Censorship and Ratings: Germany/USA

Censorship and ratings - how Germany and America differ on sex and violence

The United States is often seen as the pinnacle of free speech, allowing nearly total freedom of artistic expression. Unrestricted freedom of the arts is primarily the case for Germany, but certain aspects in media are edited for the German market. Growing up in Germany often meant that we had to either deal with the censored version or buy unrated versions of our desired movies and video games from our neighbouring countries, often at horrendous prices. But does the US allow everything, and if not, what is a no go? This article aims to shed light on how censorship and ratings play an essential part in the American music and movie industry and compare the censorship landscapes of both countries.

Parental Advisory! - Music censorship in the US

The parental advisory sticker

Most readers should already know the following sticker. It is a staple in nearly every music collection (be it physical or online).

This label has been in use as a warning label since 1985 when it was introduced by the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America). Nearly ten years ago, in 2012, the label was also introduced to digital music outlets. According to the RIAA, it indicates that "strong language or depictions of violence, sex or substance abuse are present in a recorded work". The labelling system is further described on their website as a "voluntary initiative for record companies and artists". That allows "greater freedom of expression while also allowing them to help parents and families make informed consumption decisions". According to the RIAA, this means that most record companies decide (in consultation with the artist) which releases should receive this label considering "that there is musical and artistic credibility in a piece of recorded work despite explicit lyrics". For example, suppose both parties wish not to receive this label on their packaging and advertising material. In that case, the artist would need to revise explicit lyrics or altogether drop songs from the release if necessary.

How did it come to this?

Matthieu Deflems, sociology professor and member of the South Carolina Advisory Committee for the US Commission on Civil Rights, explained thoroughly in his article "Popular Culture and Social Control: The Moral Panic on Music Labeling" why this label came to be. Surprisingly, it all started because of a rather raunchy Prince song named "Darling Nikki", which begins with these rather x-rated couplets:

"I knew a girl named Nikki

I guess you could say she was a sex fiend

I met her in a hotel lobby

Masturbating with a magazine..."

(Prince - Darling Nikki)

Tipper Gore, the wife of environmentalist Al Gore, heard these lyrics after buying the album which contains this song for her then eleven-year-old daughter. Shocked by such an explicit and scandalous reference to female masturbation, Gore sought a way to create a platform that shared her concern for the lyrical content children might hear in modern pop music. She did this by founding the PMRC ("The Parents Music Resource Center") in 1985 with like-mindedly concerned mothers. The goal of this organization was to "inform parents about the music young people were exposed to on the radio, via recordings, and at live concerts, and to request the record industry for voluntary restraint concerning music that was deemed explicit or obscene". According to M.A Coletti, they originally wanted to install a rating system akin to the one used by the Motion Picture Association of America, with detailed warnings. They also wanted to ban obscene covers from the storefront (so the album in question could only be sold under the counter), furnish radio stations with lyric sheets, and group music videos and songs as one entity to rate. On August 5, 1985, the RIAA complied with the PMCR's wish to put the first version of the parental advisory sticker on all future releases that feature explicit lyrical content. However, the PMRC did not find this satisfactory and demanded a differentiated classification according to various criteria, standard practice for films. This suggestion was opposed fiercely by many music industry officials, so NPR's Tom Cole. They fought this rating system because it would depend too much on an individual interpretation of the lyrics. What might seem violent or satanic to one might seem ironic or funny to somebody else. The next hearing held by the Senate commerce was a media spectacle that closed with this statement by Frank Zappa:

"The PMRC promotes their program as a harmless type of consumer information service, providing 'guidelines' which will assist baffled parents in the determination of the 'suitability of records listened to by 'very young children.' But, unfortunately, the methods they propose have several side effects, not the least of which is the reduction of all American music, recorded and live, to the intellectual level of a Saturday morning cartoon show."

According to Tom Cole, both parties agreed upon using the label, even though debates and congressional hearings dragged on until 1994.

But what about the radio?

Now that we have established the historical reason for a label for explicit content in lyrics, you might ask why there seems to be a need to eliminate profane lyrics - which often results in a "clean" edit for the singles. What exactly can ensure that a once explicit song becomes suitable for the radio and why can the radio not play profane songs in the USA? Standard practice is to silence or overdub the profanity, but there are several options to comply with the rules. A somewhat puzzling solution to edit out profanity can be heard in this chart hit from 2010.

