and an uncensored version of GTA 3 was given an R18+ in 2019.[29]
• Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas was withdrawn from sale in July 2005 following the revelation that an interactive sex minigame was included in the content files on the game's disc; one could not ordinarily access this, but a third party modification, known as the Hot Coffee mod, allowed the player to access the minigame and the inclusion of the scenes on the game disc took the game outside the MA15+ category. The MA15+ rating was re-instated after a modified version was released worldwide by Rockstar Games, removing the content files for the sex scenes.
• Grand Theft Auto IV was also pre-censored prior to classification and release in the Australian region. In the American release, sexual encounters with prostitutes occur inside the player's vehicle and the player has the ability to rotate the camera for a clearer view of what transpires. In the censored Australian version, the camera is fixed behind the vehicle, which rocks from side to side with accompanying audio effects. It is impossible for the player to view the inside of the car.[30] Rockstar later submitted the uncut version of the game, which went on to receive the same MA15+ rating as its censored counterpart, and a patch was released for the PS3, PC and Xbox 360 to uncensor the game.
• 50 Cent: Bulletproof was banned for encouraging gang violence. A version removing the game's arcade mode, cutting down on gore, and with an automatic game over for killing innocents was given an MA15+ rating.
• Fallout 3 was refused classification by the OFLC[31][32] due to the "realistic visual representations of drugs and their delivery method (bringing) the 'science-fiction' drugs in line with 'real-world' drugs." A revised version of the game was resubmitted to the OFLC and reclassified as MA15+ on 7 August 2008 after drug names were changed.[33] It was later clarified that the only change done to the final version of the game was the name "morphine" changed to "Med-x". This change was done to all versions worldwide; thus, Australia got the same version of the game as other countries uncut with an MA15+.
• Atelier Totori Plus: The Adventurer of Arland was given an R18+ rating on PlayStation Vita, a huge jump from the PS3 version's PG rating, with the reason being "references to sexual violence".[34] Comparatively, in North America, the game received a T for Teen (ages 13+) rating, a 12+ rating in Japan (CERO B), and a PEGI 12 rating. Its strict rating resulted in the creation of an internet meme captioned "High Impact Violence" that satirizes the Classification Board for labeling mildly sensual animation as having "high impact".[35]

Many games were banned before 2011 on the basis that the R18+ rating did not apply to video games at the time. This was the subject of complaint in the gaming community, who argued that there is no reason why adults should be prevented from seeing content in games that they could see in a film. One of the main opponents to the introduction of an R18+ rating for video games was the former South Australian attorney-general, Michael Atkinson, who vetoed every attempt to include one.[36]

On 11 August 2010, at a public forum, opposition leader Tony Abbott was asked a question about his views on the absence of an R18+ rating for video games and whether he had any policies relating to the subject, saying, "if what happens with video games is not roughly analogous to what happens in other areas, that seems silly ... Instinctively I'm with you, and it's something I'd be happy to look at, if we are in Government."[37][38][39][40] In December 2010, Attorney General Robert McClelland appeared to be moving on this issue following the release of telephone poll results conducted by the Minister for Home Affairs Brendan O'Connor, showing roughly 80% in support of an R18+ classification.[41]

On 22 July 2011, at a meeting of state and territories' attorneys general, an agreement was reached for the introduction of an R18+ classification. It was planned to introduce the rating towards the end of 2011.[42] On 22 July 2011, a meeting of attorneys-general produced an in-principle agreement to introduce the R18+ classification for video games; however, NSW Attorney-General Greg Smith abstained from the vote. The Home Affairs Minister, Brendan O'Connor, said the federal government would over-ride NSW and implement the R18+ rating regardless of its decision and would be officially available before the end of 2011.[43] On 10 August the NSW Attorney General agreed on the R18+; thus, the rating would be accepted and available to all states before the end of 2011.[44][45]

As of 1 January 2013, the R18+ rating has been officially implemented for video games although it is apparently not being used to full effect as many games are still being refused classification.[46] Michael Atkinson, who was the South Australian attorney-general until 2010, was a continuous opponent against the introduction of the R18+ classification, and actively blocked the release of a discussion paper until just before his retirement from cabinet that canvassed the opinion of the Australian public on whether or not an R18+ classification should be introduced.

The first game to be released with an R18+ rating was Ninja Gaiden Sigma 2 Plus. The game Saints Row IV became the first game to be refused classification under the new standard on 25 June 2013.[47][48] State of Decay became the second game to be refused classification less than 24 hours after the first (Saints Row IV) was banned. Both were refused classification on the grounds of "illicit or proscribed drug use related to incentives and rewards".[49]