What makes a book Explicit?
A question to those of you reading this blog, either on site or via the RSS feed.
When should the “Explicit” iTunes tag be used on a book? Obviously, Scott Sigler’s Earthcore is explicit. No question about it. And Mark Jeffrey’s The Pocket and the Pendant is not. These books fall well out side of the line separating explicit and “clean” content.
iTunes hasn’t given us any hard and fast rules for what should be flagged with the marker, so we are forced to use our best judgment. I was using the “if you drop an F-bomb, it’s explicit” standard, but now I’m rethinking the issue.
One of the books on our site, very popular and very well written, has had two instances of the F-bomb. One was very brief, as the main character was warning a bully not to “f*** with him again” in a threatening tone. But people say that occasionally, and it seemed warranted in the context of the book and not gratuitous. A few chapters later, another lesser character in the book has an encounter with the same bully, this time having a very heated exchange where multiple F-bombs and more were thrown the big guy’s way.
As before, I didn’t feel the author was being gratuitous with the language. The book is not marked “for kids” or “family friendly”. Foul language is *not* used as many use throw pillows.
What say you all? Should I flag it or not?
January 26th, 2006 at 12:22 pm
I would use the frame of mind that if I would not let my 12-year-old listen to it, it should be explicit. A couple swear words are going to be okay to me. Heck, kids hear more of these words in school.
January 26th, 2006 at 1:16 pm
Well, while I certainly wouldn’t be troubled by a few swear words either, I think that enough people would be that you should err on the side of caution and tag it, perhaps with a movie-style “Rated Explicit for language”, or something.
I’m not much of a fan of the MPAA, but I would say that Explicit would come into play somewhere between PG-13 and R.
January 26th, 2006 at 3:19 pm
I like to think of such a rating as more of an “over-all” coverage, not just specific instances… if such terms are used in a (podio)book just a few times, when they really are realistic and expected (and since I think I know what book you are talking about, I’d say they are)… i do not think it warrents an explicit rating.
Now, if i could just start sticking “explicit” stickers onto other people…
January 26th, 2006 at 4:53 pm
My personal suggestion would be to mimic the movie rating system. (Not with G, PG, and R) but similar.
Since iTunes supports [CLEAN], [EXPLICIT], and Null/(i.e. nothing) this gives us three states to use.
Again, my personal suggestion, would be to structure it like this, or similar:
-[CLEAN] = G; okay for all ages; nothing else to say
-[EXPLICIT] = R”ish”; contains something we think is worth warning you about - here was can say “contains adult langauge” or “use of illegal drug” or “Contains Violence”
-Null/Nothing - PG; still should carry a warning on the Podiobooks.com site, such as the podiobook book mentioned in this post. It wouldn’t need an explicit tag, but on the podiopage can state “contains mild language” or “minimal use of adult language” or “minimal mention of 80’s music”
Just my thoughts
BtD
January 26th, 2006 at 6:23 pm
I just had to chime in here. I have a five year old daughter, and I have made sure she is already well aware that there is some language that is not for polite or casual use, but she will hear it. Giving this book an explicit tag would group it in with my own (which has a COMPLETELY justified explicit tag), and that would be an injustice. These two books are meant for a completely different audience, and I’d hate to see a book that has a much broader appeal get saddled with what most people would at first glance consider to mean “for sick adults only.” If you are old enough to figure out how to receive podcasts on your own, you’re old enough to hear some “obscene” language. If not, parents shouldn’t be blindly exposing their child to something they are unfamiliar with. My two cents.
January 27th, 2006 at 9:19 am
Good comments from all. I’m disinterested in rating “all” titles, as with the G/PG/PG-13/R/NR/X model, as I’ve stated before. Several reasons for this, starting with the international audience. In the UK, they’ve got boobies on the third page of their newspaper. (I should so move to the UK).
Russell has the plan which most closely goes in the direction I’m thinking. We’ll see what others have to say. Thanks again for all your comments.
E.
January 27th, 2006 at 1:36 pm
If someone were to Podiobook straight-up, graphic erotica, then that would be a different kind of explicit than Tomi saying a bunch of F-bombs — or an itai getting shot full of holes. I agree Evo, that you don’t want to implement this complex, semi-efficient system, but at the same time, maybe the “explicit” label is just too broad.
Maybe the contributing authors ought to list the things in their books that listeners may find offensive. . .
January 27th, 2006 at 2:54 pm
EarthCore is explicit? What the fuck are you talking about? This is fucking bullshit, you all hate me.
January 27th, 2006 at 4:02 pm
The rocktopi have gotten into Scott’s brain. Again.
January 27th, 2006 at 4:16 pm
I had to jump in as I just had this discussion with my 16 year old. On the whole I hate labels but understand they are a necessary evil. That being said, I have to agree with Mike and Christiana. Unless the podiobook is filled with f bombs, I don’t see it getting the explicit notation. As my son keeps reminding me when I slip up in front of him, he hears a lot worse in high school. However, there is a difference between a good sex scene and a down and dirty, explicit, over the top bit of porno — not that that’s not enjoyable from time to time as well. I just don’t want my son listening — or at least I don’t want to know he is
And, no, Scott, we don’t all hate your fucking brains. All we want is more podcasts from you. If we don’t get a new chapter of something soon, then we’ll hate your brains!
February 10th, 2006 at 5:33 am
Mike Wills said: “I would use the frame of mind that if I would not let my 12-year-old listen to it, it should be explicit.” The problem is that some people have very different ideas of what is appropriate for children than others.
Personally, I wouldn’t rate something containing well-used swear words as “explicit” but it’s clear they can’t be considered family friendly as well.
I suggest you don’t use the explicit tag and use labels like the Dutch “Kijkwijzer” does. They do judge age appropriateness, but in addition they add icons/labels for violence, angst, drug abuse, sex, and language. Just label books with those and recommend parents to listen to anything they’re uncomfortable with themselves first.
March 9th, 2006 at 5:21 pm
I reject the use of over simplistic ‘tags’. The granularity is insufficient to be of any practicable use. I would encourage the use of descriptive prose to guide users, of any age or responsibility, instead.
‘mild swearing’, ‘ single brief shot of mild nudity’ or ‘multiple, extended scenes of full-nudity’ are of far more use in determining whether I or my kids should see/listen to a given presentation. Our views will continue to differ; but at least the arguments will be based on something more substantial than an over-simplistic, crude and essentially meaningless number or letter code.
March 9th, 2006 at 5:23 pm
BTW, what the fuck are f-bombs, do they destroy, like h-bombs, or just kill people, like n-bombs??? ;->