"I see you driving around town with the girl I love

And I'm like, "Forget you" (Ooh, ooh, ooh)

I guess the change in my pocket wasn't enough

I'm like: "Forget you and forget her, too."

Said if I was richer

I'd still be with ya

Hah, now ain't that some shh? (Ain't that some shh?)

And although there's pain in my chest

I still wish you the best

With a forget you (Oh, ooh, oooh)."

(CeeLo Green - Forget You)

What seems like elaborate slang is the "sanitized" version of "F*** You", the original song. But such explicit lyrics are not allowed on the radio, so CeeLo Green had to change the lyrics to something more suitable to gain a place on the radio playlists. This is due to the Federal Communications Commission, which poses as the watchdog of any kind of civil radio transmission. Their statutes explain what content is prohibited from being heard on the radio at any time: those that are classified as either obscene, indecent or profane lyrical content.

“Obscene content does not have protection by the First Amendment. For content to be ruled obscene, it must meet a three-pronged test established by the Supreme Court: It must appeal to an average person's prurient interest; depict or describe sexual conduct in a "patently offensive" way; and, taken as a whole, lack serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value.

Indecent content portrays sexual or excretory organs or activities in a way that is patently offensive but does not meet the three-prong test for obscenity.

Profane content includes "grossly offensive" language that is considered a public nuisance”.

But what does the public think of it?

Resident America expert Carol Ebbert Hübner deems the label may be necessary to help parents identify inappropriate content for their child. Still, she does worry that some parents seem to "get overly hung up on the lyrics/content ". When it comes to music on the radio, she implies that the censoring of offensive words is fitting. According to her, this "fits the wider American feeling that these words still have power and meaning, and shouldn't be used or used a lot in every situation". She also quips as a side note that growing up without any other music source besides the radio made her realize that she often never heard the original version of specific songs before the advent of online streaming.

Rated R! - How movies are rated in the US

Movies are cultural assets. They are enjoyed by billions of people around the world – and by all ages. Obviously, there is certain content that is not suited for all ages. However, this poses the question: who decides what is suited for what age? Like most countries, the United States rate movies in certain way. This is regulated by the Motion Picture Association (MPA). Let’s take a look at the how and why movies are rated the way they are in America.

The current ratings system

Before we talk about why films are rated the way they are we need to look at the how. The MPA created the Classification and Ratings Administration (CARA), a division of the MPA that administers the rating system. The current rating system was established in 1968 and categorizes films into 5 groups. The following explanations are all taken from the MPA website and have not been changed:

G (General Audiences) – All Ages Admitted “Nothing that would offend parents for viewing by children.”

PG (Parental Guidance Suggested) – Some Material May Not Be Suited for Children “Parents urged to give ‘parental guidance.’ May contain some material parents might not like for their young children.”

PG-13 (Parents Strongly Cautioned) – Some Material May Be Inappropriate for Children Under 13 “Parents are urged to be cautious. Some material may be inappropriate for pre-teenagers.”

R (Restricted) – Under 17 Requires Accompanying Parent or Adult Guardian “Contains some adult material. Parents are urged to learn more about the film before taking their young children with them.”

NC-17 (Adults Only) – No One 17 and Under Admitted “Clearly adult. Children are not admitted.”

Although these ratings are found with most major releases, they are not bound by law. Therefore, films do not need to be rated by the MPA. These ratings can be seen as more of a guidance. Still, theaters adhere to them, even refusing to allow certain ages to see a certain film.

History of Guidelines

Over the years there have been certain “codes” that production studios have adhered to. These codes also serve as guidelines as to what can and cannot be shown on film. The most famous code is the Production Code, or “Hays Code”. The Hays Code was implemented by the MPA (then MPPDA – Motion Picture Producers and Distributors of America) in 1930 and was very strict. For example, the code prohibited “sex-perversion” or even dancing with “indecent” moves. From today’s perspective, this seems a bit extreme and for many, including myself, this was a form of censorship. But the current ratings system is similar in many ways. If studios want to make a movie that can be seen by the highest number of people, then it would see to it, that their film is rated G.

In 1956 the presidency of the MPPDA changed. The association was rebranded, and the Production Code was altered for the first time since its introduction. Some subjects which were forbidden before were now allowed to be shown on film, to a certain extent. However, new restrictions were also implemented, for example, mercy killings could no longer be shown.

In 1968, under a new president, the Production Code was replaced, and the first rating system was introduced. Over the years it changed and became what we know today. In his autobiography, then-president of the MPA Jack Valenti said that he wanted to remove the censorship posed by the Hays Code.

