Mobile Content Rating: Where We Are and Where We’re Going

Editor’s Note: Welcome to Reality Check, a feature for RCR Wireless News’ new weekly e-mail service, Mobile Content and Culture. We’ve gathered a group of visionaries and veterans in the mobile content industry to give their insights into the marketplace. In the coming weeks look for columns from Tom Huseby of SeaPoint Ventures, Laura Marriott of the Mobile Marketing Association, Mark Donovan of M:Metrics, and more.
With the doldrums of August upon us, I thought we might forego any heavy lifting this month and take a look back at a subject that continues to hang over the future of mobile content: content rating.
In 2005, working with CTIA, the national carriers developed a framework for dealing with issues of access to age-appropriate mobile content. Going into their deliberations, the carriers were in agreement on some basic tenants: 1) If they were going to become important channels for content distribution, such as the big-box retailers or the cable MSOs and broadcasters or even movie theaters, they were going to have to meet the same obligations those industries were meeting of informing customers of the nature of the content the customer was interested in, and of restricting access to content that might be age-inappropriate; and, 2) They did not want to get into the content rating business themselves.
At the time, polyphonic ringtones, wallpapers and mobile games were the primary type of mobile content that was being consumed. But master tones were gaining traction in the ringtone and nascent ringback markets, and video clips, both made for mobile and repurposed from cable and broadcast channels, were beginning to be offered broadly. Across all of these content types, however, and despite the fact that much of the content was available on each of the carrier’s decks, there was no framework or criteria for evaluating the characteristics of the content and almost all of it was unrated.
Assisted by media experts, the carrier representatives reviewed the various existing ratings systems for movies, television, games and music. Convinced that consumers were well aware of and comfortable with the meaning of the ratings for those content types, the carriers sought to develop a framework for evaluating their own content utilizing the criteria used by the existing ratings services and to develop a set of guidelines for providing access to content across the range of ratings and content types.
What emerged from the reviews and discussion is the Guidelines for Wireless Carrier Content Classification and Internet Content Access Control, which provide a framework for the carriers to determine whether the content they want to distribute is to be generally accessible to all, or restricted from access to those age 17 and under. It also contains a commitment on the part of the carriers to develop tools and processes to help account holders manage content access across all members on their accounts.
To help them develop the criteria for evaluating the content on their decks, the carrier reps looked at movie and television content (video) and games similarly. Content from each industry is rated by an affiliated organization (or, in the case of television, by the network or broadcast channel itself), and the rating is readily available at the time of content distribution. The carriers agreed that any content of those three types that carried a rating indicating the content was suitable for consumers age 17 or under would be deemed as Generally Accessible to all mobile subscribers, under the voluntary guidelines. Content of those three types that carried ratings indicating it was suitable only for 17 and older, however, was to be considered Restricted Content, meaning under the guidelines that it would be offered on the carrier decks only after the carrier had deployed tools that allowed account holders to restrict access to such carrier content for anyone on their accounts.
Because the content ratings services use “context” for evaluating the content, sometimes resulting in certain questionable scenes being retained, in movies especially, that might not be considered acceptable to all ages, the carriers also developed a list of Restricted Content Identifiers, which, if included in any scene in the movie, video or game, despite the fact that the overall product had a Generally Acceptable rating, would cause the content to be rated as Restricted. Those Restricted Content Identifiers comprised intense profanity, intense violence, graphic sexual activity or sexual behaviors, nudity, hate speech or graphic depiction of illegal drug use.
For music, the carriers took a somewhat different approach, similar to the difference that the market has accepted between music and video and games. Unlike at movie theaters where tellers are expected to verify the age of customers attending R-rated movies, or retailers who agree to check the age of customers seeking to buy M-rated or A-rated games, there is no age-related restriction on purchasing music that carries an Explicit Lyrics label. In order not to adversely affect the nascent mobile music market, but recognizing the public nature of content like ringtones and ringbacks, the carriers took a well-balanced approach toward their music offerings. The voluntary guidelines classify as Generally Accessible all ringtones and ringbacks that do not have Explicit Lyrics labels, as well as the radio-edited versions of songs with explicit lyrics. Explicit lyrics ringtones and ringbacks are considered Restricted Content, and therefore will not be offered on the carrier decks until access-restriction controls are in place. However, as with big-box retailers and online distributors of music, full-song downloads of music with explicit lyrics are Generally Accessible through the carrier online music services.
Finally, with regard to Internet content, the carriers pledged in the guidelines to provide tools and filters that will restrict access at levels designated by account holders as the carrier business plans and technology roadmaps allow.
So far, the framework and criteria have served the carriers well, and no Restricted Access content is available on carrier decks. However, the carriers are at work developing the tools and processes necessary to enable and allow them to offer more sophisticated content, whether that is unedited versions of “South Park” or R-rated movies or M-rated games. The business and technology investments needed to achieve these capabilities, however, are not insignificant, and they take careful planning and development on the part of the carriers if they are to meet the standards that are already in place in the video and electronic game industries. And a number of carriers are likely to roll out some of these systems before year’s end. That will be required if carriers hope to successfully compete with the more mature and already established channels for content distribution.
You may contact Mark directly at MDesautels@ctia.org. You may contact RCR Wireless News at rcrwebhelp@crain.com.