More Leeway for Potentially Controversial Performances

Madam, the Media Development Authority (MDA) classifies arts performances in accordance with the Arts Entertainment Classification Code, which reflects generally accepted social norms. Where the content is contentious, MDA consults the Arts Consultative Panel (ACP) and other relevant agencies before making a decision.

"Chronology on Death" dealt with the issue of religious conversion and the resulting impact on the convert's family. ACP recommended classifying the performance under the highest rating of Restricted 18 (R18), given the potential sensitivity of its religious themes. MDA agreed with ACP's recommendation. In addition, MDA required the licensee to conduct a post-show dialogue with the audience, so that the religious themes in the play can be better explained.

Madam, this does not mean that all plays with controversial content can be given more leeway by virtue of the inclusion of post-show dialogues. A play that intentionally seeks to denigrate another religion, for example, would not be able to repair the damage caused by

Page: 32

the mere addition of a post-show dialogue. Ultimately, MDA will have to assess each performance on a case-by-case basis and classify them under the appropriate rating.

Madam, I would like to ask the Minister, in this case, was an R18 rating, with a post-show dialogue, considered a more onerous requirement on the producer or the play? Or is it a concession given? Otherwise, without that, the play would not be allowed to be staged in Singapore.

And drawing from experience, were there any learning points using this approach with the "Chronology on Death"? Was there any adverse reaction from the public or audience? And is this the first time ever that this approach was used in Singapore and under what other conditions would the Ministry consider replicating this for other performances in Singapore?

Madam, to the last question, this is not the first time. We have had two shows before where we felt that they deserved a higher rating and yet at the same time a post-show dialogue would help to explain some of the sensitive points in the play. And in the instance of this play, from the report that I have from my officers, the discussion went on very smoothly and the director took time to explain why he decided to use such a theme for his play.

In terms of the learning points, going forward, what we want to continue to do is to explore what other sort of flexibility we can allow but keeping within the classification code. In fact, the R18 rating does not call for post-show dialogue; it was a decision by MDA. Based on the content, we think it may require a bit of explanation. As I mentioned in my reply, anything that crosses the code, we will not allow it, especially when it denigrates religion, language and race.

But in this instance, there were certain sensitivities involved, conversion and death. Therefore, we felt that it is something that happens in real life and the play deserves to be staged, and also based on the feedback of ACP. But we wanted a post-show dialogue so that the audience would understand exactly what was the intent of the director. So, we will learn from this. Where we think we can be flexible, we will try, but we will have to decide based on the code that we have in place and ACP's views.