Why are movies rated the way they are?

While it is still up to theaters and production studios if they want to stick to the rating system, the question remains why the movies are rated the way they are. Who decides what is appropriate for me? Shouldn’t parents decide for themselves what their children can or cannot see? And why are some things deemed appropriate or not?

In 2007, my parents, who are from Germany, went to see American Gangster in a movie theater in Virginia. According to rottentomatoes the movie is rated R for “nudity, language, pervasive drug content, sexuality, and violence”. And I agree, the movie is very violent. My parents saw a boy, he must have been 8 or 9, in the theater with an adult. He was allowed to see the entire movie except for one scene. The adult covered the boy’s eyes when women were shown packaging heroin with their breasts showing. How come the boy is allowed to watch an entire violent movie, but not look at breasts? What do you think the boy is most likely to encounter?

Belinda Luscombe summarized several studies for TIME magazine. Apparently, parents are less concerned about violence, because it is a fantasy and that they may counteract its “glamorization with their own behavior”. Another reason is that violence has been shown in movies and TV for a very long time. People have gotten used to it and we are (for the most part) “less sensitive to it”.

University teacher and American Carol Ebbert-Hübner does not agree with the ratings posed by the MPA. She thinks that there should be more groups, for example sexual contents that are not suited for PG-13 but are not explicit enough for an R-rating. Regarding violence she suggests that it is accepted in movies due to Americans idealizing “the military and winning by force”, adding that many scenes depicting violence are “often vaguely or overtly patriotic.” For a more detailed look at violence and patriotism in film, see the podcast on American Presidents in Film.

Personally, I think that a rating system is a good idea for telling viewers what to expect from a specific film. While I do not agree with the way it is dealt with currently, I don’t generally oppose the idea. There is another problem that I deem far more important.

Are rating systems censorship?

The first amendment “protects freedom of speech”. This should also be applied to movies. Filmmakers create art and this art should be protected. If a studio forces filmmakers to make a PG movie so it can be seen by the most people possible, then they impose a restriction on the filmmaker’s ideas and expressions. And this all comes down to money. The more people see your film the more money you make off it.

A major example for this is the 2017 film Justice League. Original director Zack Snyder stepped down from the project after a family tragedy. Having shown a 4-hour long cut, he was replaced by Joss Whedon. According to Vanity Fair, Whedon altered the movie significantly reducing its runtime and changing its tone to be more lighthearted, resulting in a more “family-friendly” rating. Proof for this is 2021’s Zack Snyder’s Justice League, an R-rated director’s cut that shows Snyder’s original version, which was petitioned by fans.

His example most definitely was not the first time this has happened in Hollywood. Surely studios are censoring movies all the time. And while this might not be censorship in its original definition, it is still a problem that comes from rating systems.

How movies and music are rated in Germany

Film is the leading medium of our time. The universe of moving pictures reflects society, albeit in a filtered form. Although in modern Germany, Art. 5 Par. 1 Sentence 3 Basic Law of the newly founded Federal Republic prohibits censorship, at the same time it established the "Voluntary Self-Regulation Body" (Freiwillige Selbstkontrolle der Filmwirtschaft, FSK) in 1949, which regulates the age rating of films in cinemas today.

What is the FSK and how does the rating system work?

FSK is an organization that consists of roughly 280 examiners. According to the FSK, the idea is to keep any kind of National Socialist relic out of the cinemas. Furthermore, the most important tasks of FSK are to protect children and minors, to estimate the effects of movies on children and adolescents, to rate the material based on its suitability for different age groups, and to obviate the need for government intervention. Germany's head film industry organization (SPIO) in Wiesbaden runs the FSK, but it is an independent organization, and the volunteer examiners are not connected to the film industry at all. Professionally, they may have a variety of backgrounds, but they must have experience with children, youth, and young adults. The examiners' work is based on the German Youth Protection Law (Jugendschutzgesetz), which outlines the five different age categories:

1) Suitable without age restriction
2) Suitable for persons over 6 years
3) Suitable for persons over 12 years and children over 6 years when accompanied by a parent or educational officer
4) Suitable for persons over 16 years
5) Not to be shown to persons under 18 years (Keine Jugendfreigabe)

The FSK classification also restricts the time of day when the film can be aired on free-to-air TV stations to 8 p.m. unless otherwise stated for FSK 12, 10 p.m. for FSK 16, or 11 p.m. for FSK 18, after which it can be aired till 6 a.m. Stations can request a change rating from the Freiwillige Selbstkontrolle Fernsehen (Voluntary Self-Regulation Television, FSF), but they are usually compelled to cut the film.

