British MPS want to put a bag over the head of "lad mags"

The so-called "nanny state" is thriving, I see. According to a story in Press Gazette, a cross-party group of British MPs have demanded that magazines with "sexually graphic" front covers be concealed from view and have called for a cinema-style rating system for magazines. They apparently sweep into the category various kinds of "lad mags" and want such magazines not only put on the top shelf but concealed in a bag of some sort.

The MPs, including Tory former Home Office minister Ann Widdecombe (Maidstone and the Weald) and ex-Liberal Democrat leader Menzies Campbell (Fife NE), said the review should consider whether pornographic magazines should be concealed in bags instead of displayed on the top shelf of newsagents (as they are in Canada).

In a Commons motion tabled by Labour's Lindsay Roy (Glenrothes), the MPs state that "politicians, retailers, publishers and distributors have a collective responsibility to protect children and young people from displays of sexually graphic material that they are not emotionally equipped to deal with".

In 2006 Labour MP Claire Curtis-Thomas presented a bill in Parliament arguing for legally-binding measures to keep sexually explicit magazines out of sight of children, but it died on the order paper. At the time, the Periodical Publishers Association, the British magazine trade group, said the guidelines in place were quite stringent enough.

"Magazine publishers and retailers believe the resultant code is strengthened, and its voluntary nature is far more effective and flexible than any statutory regulation, given that standards of taste and decency are constantly changing," the PPA said in its letter to MPs.

"Ultimately it is the retailers' responsibility to sell products, and to use their discretion and judgment as they see fit to display and sell those products, including magazines."

Fight spam, but protect legitimate media activity, federal review is told

The House of Commons industry, science and technology committee has been told by Magazines Canada that Bill C-27, the Electronic Commerce Protection Act -- the so-called "anti-spam" act -- needs to be modified to remove potential impacts on the Canadian magazine publishing industry. While it agrees that e-commerce needs to be regulated, unwanted spam needs to be managed without unduly restricting reasonable online media consumption.

Specifically, in a letter to the clerk of the standing committee which is studying the bill, the national association says that

• Legitimate business activity shouldn't be unnecessarily hindered by the bill. This includes allowing communications with "communities of interest" or people who are likely to have a legitimate interest in a product or service -- things such as direct mail solicitations for magazine subscriptions.
  
• "Request circulation" should be recognized as a legitimate business model, an important circulation method used by the sector -- acknowledging that this is an allowed business arrangement, whether or not a fee is charged to the recipient.
• The burden of fighting spam should rest equally on international publishing competitors. Not requiring the limitation of spam on foreign-originating publications (principally from the U.S.) would give them a significant economic advantage. Mags Can says it needs to be ensured "that we do not, through this legislation, simply silence Canadian voices while the tsunami of foreign spam continues unabated". (While MagsCan didn't say so, there are parallels here with blue box regulations in some provinces, where domestic publishers pay for their contribution to recycling burdens, but international publishers flout the law.)