The EBU is publishing a series of interviews with the experts who participated in the Legal workshop on platform regulation in November 2015. Our third expert in the series is Professor Manuel Puppis.

Cross-media age classifications and better protection of minors in the online world

Professor Puppis is an Associate Professor in Media Systems and Media Structures at the Department of Communication and Media Research (DCM), University of Fribourg, Switzerland. He currently serves as chair of ECREA’s Communication Law & Policy Section and board member of Swiss Association of Communication and Media Research (SACM). His research interests include media policy, media regulation and media governance, media systems in a comparative perspective, political communication and organisation theory.

What are the obstacles for cross-media age classifications and content descriptions?

In the digital era, children and adolescents can choose from many different forms of media use and participation. It is possible to watch movies and TV shows not only on traditional TV sets but also to download and stream them from the Internet via tablets and smartphones. Moreover, videos are available on a multitude of platforms such as YouTube.

Streaming services are becoming more popular for music than traditional radio. And of course social media allow for interaction with peers. This opens up a wealth of new opportunities for communication, information, entertainment and education. This is certainly exciting for young media users – and not only for them. Yet with these developments come an entirely new set of risks that youth media protection needs to address. Due to the growing importance of mobile devices, minors have greater autonomy in their media use. Parents find it increasingly difficult to keep up and while gaining autonomy from parents is an important part of growing up, minors also need protection.

When reading, listening and watching media products, children and adolescents may be unsettled or distressed by inappropriate content. Age classifications play an important role in informing minors and parents about the suitability of content. But due to convergence, it no longer makes sense to have different classification systems for different media types. A cross-media age classification system that covers broadcasting, video-on-demand, cinema, DVD/Blu-ray and games is necessary today. It will offer coherence and raise public awareness of the classification system. However introducing such a system is a challenge.

First and foremost, there are clear limits to voluntary systems of self-regulation. International comparisons show that co-regulation, offering a legal framework for industry self-regulation, is usually needed to get all companies aboard. Moreover, cultural differences must not be underestimated. The evaluation of media content in different countries – and even within the same country, such as a multilingual country like Switzerland – may vary greatly. And finally, the usability of one classification system for different media types is often met with scepticism.

Yet differences between cultures and media types are not necessarily a stumbling block for cross-media age classification. Such a system need not offer a “one size fits all” approach but rather a harmonisation with respect to age levels as well as to symbols used for indicating the suitable age and describing content. Content itself – whether a movie or a game – can still be evaluated according to media-specific (and potentially culture-specific) criteria. The NICAM/Kijkwijzer system in the Netherlands provides a very successful model.

It is also important to emphasise that youth media protection today cannot focus on the use of standardised media content alone. On the Internet, minors may be confronted with other risks as well: first, as market participants and contractual partners of media providers; second, as participants in personal communication processes with others who may upset, harass or offend them; and third, as agents producing and disseminating inappropriate content themselves, that could upset, harass or offend their communication partners. A state-of-the-art system of protecting minors should be able to respond to these trends adequately, combining regulation to protect minors with positive measures like promoting media literacy and providing suitable platforms and content.

How can access restrictions be enforced more effectively in the online environment?

A cross-media age classification system that is legally binding is an important prerequisite for protecting minors from unsuitable media content. In broadcasting, air time (and in the case of Pay-TV scrambling) also offer some protection. Most countries have implemented a so-called watershed in their broadcasting laws. Moreover, co-regulatory organisations, like the FSF in Germany, screen content for suitability before broadcasting. With respect to cinema and the sale of movies and games on physical discs, age can be checked at the point-of-sale. This requires the training of the sales force.

But of course a similar level of protection is required online. While “notice and take down” procedures are useful for illegal content, restricting access to legal but potentially harmful content is more complex. Basically, there are two options: age verification by the content provider and the use of filter software by users. Age verification for the online sale of media content on physical discs (movies, TV shows, games) as well as for streaming and video-on-demand platforms is certainly possible using credit cards or identification cards. Given that many players in the market are international companies (e.g. Google, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon or Netflix) a European solution would be more useful than national regulation. Parental control access systems such as technical filters are not sufficiently user-friendly and would require more support by the industry.

Despite attempts at regulation, minors will time and again be confronted with media content that might be inappropriate or harmful. Thus, it is necessary to combine regulation with media literacy. Children and adolescents not only deserve protection but also the ability to deal with media and to get help when needed. Making media literacy an integral part of the school curriculum, rather than solely dependent on parental guidance which can vary greatly from one family to the next, would ensure that all minors acquire minimum capabilities and thus have equal opportunities. However, media literacy is only one pillar of youth media protection. The potential problems created by the media industry cannot and should not rest completely on individual users' shoulders. Regulation is necessary to get media companies to assume their responsibility in this regard.

How can the offer of suitable content and platforms for minors be improved?

When taking note of children and adolescents, media policy is often fixated on their protection. Yet minors not only need protection from unsuitable content and platforms, they also need content and platforms that are appealing as well as being safe. Promoting suitable content and platforms should be a cornerstone of media policy.

One possibility is to support platforms offering suitable content on the Internet through subsidies or by providing them a certification for adhering to certain conditions (e.g. with respect to data mining). Advisory systems that point users to recommendable websites could also be supported. Traditional broadcasters can make an important contribution as well. Quotas for private broadcasters and a specific remit for public service media are some of the options open to media policy. Public service media especially have the potential to do more for young citizens by broadcasting radio and TV programmes for children and adolescents and by developing online platforms that adhere to strict standards regarding content, safety and privacy.