Not much left to the Imagine'ation - Magazine publisher serves up porno to minors

[chudley]

I have just popped in to check the forums quickly, but will now have to set some time aside for a good read of this thread when i get out the bath.

I wonder where the ombudsman stands on this?

I am now looking forward to reading this in depth in about an hour - I like a long bath

All washed up now.

I believe there are some good argumentsfor and against , but as a parent I believe an age restriction should be put on the front cover, not only due to the adverts but also because of the game content.

I will not let my son play games with gratuitous violence (10) he would love to have GTA but that does not even get in the house. I also know he would ask me about the adverts in the mag as thats what he is like.

Either way a good article which is provoking good interest and responses.

 

[mayhem]

Yeh my sons not allowed to play like that nither. All though i allow him some FPS such as halo and some other im quite carefull what he can play.

 

[PalmliX]

While I agree that advertising for pornography is in bad taste in a magazine read mostly by young people (although targeting pornography at young males is probably a great marketing move) and that can be bought by someone of any age, I have to disagree with the author's repeated use of the word pornography. It's not as if her 8 year old was able to buy pornography, she was able to buy a magazine with lewd advertising in it. The images themselves technically weren't pornagraphic.

I also find her outrage at the fact that her daughter could go into a store and buy these magazines ill placed. Of course she's going to be able to buy them if there's no age restriction on the cover or no flags come up at the checkout isle. It's not the stores job (esp not the clerk's) to look through the magazines and see if they feature any lewd content. They are not moral police, they simply follow the laws, regulations and standards set forth by the state.

Going to the manager of the store about something like this is aiming far far too low on the ladder. If even on the right ladder to begin with.

The author repeatedly made the claim that Imagine publishing was 'serving up' pornagraphic content to minors. This is an extreme exaggeration and technically a lie.

Should Imagine publishing put a ratings sticker on their magazines? I think so, if they feature advertising deemed not appropriate for children under a certain age by the state in where they are sold

But exaggerating the actual facts of the story (and using a headline like 'Magazine publisher serves up porno to minors') and being outraged at a few random clerks and managers is going about this in the worst way possible.

Instead the author should be focusing her energy at the government which created the system in where this type of sale is legal.

 

[mayhem]

pornography : The word derives from the Greek πορνογραφία (pornographia), which derives from the Greek words πόρνη (pornē, "prostitute" and pornea, "prostitution"), and γράφω (graphō, "I write or record," derived meaning "illustration," cf. "graph"), and the suffix -ία (-ia, meaning "state of," "property of," or "place of"), thus meaning "a written description or illustration of prostitutes or prostitution."

Or Semi naked to naked ladys or men depicting any type of graphic some times offcence matter.

P.s mayhem author = me = man

thank you.

Oh and welcome to the forums.

 

[PalmliX]

pornography : The word derives from the Greek πορνογραφία (pornographia), which derives from the Greek words πόρνη (pornē, "prostitute" and pornea, "prostitution"), and γράφω (graphō, "I write or record," derived meaning "illustration," cf. "graph"), and the suffix -ία (-ia, meaning "state of," "property of," or "place of"), thus meaning "a written description or illustration of prostitutes or prostitution."

Or Semi naked to naked ladys or men depicting any type of graphic some times offcence matter.

P.s mayhem author = me = man

thank you.

Oh and welcome to the forums.

Thank you! Not sure why I thought you were a woman... My bad. Your definition of pornography is probably very accurate, but obviously your government doesn't feel the same way or else the magazine's you talk about would be in violation of the law no?

 

[Shponglefan]

I think its the combination of things here that add up to this being bad news. For example, if the ads for the games you mentioned were available for 10p and could be delivered to any mobile phone regardless of the owners age, then YES it should definitely have a certification.

On the flipside, when I was a kid there were ads for video game help lines in comic books and magazines that also charged by the minute. So again, I don't think that alone is a good basis for 18+.

