Content Ratings in YA

DennyCrane · Jun 8, 2011

I'm curious on everyone's feelings the pros and cons of incorporating a parental guidance ratings system (blog link) for Young Adult books, similar to those found in video games and film.

Would this help to avoid those (ridiculous) claims raised in the infamous WSJ article?

And who among the gatekeepers bears the responsibility of published content and how it is disseminated to the public, publishers or the bookstores?

Shady Lane · Jun 8, 2011

I think it's dumb. We don't write for the parents. It's not the same as kids sneaking into R rated movies. These are books written *for them.* Putting a parental advisory thing on it suggests that parents are a natural part of the process, and they're not. Whether a parent chooses to screen his own child's reading his his business, I guess (or, more accurately, the kid's business, since he's the one who will be hiding books under the bed and deleting his internet history every five minutes) but we definitely should not be making it seem like it's normal.

That being said! I care a lot less about this than a lot of people, because I don't a. believe it's a real possibility b. think it would actually make much of a difference outside of pissing a bunch of people off.

Cyia · Jun 8, 2011

Ratings are arbitrary, and I don't like the idea of them being on books. I wouldn't mind some sort of discrete triggering warning for people who have suffered abuse on books that have realistic representations of assault and the like, but it shouldn't be used to determine the worth of the content.

eventidepress · Jun 8, 2011

on the bright side, if your book is rated "M for Mature" or whatever, more kids will want to read it. yay, making things illicit makes them popular!

Becca_H · Jun 8, 2011

I think all ratings would do is attract more readers - so, in that sense, maybe a good idea.

How many boys would pick up a book rated 'R'? Quite a lot, I'd guess.

Although, it could also put some readers off.

Who knows, really. Isn't the blurb supposed to do this job, anyway? Give a description so the reader can decide if it's something they want to read?

DennyCrane · Jun 8, 2011

Shady Lane said:
That being said! I care a lot less about this than a lot of people, because I don't a. believe it's a real possibility b. think it would actually make much of a difference outside of pissing a bunch of people off.

I think we're like minded on this, except for one point - the possibility of a ratings system. It comes down to opportunity of the parent to be the gatekeeper. Where every kid these days has a smart phone in their pocket and ebooks gathering momentum, kids can buy a book and be through it before the parent ever gets the bill. And let's face it, kids these days are practically computer engineers by the age of 10. They're smart and able to work around any barrier put in their way. We can all agree on that. But I can totally see a "Call for Changez!" from those concerned with technology taking away their opportunity to parent. That's sort of what went down in the video game industry.

But who knows? One part of me thinks, "Oooh. Cool. I've got the bad kid book label. More sales!" The other part thinks, "Don't judge me, man!"

Liosse de Velishaf · Jun 8, 2011

For YA books, I think it would be silly. As Shady mentioned, these are books targeted at YA readers, whereas movies may be meant for adult audiences, etc. My parents would never have been able to stop me reading what I wanted, and putting a rating on a book is only going to lead to off-hand rejections of reading material. A rating tells you that it is the arbiter of propriety, and that's silly. The only way a parent could make an informed decision is to read the book themselves, and even then they might not be judging the maturity of their child properly.

Smish · Jun 8, 2011

100% against it. Content ratings lead to censorship.

We had this same discussion a couple years ago in the kidlit room. My opinions haven't changed at all since then.

Becca C. · Jun 8, 2011

I agree with Shady completely.

In a way... I think a ratings system would be a form of "telling" rather than "showing." You can tell a so-called "edgy" book from a lighter book from the title, the blurb, the writing on the first page -- all things readers browsing in a bookstore look at. I think if a book has an R rating slapped on it, it might give the publisher and author more permission to be lazy with the style of the book overall. "Hey, it's just going to have an R on it anyway, Mr. Author, so you don't have to work so hard creating that beautiful, dark atmosphere in your writing, okay? Don't bother building the tension up to the MC's brutal rape because the reader just knows it's going to happen from the rating, anyway."

thebloodfiend · Jun 8, 2011

I'm not for a ratings system. Ratings always lead to bullshit like The Matrix being rated R along with American Pie and Julie and Julia adding racy content to scrape a PG-13 rating.

But I do think you should tell whether or not a book has sexual content, swearing, or violence in it -- but without a rating. That way, a reader can determine if they want to read it without subjecting it to a rating. I don't believe in censorship, but I do believe in informing your reader. It would totally suck if I was reading a book that had a blow job scene in it and I didn't know till my parent picked it up and skimmed it. Yeah, embarrassing situation that I could have avoided. And then you have people that wouldn't want to read a book that has swearing or sexual content. All those stupid reviews on Tithe that complain about swearing? Those could have been avoided.