Saving Private Ryan (USA 1998) is a recent case for which Pro7 has been fined 500,000 euros for its broadcast at 8:15 p.m. Despite a seven-minute edit by the station, the film received a "from 16" approval, the broadcast of which is not permitted until 10 p.m. according to television laws. This explains the numerous cutbacks made by broadcasters in order to reach the widest potential audience and increase advertising income.

What next if FSK refuses to rate a video?

If the FSK declines to rate a film's video release, the Commission of Lawyers (Juristenkomission, JK) of the SPIO can do so. A SPIO/JK certificate certifies that a film does not infringe on German legislation, such as the prohibition on "glorification of violence," in the opinion of the JK. Films with such a certificate, however, can still be banned and are routinely added to the index of the German government's Federal Department for Media Harmful to Young Persons (Bundesprüfstelle für jugendgefährdende Medien, BPjM). Indexing means that a film may not be displayed, shown, or advertised in public places.

Furthermore, while an FSK rating is not legally required for a film to be sold, "unrated" films may only be sold to adults because most retail chains and virtually all cinemas only sell films with an FSK rating. The organization is normally responsible for classifying movies, except for hardcore pornography and films containing extremely strong violence, which are likely to be denied a certificate.

But what about music?

Songs that are provocative or even banned for these reasons do not only exist in the US. In Germany, there are often such songs as well. In such cases, BPjM is responsible for censoring music that is considered harmful or dangerous to minors. Young people's media watchdog has censored several CDs, igniting a debate on just how far censorship should go. Once listed in the index, CDs can no longer be sold to minors.

Thus, several German rappers have been increasingly appearing on the index due to violence, sexism and nationalism. Nevertheless, despite the fact that their lyrics may be merely reflections of their own lives and those of their neighborhoods, the BPjM sees these songs as detrimental to young people. In an interview with DW-World, Petra Meier, BPjM's deputy head, stated:

"The songs we examine have right-wing extremist lyrics, but we are also dealing with rap music from Germany more and more."

The lyrics of artists like Kollegah and Bushido have long been a thorn in the side of media watchdogs. Songs like "Aggro Announcement No. 2" and "King of Kingsz" by Bushido have been banned for sale to children and young people. The two CDs are about the excessive use of fecal language and the description of sexual scenarios. According to the BPjM, the texts are suitable for "socially and ethically disorienting" young people, as reported by Spiegel. An inhuman image of humanity is conveyed, and the dignity of women is violated to a high degree.

However, rapper Bushido does not seem to share this opinion, saying that he does not feel personally responsible for the impact of his music. The Süddeutsche Zeitung quoted Bushido as saying:

"When I listen to Rammstein or Eminem, I know it's not my life.

It's up to me to decide whether it influences my way of thinking.”

However, the problem is that many of the songs from the index can still be found on the Internet. And critics fear that if a song ends up on the index, it will become really interesting to young people. The sociologist Roland Seim said that though banned things may not be particularly interesting, they become so as a result of their ban.

According to Seim, as youths they are supposed to be shielded from all types of influences, so forbidden areas in particular entice them, as minors, to learn more about what they're not supposed to find out about. Hence, the crucial question is, does freedom of speech need limits? While breaking taboos and portraying extremes are important stylistic devices of art that belong to free speech, protecting the rights of youth requires clear boundaries, which is also very important.

In conclusion, this article examined how censorship and ratings play a vital role in the American movie and music industries and compared both countries' censorship landscapes. The differences in movie and music ratings are partly caused by cultural differences. Germany and the United States differ greatly in their attitudes towards nudity and violence. Whereas ratings for violent content are for an older audience in Germany and sexual content for a younger audience, it's just the opposite in the US. Here, strong language and nakedness are considered scandalous and therefore result in a restricted rating.

Sources:

“AmericanGangster". Rotten Tomatoes, www.rottentomatoes.com/m/american_gangster.Breznican, Anthony.

Baims, Constantin. “Deutsche Popsongs, die es schwer hatten.“ SWR, 18 Sept. 2020, https://www.swr.de/swr1/bw/programm/deutsche-songs-die-verboten-waren-100.html.