 

[Shponglefan]

First off Shponglefan welcome to the forum

Thank you.

what your saying is true but when you direct the adds "Directly" at kids this is another matter..

The article is there to be debated over but i strongly believe this tyope of "add" is mags aimed at the younger audience is just a total violation against our young kids.

Can you verify this? I agree that ads for porn shouldn't be in magazines which are targeted at kids, but video games tend to be play by a wide range of people. IIRC, the average age of gamers is in the high 20's.

Can i ask were you saw the link please. thks.

Blue's News

 

[Shponglefan]

Or Semi naked to naked ladys or men depicting any type of graphic some times offcence matter.

You've just described about 80% of video game marketing.

 

[mayhem]

hehe I can only do 1 thing at a time

Ive been checking on the law in the UK and we do have a law's set out in place but the advertises are getting arround the law.

What the law states is this.

The publisher has to stay with in the law and that if any "content" has any sexual nature such as pono then it has to add a 18 cert. Now this is the problem this does not cover advertising. That is how they are getting arround it. Yeh more moral publasits do adhear to this and place a 18 to 15 sticker on the front of the mag warning of the content. Image publishing is flouting this law and seemingly has no morals at all.

All we ask is the image Publishing do the right thing and put these stickers on.

So that the reatiler can then classify the magaiznes in the right way.

There is more to add but im saving it for PT 2. Pt 1 is just some thing to sink your teeth into ...

 

[PalmliX]

hehe I can only do 1 thing at a time

Ive been checking on the law in the UK and we do have a law's set out in place but the advertises are getting arround the law.

What the law states is this.

The publisher has to stay with in the law and that if any "content" has any sexual nature such as pono then it has to add a 18 cert. Now this is the problem this does not cover advertising. That is how they are getting arround it. Yeh more moral publasits do adhear to this and place a 18 to 15 sticker on the front of the mag warning of the content. Image publishing is flouting this law and seemingly has no morals at all.

All we ask is the image Publishing do the right thing and put these stickers on.

So that the reatiler can then classify the magaiznes in the right way.

There is more to add but im saving it for PT 2. Pt 1 is just some thing to sink your teeth into ...

Well it's obvious your doing your research and that's great. The only thing I have to say is don't waste your time 'asking' Image publishing to put these stickers on. They are simply doing what any resourceful company would do to make as much profit as they can, as per their legal obligation to stock holders. I don't think you can blame them for that. They are operating within the confine's of the system and so that's where I feel you have to direct your energy and attention. Towards politicians and lawmakers.

 

[mayhem]

Well it's obvious your doing your research and that's great. The only thing I have to say is don't waste your time 'asking' Image publishing to put these stickers on. They are simply doing what any resourceful company would do to make as much profit as they can, as per their legal obligation to stock holders. I don't think you can blame them for that. They are operating within the confine's of the system and so that's where I feel you have to direct your energy and attention. Towards politicians and lawmakers.

Well yeh i agree with that comment totally again. But if you have been watching the news lately Gordon Brown only seems to pull his finger of his ass (as the government do) when the media get involved. So the more "Hype" we can make and the more Noise we can make the more chance Mr Brown and his peer's will do some thing about it. I not its not the perfect way of doing things but at the same time it does a raise awareness to other people of this matter.

Some people wont agree witch is fair enough and some will. Its all ways good to hear both side of the story.

As for the stock holders do you really think they would like this type of attention. I will say this even there own editors of the magazines involved do not what this content in them... but you will need to read my follow up once all i have finished.

 

[Shponglefan]

The publisher has to stay with in the law and that if any "content" has any sexual nature such as pono then it has to add a 18 cert.

Do you have a link to this law? Reason I ask, it seems odd to me that "sexual nature" would require 18+. I mean, what's actually in those adds are scantily clad girls, not unlike what you'd see in Maxim, FHM, or heck, even a good number of video games. And those aren't rated 18+ (at least on this side of the pond; I am in Canada).

