IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Case Study: Australia's Computer Games Audience and Restrictive Ratings System

Listed author(s):
  • Jeffrey E. BRAND

    (Bond University, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia)


    (Bond University, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia)

  • Kym HOLMES

    (Bond University, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia)

Registered author(s):

    Computer and video games are big business in Australia, just as they are in many other developed economies. However, Australia is unique among developed states because there is no R18+ or "Adult" rating for computer game content in Australia. The present case study represents a snapshot of a larger national audience study of 1614 homes and 4852 individuals within those homes. The research presents demographic, behavioural and attitudinal data by which the largely functioning ratings system may be judged. The data show that the typical gamer is 30 years of age, often a parent and actively engaged in content selection and exposure. By presenting these data in the context of the unique regulatory regime in Australia, this report seeks to demonstrate that consumer power exceeds the control of the state and such control may function to enhance rather than stifle the health of the computer games industry.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Article provided by IDATE, Com&Strat dept. in its journal Communications & Strategies.

    Volume (Year): 1 (2009)
    Issue (Month): 73 (1st quarter)
    Pages: 67-80

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:idt:journl:cs7303
    Contact details of provider: Postal:
    BP 4167, 34092 Montpellier cedex 5

    Phone: 33 (0)467 144 444
    Fax: 33 (0)467 144 400
    Web page:

    More information through EDIRC

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:idt:journl:cs7303. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (BLAVIER Thomas)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.