Seven West Media found not in breach of the Code of Practice by the ACMA, after an investigation was launched into a broadcast of the movie “Hannibal” 
The report (I had a look and it’s ridiculously long and thorough) is available on their website:
http://www.acma.gov.au/theACMA/ACMAi/Investigation-reports/Television-investigations/2017-television-investigations
Note:
Coincidently I actually mentioned this film a few months ago on MediaSpy, not sure if it was the same broadcast, but others obviously wanted to get answers. In this case it sounds like a guardian of a child that complained, by the looks of one of the appendices.
–
So, I picked up two main issues raised during the investigation report (there were probably more though):
•Seven’s classification officers apparently requested and read both the Classification Board & Classification Review Board reports for the film (MA & R) from 2001, despite the latter being the current one, although apparently not with another MA rating given to a Blu-Ray release eight years later.
ACMA noted it was clearly a challenge in determining what is considered to be “high in impact” now, compared to back then, with community attitudes, policies and guidelines changing. They noted that the “Broadcast Standards Act” requires modification of R content for television.
Seven also noted that two scenes had been cut. So clearly Seven took the view that some scenes were either indeed R worthy or simply couldn’t be accomodated into the code.
•The other issue and probably main issue, was Seven acknowledging they found the film “thematically challenging” to classify.
Due to having crucial scenes in the narrative but that still posed the most classificable content.
Example: The famous dinner scene near the end, it is arguably the most violent scene, but Seven confirmed they left it unedited as it was vital to the plot (among other justification for doing so). The complainant I gathered was most concerned with this scene.
Interestingly, the ACMA took a different view, saying this scene came under “themes” rather than “violence”, as it was linked to the horror, his cannibalism and being a seriel killer. They also believed the scene was more a “medical procedure” than violence (which I found odd).
To be honest, I found this report very eye-opening and interesting to read. Adding together the ACMA’s responses, Seven’s responses, the complainant’s responses and other sources, it’s almost an essay!
If anybody else gets time to sift through it, I’d be keen on your take?