That's why I'm curious if an ad for porn, which doesn't feature pornographic content itself, actually constitutes porn.

 

[mayhem]

well we haven't posted some of the more explicit adverts as we don't want to cause concern with our own readership.

Needless to say one of the ads even has a 18 Cert over the private parts of the lady.

As for the info i cannot post it due to the fact i blew up my pc yesterday lol ->

http://forum.overclock3d.net/showpost.php?p=342384&postcount=46

That has all the info on its hard drives which with were encrypted .

 

[chudley]

hope you get the PC sorted mate!

 

[fightingspirit325]

Most people are going to be against porn adverts going into magazines targeted at children. We know there's corruption elsewhere, but that doesn't mean it's ok to add to it.

Advertising is part of the magazine's content and the publisher, not the advertiser, has overall responsibility to make sure it's ethically correct. You don't see chatline adverts on ITV. That's because anyone can access that channel, so it's ITV's responsibility to make sure all the content, including the adverts, are suitable for everybody.

However, the advertisers of pornographic services do actively target publishers to try and get their adverts in there. They especially like to lure magazines which have borderline age-group readerships - that way they're bringing in new blood. However an ethically correct publisher would not accept what is effectively a form of bribe.

If your children play an Xbox 360 but you feel £5/6 is too much for a magazine, a good choice is 360 Gamer. It's £2.89 and doesn't have dirty adverts in it. I get mine from Tesco or Asda every issue.

 

[llwyd]

I do find that extremely innapropriate, there is no need for it. At the price they sell some of the magazines for there should be little need for the additional revenew. I agree to some point that porn and adult material is readily available on the internet and it is down to the individual (and their parents) to regulate the viewing of such material, but when there is adverts for cartoon porn in magazines that kids will undoubtedly read then there is certainly cause for concern.

Putting age certs on magazines is obviously a step in the right direction but a huge percentage of buyers will be in their young teens. You would expect sticking an 18 cert on their mags would cause a slump in sales but obviously not - they should read into this and consider that the cert is doing little more than covering their own backs

Also, well done for going out and testing the shops, hopefully they will take note. I would imagine being dropped by WHSmiths or Tescos would be quite a blow to some publishers, hopefully resulting in the content being pulled. There's no need for it, who buys gaming mags for the porn content, seriously

 

[mayhem]

Some good news Guys and Girls. Local new paper Northern Echo is coming around tomorrow to do a pace on this. There all so going to chase up Image Publishing and all so Asda, Tescos ect ect to get official comments.

 

[Youngie1337]

Don't you think this is a bit too far Mayhem? I mean if you don't like what's in the magazine don't buy it. The company needs to make money and if it means they make most money from them advertisements let them.

Overprotecting your child will make it worse. Ofcourse you don't want them seeing stuff like this but why do they have an XBOX360 and I'm sure they play games older than they're allowed. It's up to the parent to be the grown up and say whether the magazine is suitable. Same with films, you can get into a 15 at the age of 11 if you're with an adult.

Don't see why you took it this far .

 

[mayhem]

It's up to the parent to be the grown up and say whether the magazine is suitable. Same with films, you can get into a 15 at the age of 11 if you're with an adult.

Don't see why you took it this far .

you just answered it your self. .... that why this is such thing as age ratings.

 

[Youngie1337]

you just answered it your self. .... that why this is such thing as age ratings.

Age ratings mean nothing, I've seen PG's much scarier than 15's, and I have seen much more nudity in a 12 than an 18.

Like I said if you don't want your child looking at the adverts rip them out or don't buy the mag. Not sticking up for the company but it is up to the parent to check the magazine. If the magazine has a 15 label then you're not allowed to purchase the magazine (legally) unless you're 15 or over. Buying the magazine for someone younger is up to you, not the shop or publisher.

Raving on to them saying about explicit content in their magazine which most likely clearly states an age rating somewhere is lack of caring on your behalf.