Thursday 24 March 2016

7.2 Ethical and Legal Constraints in the Creative Media Sectors

Legal issues in the media media industry:

Copyright is bid issue the media industry faces. Legal protection is advised so that their original material can't be used in somebody else's name or brand. However, copyright can only be applied on the application of the idea, not the idea itself. It is also illegal to discriminate anyone on the terms of their race, sex, disability etc. when you are recruiting in the workplace. National security is another legal issue that filmmakers face. Filmmakers and producers must be aware of certain laws such as the official secrets act 1911 and the prevention of terrorism etc.

What are social issues?
A social issue (also called a social problem, social conflict, or social illness) refers to an issue that influences a considerable number of individuals within a society. It is often the consequence of factors extending beyond an individual's social issue is the source of a conflicting opinion on the grounds of what is perceived as a morally just personal life or societal order. Social issues are distinguished from economic issues; however, some issues (such as immigration) have both social and economic aspects. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_issue 
One social factor in the film industry is that there is a Lack of government grants for short films. Government grants are an important contribution to indie filmmakers as well as big productions but there appears to be a reluctance to invest in short filmed content. Perhaps this is because turning a profit on a short is seen as impossible, and it’s not an export format that can earn money at the box office but, short films are today’s most important communication tool. Some might argue that the feature film as a format itself is becoming extinct. Well, there’s a reason for it, but that doesn’t mean that short filmmakers should be punished and not supported to preserve the status-quo. In fact, shorts can bring a lot of public interest to places, people, products and so on. This is where a profit can be made. Another social issue in the film industry is the fact that Film crews not knowing their legal rights. A majority of filmmakers have no idea what their actual rights are as workers or even on the intellectual copyright side. This poses a challenge as there are people out there that can abuse this lack of knowledge to get their way. Unfortunately some rogue producers have treated their crews badly, paid them virtually nothing and even endangered their safety by breaking all these rules. People are scared to come forward, don’t know how to deal with these problems or are too afraid to stand up to abusive practices.

The professional body codes of practice is issued by a professional body or association and set for their members to comply ethical standards. The code of practice is usually a set of written guidelines agreed on with the members of the media profession, for example the BBFC, British Board Film Classification, could write a set guidelines that film companies need to comply by.

Representation of gender:
In light of the record-breaking opening of the female-led action film Hunger Games: Catching Fire, the New York Film Academy decided to take a closer look at women in film and what, if any, advancements women are making. After reviewing the data, it is clear that Hollywood remains stuck in its gender bias. Of course, it’s not all disparaging news and there are a number of female filmmakers, characters, and emerging talent challenging the status quo. In addition, in the independent sphere, women made up roughly half of the directors at this year’s Sundance Film Festival, yet still struggle when it comes to films receiving a wide release. By shedding light on gender inequality in film, we hope to start a discussion about what can be done to increase women’s exposure and power in big-budget films.

The Broadcasting Act 1990 is a law of the British parliament, often regarded by both its supporters and its critics as a quintessential example of Thatcherism. The aim of the Act was to reform the entire structure of British broadcasting; British television, in particular, had earlier been described by Margaret Thatcher as "the last bastion of restrictive practices". The act came about after the finding from the Peacock Committee. It led directly to the abolition of the Independent Broadcasting Authority and its replacement with the Independent Television Commission and Radio Authority (both themselves now replaced by Ofcom), which were given the remit of regulating with a "lighter touch" and did not have such strong powers as the IBA; some referred to this as "deregulation".

The Obscene Publications Act 1959 applies to television and covers material which is obscene, whether it is in a person's possession or it is published or broadcast. The definition of obscene is "likely to deprave and corrupt" the audience for which it is intended and includes not only sexually explicit material but material relating to violence and drug taking. This offence is more likely to apply to research material than material actually transmitted because of the stricter tests relating to harm and offence under the Communications Act 2003 and the Ofcom Broadcasting Code. http://www.channel4.com/producers-handbook/media-law/other-laws-affecting-broadcasting/obscene-publications-act-1959

The Official Secrets Act 1989 makes it a criminal offence to obtain or publish any information from a serving or former member of the security and intelligence services or from certain categories of civil servants or public contractors where that disclosure would be damaging. There is no public interest defence. If it is anticipated that a project will stray into this complex area of law, referral to your commissioning editor and programme lawyer should be made immediately.

The Privacy law refers to the laws that deal with the regulation of personal information about individuals, which can be collected by governments and other public as well as private organizations and its storage and use. Privacy laws are considered in the context of an individual's privacy rights or reasonable expectation of privacy.
The Video recordings Act 1984: In making decisions under the Act, the BBFC was required to consider 'whether or not video works are suitable for a classification certificate to be issued to them, having special regard to the likelihood of video works being viewed in the home' and to consider whether a video was 'not suitable for viewing by persons who have not attained a particular age' or whether 'no video recording containing that work is to be supplied other than in a licensed sex shop'. The Act also required that tapes, disc and packaging should be correctly labelled with the BBFC certificate and an explanation of that certificate (e.g. 'Suitable only for persons of 15 years and over. Not to be supplied to any person below that age').



Case study:

The Human Centipede 2:

The British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) has denied The Human Centipede II (Full Sequence) an 18 certificate for fears it poses a "real risk" to cinema goers. The BBFC refusal means it cannot be legally supplied anywhere in the UK – even on DVD or download. In the sequel, a man becomes erotically obsessed with a DVD copy of the original film – in which the victims are surgically stitched together mouth to anus – and decides to recreate the idea. By contrast, the BBFC report on Full Sequence stated that the film's content was too extreme for an 18 certificate and was "sexually violent and potentially obscene". The board members felt that the centipede of Full Sequence existed purely as "the object of the protagonist's depraved sexual fantasy". They criticised the film for making "little attempt to portray any of the victims... as anything other than objects to be brutalised, degraded and mutilated for the amusement and arousal of the central character, as well as for the pleasure of the audience" and stated their opinion that the film was potentially in breach of the Obscene Publications Act. The BBFC stated that they would not reclassify the film in the future, as "no amount of cuts would allow them to give it a certificate".

No comments:

Post a Comment