Please read on for a quick update on what I have managed to find out so far about film ratings and IMDA regulations. This has bearing on the strip club scene from the movie I saw yesterday afternoon at OTH.
This evening, I was informed by a member of the public that the movie I saw at OTH yesterday was 'Kal Ho Naa Ho'.
A quick check online about this film turns up independent synopsis and reviews confirm that there is a significant scene in the movie that takes place in a strip club.
Refer to
1.Top 50 Memorable Bollywood Characters: Kantaben from Kal Ho Naa Ho (https://bit.ly/31Ckumk
2. Bollywood Goes Off the Straight and Narrow (www.livemint.com/Home-Page/ZXsBM4OnZ3dCl6ExQJVILK/Bollywood-goes-off-the-straight-and-narrow-path.html%3ffacet=amp
I did a quick check on IMDA database and this is a Bollywood film that has been given a PG rating by IMDA. (See IMDA classification here: https://bit.ly/2odJP8n
Strip club scene = PG rating?
Under the Exhibition License terms stated on IMDA's website, there is no requirement for the entity intending to screen films of a particular rating to apply for license.
"A Film Exhibition Licence is required for all entities that are carrying out the activities of publicly exhibiting films and videos in the course of their business, unless exempted. The public exhibition of films includes films streamed over the Internet or transmitted via commercial satellite links to a public audience.
A Film Exhibition Licence is not required for exhibition of films classified as G, PG or PG13.'
We must now ask the relevant authorities if a PG rating is even appropriate for such general public viewing in such an accessible area where not only are there primary schools nearby but also many businesses serving the young and very young in the property.
With the help of another friend, we checked the Board of Censorship Classification Guidelines.
I highlight the few pertinent guidelines (Points 8,18 and 19) stated in the document below:
8. In general, the Board’s classification decisions are guided by the following principles/considerations:
• Generally accepted social mores
• Need to protect the young
• Racial/religious harmony
• National interest
• Treatment of theme, content and context
• Evaluation of impact
a. Generally Accepted Social Mores
Films screened must be sensitive to community standards of morality and decency, as well as social norms acceptable to the general public.
b. Need to Protect the Young
For the lower ratings, particular attention will be paid to content that may be harmful to or unsuitable for the young.
Publicity Materials
18. To avoid offending unsolicited viewers and attracting the under-aged, stricter
content standards are applied to publicity materials. These materials include posters,
banners or billboards displayed in public places, advertisements in newspapers and
magazines. Publicity materials for all ratings should conform to community standards
and should not offend the general public. Detailed guidelines for print publicity
materials are available on the IMDA website.
19. Once a film is classified, posters displayed at public places should clearly display the rating and consumer advice. The display of posters and banners for R21 films should be restricted to cinemas licensed to exhibit R21 films. More sensitivity should also be exercised in the dissemination of publicity materials for films in the lower rating categories as they can be displayed in public places where young audiences are exposed to them.
Now, if publicity materials are required to confirm to community standards and general public viewing, the media content screened in public areas intended for the general public should be subjected to similar if not more rigorous standards because the visual media is much more impactful on the young.
In the incidences of inappropriate media being shown on the screens at OTH, I have observed even babies and very young children under 6 sitting in front of the screen. Let's not argue that babies and young children can't understand such imagery and messaging. There is sufficient research and evidence to show the impact media exposure has on them.
Some people left comments on my first post on OTH Facebook page, which has since unfortunately disappeared somewhere, that they saw sexually provocative MTVs screened just last Sunday during lunch hour. To quote Facebook user Grace Du, 'many children inadvertently watched it' while waiting for the cartoon to come on.
I know that some would argue that it is up to the parents to guide their children. Yes, it is true that parents ought to educate their own. HOWEVER, when such inappropriate sexual content is being screened so liberally in such a public area, and no film rating warnings are posted anywhere in OTH, parents are not given any any opportunity to make an informed decision whether or not the content is suitable. Furthermore, there are just some things that are hard to unsee once seen.
As mentioned earlier in my original petition post, this space is occupied by many businesses catering to the children. The childcare children go for walks around the hub. School children have school excursions to the hub for various programmes like swimming, library visits or community activities.
I am certain that OTH management is law abiding and they would have worked through the appropriate legal requirements properly.
However, this is an issue that demands more than just a blind adherence to legal requirements. If there has been several members of the public sending in feedback of concerns over the past few years, this shows that there is community standards of morality and decency being violated. There should have been attempts by the OTH Management to investigate and address concerns instead of ignoring feedback or brushing it away with comments such as 'obscene is subjective'.
OTH may not be under any legal obligation even right now to answer for why it has kept allowing such content to be screened in spite of complaints from the community.
However, I believe that OTH being part of PA - an entity responsible for building a strong and resilient community through its programming and being entrusted with Singapore taxpayer monies, OTH has an greater moral obligation to fulfil than just what IMDA licensing requirements state.
As the Censorship Guidelines state in points 8, 11 and 18, careful and special consideration must be taken to evaluate content especially when the young are concerned.
In IMDA's own words captured in its Censorship Guidelines, we 'need to protect the young'.
Yes sex and sexuality education is important. But the screens in public areas are not the appropriate platform nor media channels.
And no, I do not believe that babies and children need to be shown men and women in various states of undress gyrating against each other or objects in suggestive poses in order to be given a proper education in their bodies, of the birds and the bees.