Know-How Exchange : Other

I find no reason why the film industry should not adopt an ISO. As a matter of fact, it should be a neccessity.

Of course, this instantly begs the question of restricting artistic expression, which leads into your question about censorship versus quality auditors.

Censorship is VERY unpopular in the States. As a matter of fact, censorship in any artistic realm is not well received. Although most will support the idea of a panel of "quality control screeners or auditors" for rating and making sure the film is placed within the approriate channels (i.e. pornographic, extreme violence, graphic drug use, etc). Censorship is viewed as a biast control method of a few opinions, to control what millions of people see and restrict creativity.

You are right on track with supporting the shift into more of a "critic" role, which is more opion based, from the controlling and poorly received method of censoring.

The UK and other European "censors" are somehwhat less strict than American the US simply due to cultural differences. Nonetheless, I think most everyone will agree you are on the right track and I applaude you for your stance.

I speak personally as an artist, with a brother who is a sreenwriter, and a film/theatre fanatic. Censorship will NEVER be welcome in any art form.

Good for you and good luck! If you want to use my post or contact me for a more formal statement from myself and other people in the screnwriting/showbiz arena to support your stance, I'm with you all the way and willing to contact everyone I know!

Email: jett_enterprises@cox.net

Good Luck!

Here are some supportive links I think you will find useful in stating your case:

US:
https://www.ncac.org/issues/filmmenu.html
https://www.screenonline.org.uk/film/id/593210/
https://www.wsu.edu/~amerstu/pop/censor.html

Australia:
https://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2003/7/3/212313/2909

UK, New Zealand, Canda
https://www.caslon.com.au/censorshipguide15.htm