Talk:Censorship in the Republic of Ireland

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Are any Movies still banned in Ireland? --Richy 19:48, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

As the article says, Natural Born Killers is still banned. Kiand 19:55, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Or not, if the IMDB is to be believed. Claims to have been rerated. Will contact IFCO. Kiand 19:57, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

http://imdb.com/List?certificates=Ireland:(Banned)&&heading=14;Ireland:(Banned) lists all movies to have ever been banned here, wheter now unbanned or not.

No, NBK is not still banned in Ireland. In fact, hardly any of the films listed on the IMDb as banned in Ireland are still banned. The listing only reflects the initial ban, and if you follow the link for most of the films you will see what year the film was unbanned. In some cases it was within weeks of the first submission.

--Attila the Pooh 23:18, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

One that I'm pretty sure still is, is Showgirls, but I'm not positive. Bans are effectively useless now, if the film isn't banned everywhere in the EU. You could import a copy, and under the assumption you got caught (its extremely unlikely, but a neccessary tool for this example) you could challenge the ban of the film as a barrier to trade - a violation of EU legislation. There are a good few films on amazon.co.uk which are banned in Ireland, but they will ship here nonetheless, Showgirls being one. - ^Рэд_хот 13:23, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Lads it was unfair to remove my edit about Ryanair as it is accurate. The ASA is a toothless dog and won't take sanctions against advertisers. The passage in the article is inaccuate. The ASA cannot take a publication off the sheleves. The ASA is a trade association and not a govt funded association. Prehaps they need to cite their source for this section of article before I remove the ryanair references which I can back up. Aerlingus 18:05, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Contents 1 Music 2 Hardcore pornography contradiction? 3 A few things 4 Lots of pointless fact tagging by anon

[edit] Music

What is the source for many shops sourcing their stock from North America to avoid censorship? I have never seen an album or single in any shop in Dublin, that didn't say "Made in the EU" on the back, and this includes multiple albums with explicit lyrics, an example I know for sure is I'm Not Dead by P!nk, which has explicit lyrics, and carries "Made in the EU" on the back. The only case I have seen is an album which has not (yet) been released in Ireland, e.g. Oral Fixation Vol. 2 was an import in HMV for a long time, until the Irish release. Can someone get a source for this North America thing? - ^Рэд_хот 13:02, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

That'd be because most CD pressing plants are in Europe... most of my direct US imports here have "Made in the EU" on them to. Check the catalogue numbers of CDs, particularly Warner or Sony ones, against discogs.com and you'll notice they're usually all Canadian or US versions, not the UK version. Anyway, its not to avoid censorship, its cost/parent company related, US releases are far -more- likely to be censored, it just means that you get more CDs in stores here with the "Parental Advisory: Explicit Lyrics" stickers on them than you do in the rest of Europe. --Kiand 14:41, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

I see... unless I'm missunderstanding what you're saying, then the article's statement isn't wrong, but it's not exactly right either? Is that it? And I also have imported a few CDs from US but they all have "Made in USA" on them. Also, if they're made in the EU, then they're not exactly "sourcing" the stock from North America - I can't imagine its exported there, then imported back. - ^Рэд_хот 17:36, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Worryingly, it often is. Even more wasteful than Microsoft sending all their Irish pressed CDs to Malta to be posted out to Irish users. I also have some US discs with "Made in the USA" on them, as well as European or Australian ones; but the majority of pressing plants are in the EU. --Kiand 20:14, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Well thanks. That's very strange though. - ^Рэд_хот 19:36, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hardcore pornography contradiction?

What is the source that it is legal? I have not seen anything to this effect, in fact quite to the contrary. Can someone confirm this, especially hardcore? If it is, why is classification usually refused, since DVDs have to carry a cert unless exempt. Don't they? I think it contradicts itself as well, where it says that video games can be banned if they have it. - ^Рэд_хот 14:05, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

DVD's have to have certification to be sold publically, virtually anything can be shown or sold in members clubs, which I presume those places you see dirty old men in raincoats going in to on Capel Street are... could be "members clubs" like the IFI where you just pay an extra 2 quid in if you don't have a card, mind. The IFI itself has shown a number of european "Art movies" that were refused 18 due to extreme sexual content. --Kiand 15:37, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Possession of it may not be by itself illegal and so if you obtain it somehow you couldn't be charged with any offence simply for having it in your possession therefore it is "legal".

