The Freedom of Government Censorship

Over at filmclassification.ca I periodically note the ratings assigned to films by the different boards in Canada. For some perspective I also include the ratings assigned in a few other countries. In most of the world, ratings are assigned by government agencies, but in the freedom loving United States ratings come from an industry association. Their mantra, also often applied to possibility of Internet censorship, is that industry must censor itself to prevent government censorship. Implicit in this approach is that industry censorship is better, i.e. more liberal, than government censorship.

A look at the ratings suggests this is not necessarily true. Here's my completely non-scientific sample for 2012:

Title	BC	AB	MB	ON	PQ	NS, PE, NB	MPAA (U.S.A)	BBFC (Great Britain)
The Campaign	14A	14A	14A	14A	13+	14A	R	15
The Dark Knight	PG	14A	PG	PG	G		PG-13	12A
Hugo	G	PG	PG	PG	G		PG	U
Hunger Games	PG	14A	14A	14A	G		PG-13	12A
Les Miserables	PG	PG	PG	PG	G	PG	PG-13	12A
Looper	14A	14A	14A	14A	13+	14A	R	15
Mission Impossible - Ghost Protocol	PG	14A	14A	PG	13+		PG-13	12A
Skyfall	PG	14A	14A	PG	13+	14A	PG-13	12A
Snow White and the Huntsman	PG	PG	PG	PG	G	PG	PG-13	12A
Ted	14A	18A	18A	14A	13+	14A	R	15
Tintin	PG	PG	PG	PG	G		PG	PG

In most cases, the MPAA ratings are the same or higher than the ratings from government agencies. There are a few exceptions. For example, Skyfall and Mission Impossible have 13+ ratings in Quebec, which means children under 13 cannot view them, while in the United States the PG-13 rating is advisory only. Similarly, 14A requires adult accompaniment, while PG-13 suggests it.

The notion that industry censorship is more liberal than government censorship should not be accepted without question. In a democracy, government censors are obligated to answer to the people. Industry censors face no such obligation. Keep that in mind next time you hear a suggestion that Internet companies need to censor the net lest government step in. Government censorship might be better.