Censorship will exist as long as there are helicopter parents trying to prevent every kid in their district from reading a book. But informing with out determining who should read what is best. After all, comics, movies, and games tell the content that's in them. Though I think they'd do best without ratings too. I don't know what idiot thought it was a good idea to rate Mortal Kombat M along with The Warriors, and San Andreas.

Momento Mori · Jun 8, 2011

DennyCrane:
Would this help to avoid those (ridiculous) claims raised in the infamous WSJ article?

No. We have ratings on books in the UK (it's a 'voluntary' system run by some publishers) and it hasn't made any difference to what's out on British book shelves. Just as ratings for video games has made no difference at all - given that there are always parents out there who'll buy BloodSlaugherDecapitation 3 for their kids irrespective of the rating.

If anything, ratings become a status symbol, with 'better' readers seeking out older material to prove how advanced they are. Plus they're still dependent on parents enforcing them for their children.

And finally, who decides what ratings apply to which books? In the UK, the publisher set them to help booksellers know which shelves to use for which books, but I still see amazingly dark fiction on 9-12 shelves regardless of the age limit on the back.

Sorry. That got a bit ranty. It's a bug bear.

MM

Katallina · Jun 8, 2011

I agree with thebloodfriend. I would not want to see books go the E, E10, T, M, A route (or its movie counterpart). If we need something on the books for whatever reason let it be a listing of what the book actually entails. The reason I feel this way is that different people view different things as more or less offensive depending on culture, region, upbringing, etc.

cryaegm · Jun 8, 2011

*Headdesk. Headdesk. Headdesk.*

That's how I feel.

Off the wall thinking, but if anything, think of MG, YA, and Adult as ratings. Don't limit people on what they want to read, though. It does nothing.

Again:

*Headdesk. Headdesk. Headdesk.*

Smish · Jun 8, 2011

cryaegm said:
Off the wall thinking, but if anything, think of MG, YA, and Adult as ratings.

Yes! Exactly.

DennyCrane · Jun 8, 2011

Momento Mori said:
No. We have ratings on books in the UK (it's a 'voluntary' system run by some publishers) and it hasn't made any difference to what's out on British book shelves. Just as ratings for video games has made no difference at all - given that there are always parents out there who'll buy BloodSlaugherDecapitation 3 for their kids irrespective of the rating.

If anything, ratings become a status symbol, with 'better' readers seeking out older material to prove how advanced they are. Plus they're still dependent on parents enforcing them for their children.

And finally, who decides what ratings apply to which books? In the UK, the publisher set them to help booksellers know which shelves to use for which books, but I still see amazingly dark fiction on 9-12 shelves regardless of the age limit on the back.

Sorry. That got a bit ranty. It's a bug bear.

MM

Not ranty! Great observation! It seems there is futility in not doing anything as much as there is futility in a overhaul of classification or rating system.

frimble3 · Jun 8, 2011

Even a system that lists what's in the book is not idiot-proof. Especially if the people making the list are being really, really careful. On television content warnings, I've seen a local cooking show, by a couple of pleasant young women listed with warnings for 'coarse language' and 'suggestive language'. Occassionally something goes wrong in the kitchen and one will say 'Darn'. And sometimes they explain how to cook chicken breasts.
I think 'listing what's in the book' will lead to key-word software cherry-picking words, regardless of context, leading to errors of over or under-reporting 'issues'.

thebloodfiend · Jun 8, 2011

frimble3 said:
Even a system that lists what's in the book is not idiot-proof. Especially if the people making the list are being really, really careful. On television content warnings, I've seen a local cooking show, by a couple of pleasant young women listed with warnings for 'coarse language' and 'suggestive language'. Occassionally something goes wrong in the kitchen and one will say 'Darn'. And sometimes they explain how to cook chicken breasts.
I think 'listing what's in the book' will lead to key-word software cherry-picking words, regardless of context, leading to errors of over or under-reporting 'issues'.

That would suck. I'm not for that. I only want honestly.

If a book has explicit sex(my WIP has several not really graphic sex scenes) I want a reader to know they're there. Same for the language. I don't want them complaining in a review about the sex and swearing.