I believe it is the censor policy not to give it a certificate

I have heard stories that in the past the ban on particular books only applied to one version of the book , usually a paperback version , and that it was quite legal to sell the hardback versionGarda40 15:55, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

As goes the books, sometimes the version of a book from one publisher was banned and it was legal from another, or the abridged version was banned and the full one wasn't (!), that was quite common. CPB was about as basketcase as every other state organisation is... --Kiand 15:59, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

That still seems to contradict other parts. If the films are kind of legal, then why could video games be banned for the same reason. - ^Рэд_хот 12:33, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Because I believe it is Government policy and therefore by extension censor policy that Hardcore porn shouldn't be on sale publicly in Ireland and have given the censor power to ban it's sale whether in movies or a video game.

The thinking behind that seems to be that making the material impossible to obtain in Ireland legally was enough by itself and you didn't have to go and waste time amending the law to make possession itself illegal.Garda40 14:08, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

But in that case it's not really de jure legal (just de facto). Also, the website for Revenue says that obscene materials may be confiscated by customs authorities on entry, so doesn't that suggest otherwise? - ^Рэд_хот 17:31, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A few things

Firstly I've added in the fact that TV3 used to show adult videos on their late-night music show a few years ago, I can't remember what the name of the show was or what specific years it ran from (I would think it was about '03 to '05), does anyone else know the details?

On another issue, this sentence from the Computer Games section is quite confusing "This led to an unusual situation where in the 1990s, UK owned game sales multiples sold the sanitised versions of Carmageddon, whilst Irish owned stores sold the uncut versions imported from the United States.". It seems to be badly worded and I can't quite understand what is being said. Is it saying that UK owned games stores sold the censored version (Like Electronics Boutique and GAME (retailer)) and Irish owned stores sold the uncensored version?

Oh and finally the article states "Games may only be banned if they contain content which could be classed as pornography.", well I'm pretty sure Porn games like Leisure Suit Larry are legal (and in the Shops) in Ireland, so either that rule doesn't exist, or it isn't being enforced. --Hibernian 17:10, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Firstly, "Music Cubed" or "Music³", depending on how you accepted their name. And yeah, EB, HMV, etc sold UK-cut versions of games; Irish independents generally sold the uncut version. As goes Leisure Suit Larry, erm.... no idea. --Kiand 18:57, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lots of pointless fact tagging by anon

An anon user has gone and added a huge amount of {{fact}} tags on entirely uncitable content - best example being that theres no legislation to ban music/games - if theres no legislation, theres not anything to cite now is there? Although there is the ifco site. I've gone through the remaining ones and only one was actually easily citable. Many of the others hang on getting a full listing of what was controlled by the Censorship of Publications Board.

1. Leaving Cert syllabus, that needs both a definitive CPB listing and a Dept. of Education syllabus listing, comparing those is Original Research so not citable
2. Some movies still being banned - thats just true. IFCO's db doesn't go back more than 2 years and doesn't cover DVD releases so the, erm, three movies banned in the past 4 years or so aren't listed. Theres no way to cite for this, its just true.
3. Movies getting lower age ratings - hard to cite for this one
4. Movies not getting cut - ifco's own site says this albeit in far far more words, as does the wonderfully titled document "Irish Film Censorship: A Cultural Journey from Silent Cinema To Internet Pornography" which they provide on their site.
5. NOTW/Playboy being banned - needs a definitive CPB listing. None seems to exist, theres a listing of what still is banned somewhere in a recent Iris Ofiguil mind...
6. Both cites in the "Censorship of books section" need a CPB listing.
7. Music videos - uncitable because this is again, "just true". most stations here get their videos from the UK record labels in the first place...

--Kiand 01:54, 6 November 2006 (UTC)