Brown, Damon. “Cee Lo's Youtube Hit You Won't Hear on Radio.” CNN, Cable News Network, 30 Aug. 2010, http://edition.cnn.com/2010/TECH/web/08/30/cee.lo.song.video/index.html.

"Bundesprüfstelle setzt Songs auf den Index". Spiegel Kultur, 28 Jun. 2005, https://www.spiegel.de/kultur/musik/hauptstadt-rap-bundespruefstelle-setzt-songs-auf-den-index-a-362751.html.

Burack, Christina. “How Germany's Film Age-Rating System.” DW.COM, Deutsche Welle, 7 Dec. 2017, https://www.dw.com/en/how-germanys-film-age-rating-system-works/a-41551312.

Coletti, M.A. “ First Amendment Implications of Rock Lyric Censorship.” Pepperdine Law Review, vol. 14, no. 2, 1987, pp. 421–451., https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1825&context=plr. Accessed 21 Nov. 2021.

CeeLo-Green. “Forget You.” Spotify, 2010, https://open.spotify.com/track/7AqISujIaWcY3h5zrOqt5v. Accessed 21 Nov. 2021.

Deflem, Mathieu. “Popular Culture and Social Control: The Moral Panic on Music Labeling.” American Journal of Criminal Justice, vol. 45, no. 1, 2019, pp. 2–24., https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-019-09495-3. Accessed 21 Nov. 2021.

Ebbert-Hübner, Carol. 15 Nov. 2021. (Interview via E-Mail)

FCC. “Obscene, Indecent and Profane Broadcasts.” Federal Communications Commission, 13 Jan. 2021, https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/obscene-indecent-and-profane-broadcasts.

“Film Ratings.” Motion Picture Association, Motion Picture Association, Inc., 30 Apr. 2020, www.motionpictures.org/film-ratings/.

Güngör, Loh. "Harte Texte und die Härte der Nazis". Süddeutsche Zeitung, 11 May 2010, https://www.sueddeutsche.de/kultur/interview-mit-bushido-loh-guengoer-harte-texte-und-die-haerte-der-nazis-1.425538-2.

“Information about the FSK.” FSK, https://www.fsk.de/?seitid=1287&tid=480.

“'Justice League': The Shocking, Exhilarating, Heartbreaking True Story of #TheSnyderCut.” Vanity Fair, Condé Nast, 22 Feb. 2021, www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2021/02/the-true-story-of-justice-league-snyder-cut.

Luscombe, Belinda. “Why Parents Care More about Sex than Violence in the Movies.” Time, TIME USA, LLC, 4 Dec. 2015, time.com/4135760/why-parents-worry-more-about-sex-than-violence-in-the-movies/.

“Motion Picture Association Film Rating System.” Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, 19 Dec. 2021, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_Picture_Association_film_rating_system.

Prince. “Darling Nikki”. Spotify, 1984, https://open.spotify.com/track/0khi86hc79RfsRC0rrkkA2

RIAA. “Parental Advisory Label.” RIAA, 2020, https://www.riaa.com/resources-learning/parental-advisory-label/.

RIAA. “Parental Advisory Label.” Wikipedia, 2001, https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parental_Advisory#/media/Datei:Parental_Advisory_label.svg. Accessed 21 Nov. 2021.

Seim, Roland. “Cut or Ban.” F.LM, 1 Jan. 2003, http://www.f-lm.de/cut-or-ban/.

Casagrande, Sabina. “Censoring German Rap.” DW.Com, Deutsche Welle, 26 Dec. 2005, https://www.dw.com/en/censoring-german-rap/a-1633143.

Strauss, Neil. “Wal-Mart's CD Standards Are Changing Pop Music.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 12 Nov. 1996, https://www.nytimes.com/1996/11/12/arts/wal-mart-s-cd-standards-are-changing-pop-music.html.

Sweney, Mark. “Parental Warnings to Be Introduced for Online Music.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 2 June 2011, https://www.theguardian.com/media/2011/jun/02/parental-warnings-online-music.

“The Constitution.” The White House, The United States Government, 20 Jan. 2021, www.whitehouse.gov/about-the-white-house/our-government/the-constitution/.

Valenti, Jack. This Time, This Place: My Life in War, the White House, and Hollywood. Harmony Books, 2008.

Zappa, Frank. “Where Is Our Zappa? Pt. 1.” Edited by William Witka, CBS News, CBS Interactive, 2005, https://www.cbsnews.com/news/where-is-our-zappa-pt-1/.