Becca C. · Jun 8, 2011

With listing what's in the book, though, you could move into the realm of spoilers. If it says "sex scene," and it's a will-they-or-won't-they kind of romance... well, that's the whole book and all the tension ruined.

Miriel · Jun 8, 2011

I think there's a big difference between censoring books en mass and giving a reader tools to chose if a book is one they want to read -- whether that's as an adult picking up a book for themselves (me!) or a parent who wants to be involved in their kid's life and discuss what they're reading with their child (maybe it's just the people I know, but it seems parents aren't as interested in "censoring" as letting their teen know they're there and would be happy to discuss, talk, and answer questions).

I don't think there's a need for a national rating system -- I think that would be a mess. There is, however, a great book review site (http://www.bookshoptalk.com/) that includes at the bottom notes on the language, violence, sensuality, and mature content in a book. It's positive-reviews only, so it's not like someone's there just to bash the book. I like it for picking out books for me because I have tastes like everyone else: there are some things I'm not interested in reading. I think it's great to let a reader know what they're picking up -- to let the reader be informed and make choices about what they want to read.

Liosse de Velishaf · Jun 9, 2011

Becca C. said:
With listing what's in the book, though, you could move into the realm of spoilers. If it says "sex scene," and it's a will-they-or-won't-they kind of romance... well, that's the whole book and all the tension ruined.

This. Kind of ruins the story.

I agree with Miriel a bit, too, but there have always been reviews, and I've seen many that make note of content like this.

thebloodfiend · Jun 9, 2011

Liosse de Velishaf said:
This. Kind of ruins the story.

I agree with Miriel a bit, too, but there have always been reviews, and I've seen many that make note of content like this.

It hasn't ruined a movie or a video game yet. I fail to see how it's a spoiler.

Becca C. · Jun 9, 2011

thebloodfiend said:
It hasn't ruined a movie or a video game yet. I fail to see how it's a spoiler.

Say my WIP was published. It's a coming-of-age contemporary LGBT kind of book. You wouldn't expect any blood and guts, but a huge fight scene is a pivotal plot point. So if you saw a warning for a graphic fight scene, you'd be like "Really? But this book looks so fluffy!" and the surprise and emotional gravity would be gone.

thebloodfiend · Jun 9, 2011

Becca C. said:
Say my WIP was published. It's a coming-of-age contemporary LGBT kind of book. You wouldn't expect any blood and guts, but a huge fight scene is a pivotal plot point. So if you saw a warning for a graphic fight scene, you'd be like "Really? But this book looks so fluffy!" and the surprise and emotional gravity would be gone.

I see your point, but same can be said for movies. Any movie. And if it's a fluffy book, a violent fight scene is kind of weird. I'm talking about Jack Ketchum/Stephen King violence or abuse/torture, not a small fight. Why warn for that? I mean something that someone wouldn't want to read, ie torture porn. Not a school yard fight.

Dawn Schaefer · Jun 9, 2011

We have a rating system. It's called Chapter book, MG, YA and Upper YA. Maybe bookstores should be clearer about where the distinction is, but ultimately it's up to the parents.

thebloodfiend · Jun 9, 2011

dawn miller said:
We have a rating system. It's called Chapter book, MG, YA and Upper YA. Maybe bookstores should be clearer about where the distinction is, but ultimately it's up to the parents.

That indicates reading level. When you see 14+, it has nothing to do with content.

MG, Upper MG, and YA only designate protagonist age. And even then, the line is very fuzzy. Shug, a book by Jenny Han, has a twelve-year-old MC and it's YA. It has mild swearing. Into the Great Wide Open is also YA. The MC is 18. It has heavy swearing and graphic sexual content. The Hunger Games is YA. The MC is 16, right? And it only has graphic violence. Labeling them all YA(if YA is indeed a rating, which it isn't) is akin to slapping a PG-13 rating on Shrek, American Pie, and Battle Royale. That's why I'm anti-rating, and pro content awareness. Not all YA books are the same. And if a parent wants to restrict their kid from reading something because of content, I don't care. That's their right as a parent. Besides, the kid will probably find a way to read the book. But they better not try to prevent me from reading it.

Content Ratings in YA

Dude. Seriously.

my name is hannah

Rewriting My Destiny

Where am I again?

Dude. Seriously.

Reads more than she writes.

Cory

Tired and Disillusioned

Snakecakes

Reads more than she writes.

Dude. Seriously.

Heckuva good sport

Cory

New kid, be gentle!

Cory

Cory

practical experience, FTW

Cory