Some Content May Offend: Public Attitudes to Content Classifications and Warnings on Free-to-Air and Pay TV, 2010
Download PDF:
Some Content May Offend PDF (303.28 KB)
Date published: February 2010
Research Company: Mobius Research and Strategy Limited
Scope
- Understanding public awareness and expectations of, and satisfaction with, content classifications and warnings currently used by free-to-air and pay TV broadcasters
Methodology
- Focus group sessions and interviews with 88 parents or guardians of children aged between five and 17 years in Auckland
Results
- Parents use a range of tools and criteria to decide on viewing suitability
- Parents see classifications and warnings as important guidelines in deciding what their children watch
- While parents don’t want to be told what they should be doing, they want to be informed enough to make decisions affecting their households
- Communication of classifications and warnings to the New Zealand viewing public is not currently as clear as it could be, especially with pay TV
- Parents make passive use of classifications and warnings
- Besides communication issues, several other factors impact on the effectiveness of classifications and warnings:
- Credibility issues
- PGR/PG classifications
- Pay TV’s M classification
- Pay TV’s warning symbols
- Perceived gaps in classification
- Timing
Recommendations
- Consider the rationale behind two separate free-to-air and pay TV systems
- Consider modelling any revised system on the current free-to-air approach
- Consider how an age-based system may add value for parents
- Ensure clear differentiation between the symbols used for classifications and those used for warnings (pay TV)
- Use visual and verbal communication as a matter of course
- Consider dispensing with classifications and warnings that are ‘meaningless’ to parents, such as M and C
- Consider a wider communications approach focusing on the role of classifications and warnings
- Consider an alternative to the term ‘watershed’