A

fter a few quiet months, the Film Censorship Board (LSF) is back in the news. Together with the House of Representatives, the organization that classifies and cuts our films is reconsidering its approach to censorship '€” which may see it start cutting in the pre-production phase.

What is shown on the screen is the perception of writers, directors, editors, musicians and other artists drawn from or inspired by personal experience or actual events.

Restricting their vision, especially at the very early stage of pre-production, is definitely going to hurt them. Should films be censored, anyway?

Film censorship has a long history in Indonesia. In the colonial era, the Dutch issued rules to restrict the exhibition of cinematic works that could be deemed subversive or pro-independence.

Fast forward to today '€” film censorship is regulated by the 2009 law on Indonesian films and by Government Regulation No. 18/2014 on the LSF, under which every film to be distributed or exhibited must pass censorship by the LSF.

The Law states that the core value of censoring films is to protect the public from the inappropriate influence of films. Their guidelines and criteria of censorship follow the provisions under a 2011 regulation, which determines that the LSF has to look out for violence, pornography, drug abuse and religious aspects, among others.

Many argue that the censorship board is necessary to keep an eye on the content of films. Their argument is that sometimes murders take place and rape happens because of the influence of films.

Many studies on the causal relationship between film and behavior have been carried out, but for every piece of research, another study will almost always have the opposite results.

Yet in an era when moviemakers put anything into a movie to make it interesting, like nudity, extreme violence, abusive language, etc., these types of things may impact the culture of society.

There are moviemakers who make films for exploitation, with unnecessarily violent and disturbing scenes.

In a perfect world, where we can always monitor what our children watch or predict what kind of scenes could inspire violent behavior, censorship would not be necessary.

Unfortunately, a censorship body is still needed to remove certain types of scenes from movies.

Another opinion, meanwhile, holds that censorship degenerates media freedom in general. The creativity of the storywriter and director of the film is restricted when they want to express artistic feelings through topics including sex and violence.

Moreover, media censorship could easily be misused for political purposes. The government may use censorship to prevent unfavorable information, such as criticism of certain policies.

Others say censoring films encouraged piracy. Viewers would generally feel unsatisfied if parts of a film are cut. This would motivate them to download (illegally) the censored film in its entirety from the internet.

How the LSF might censor films at the script-writing stage is not clear yet. A similar method had been practiced in America in the 1930s. At the very beginning of American cinema, fearful that community agitation on the bad influence on films would find its way into legislation, the major motion picture studios formed the Motion Picture Producers and Distributors of America (MPPDA).

Their leader, Gen. William Hays, worked with the studios, religious leaders and various other stakeholders on a set of guidelines that became the Motion Picture Production Code, popularly known as the Hays Code.

The goal was to avoid censorship that studios should be mindful of when producing movies.

Under its provisions, studios would submit scripts and screenplays to his office to find ways in which objectionable content could be avoided.

Indonesia has mandatory censorship already; if the LSF plans to resemble the Hays code today it will be inappropriate and will only create more delays in film production.

The LSF must prepare a lot of staff to keep up with the work of reviewing scripts and finished films, while studios would not be thrilled by the extra bottleneck caused by the whole operation and bureaucracy.

The reason behind this new plan is still unknown. It may be connected to the new partnership between the LSF and House of Representatives Commission I on national defense, foreign affairs, broadcasting and communication. Films are now part of the national defense strategy.

Another reason might be that new LSF members were just elected on Sept. 15 and it is common in Indonesia that every time someone new takes charge, a fresh set of rules comes into play.

Critics of censorship enforced by the LSF say that this new plan hampers filmmakers'€™ freedom to tell realistic stories. Ideally, the LSF must balance the twin demands of media freedom and protecting audiences, particularly children.

Any art form must have creative freedom but must also be socially responsible. At least for now the plan is still far from being implemented, because the 2014 regulation clearly states that the LSF may only censor finished films.