BBFC – written evidence (CHI0025)

CHILDREN AND THE INTERNET

1. The British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) welcomes the Lords Select Committee on Communications decision to undertake an inquiry into Children and the Internet.

2. The BBFC is the independent regulator of film and video in the United Kingdom. It operates a transparent, trusted classification regime based on years of expertise and published Classification Guidelines. The BBFC conducts regular large scale public consultations to ensure that its Guidelines continue to reflect public opinion. The BBFC’s primary aim is to protect children from harm through classification decisions. It also empowers consumers, particularly parents and children, to make informed viewing choices through consumer advice and education.

3. The BBFC is a member of the UK Council for Child Internet Safety (UKCCIS) Executive Board and works with international partners on projects to improve the protection of children from potentially harmful media content online.

4. Below is the BBFC’s response to those inquiry questions relevant to its work:

Risks and Evidence

1.              What risks and benefits does increased internet usage present to children, with particular regard to:

i. Social development and wellbeing;

ii. Neurological, cognitive and emotional development;

iii. Data security

5. The BBFC believes that it is too easy for children and young people to access inappropriate and potentially harmful content online.  The regulatory framework that has developed in the offline world to protect children from content - for example dangerous and imitable behaviour, self-harm, suicide, drug misuse and violence - that is likely to impair their development and wellbeing has not transferred to the online space.  Pornography is of particular concern.  It is well regulated in the offline world but for the most part unregulated online. 

6. Most online pornography accessible in the UK is unregulated and easily available to children in the absence of filters. A significant proportion of this pornographic content would not be classifiable by the BBFC (because for example it features content that would be deemed obscene under CPS guidelines; involves violence and/or implied lack of consent; involves the infliction of pain or acts which may cause lasting physical harm; or features material likely to encourage an interest in sexually abusive activity).  This has led to the normalisation of largely unfettered access to the strongest, sometimes unlawful, pornography by children online.  

7. Research suggests that the impact of this new societal 'norm' has been significant and detrimental to the wellbeing of children and young people.  The Government’s consultation ‘Child Safety Online: Age Verification for Pornography’ highlights research that found 'adolescents who viewed violent pornography were six times more likely to report engaging in sexually aggressive behaviour than their peers who did not'.[1]

8. Girlguiding's 'Girls' Attitudes Survey 2015', a survey of young women aged 7-21, found that ‘Seven in ten think that pornography gives out confusing messages about sexual consent, or that it makes aggressive or violent behaviour towards women seem normal (both 71%). Two in three young women agree that pornography puts pressure on girls to have sex before they are ready (66%)'. 53% of young women surveyed by Girlguiding also agreed that 'boys are copying what they see in pornography when they try to coerce their girlfriends into sex acts'.[2]

9. In its 'Briefing on Pornography and Violence Against Women and Girls' (July 2014) End Violence Against Women (EVAW) notes that 'pornography and sexualised popular culture form a conducive context for violence against women, contributing to messages about gendered stereotypes and sex which normalise men dominating women.'[3]

Education

5.              What roles can schools play in educating and supporting children in relation to the internet? What guidance is provided about the internet to schools and teachers? Is guidance consistently adopted and are there any gaps?

10. Schools have a crucial role to play in educating children about accessing the internet safely and teaching resilience.   When we speak to children and young people and carers, the issue of online safety frequently arises, in particular around the sheer volume of inappropriate material and the lack of clear guidance and advice for the public when they are navigating content online.  

11. The BBFC Education Team seeks to promote resilience in schools through its education outreach programme.  The BBFC speaks to over 10,000 people a year, more than 75% of whom are under 18.  We also provide classroom resources and offer a dedicated children's website, www.cbbfc.co.uk.  Through these various platforms, we explain to children, parents and teachers how to find out about age ratings and make safe viewing choices online.   The BBFC works in partnership with organisations such as Childnet to provide parents and children with guidance, including through Safer Internet Day. The BBFC’s children’s website (www.cbbfc.co.uk) supports the 5Rights charter and the BBFC is part of the committee driving the 5Rights project.

12. The BBFC will be extending the information it offers to both younger (primary school) audiences, and their parents, about making safe, empowered decisions online, following BBFC research into families and their viewing decision-making processes planned for later this year. The BBFC will use video, with supporting web resources, designed to promote safe viewing, demonstrate how to avoid potentially harmful unregulated content online, and incorporate the online safety messaging of partner organisations about responding to inappropriate content online.  The BBFC is also developing classroom resources, including a poster and stimulus material, for secondary aged learners and their teachers.  This will combine our expertise in using film and TV extracts to encourage discussion around content and age suitability.  We will also share 'insider track' insight on what techniques members of our examining team use in order to develop resilience when viewing strong material.

13. The BBFC’s education outreach programme also offers schools information on the Mobile Network Operators' (MNO) voluntary, best practice filtering scheme regulated by the BBFC, based on classifications that are well understood by parents. Schools are in a good position to proactively encourage parents of school age children to ensure filters are in place for any online access.

6.              Who currently informs parents of risks? What is the role for commercial organisations to teach e-safety to parents? How could parents be better informed about risks?

14. The BBFC offers parents a system of classification which provides solutions in the online space with age ratings which are widely understood and trusted.  These age classifications can then be applied to parental filters.

15. Since 2008, the BBFC has been working in partnership with the home entertainment industry and others to bring, as far as possible, offline regulatory protections online. In doing so, it uses a number of best practice, voluntary self-regulatory models that apply trusted BBFC standards in ways that best fit the business practices of different providers and the requirements of their consumers, particularly parents.

16. The BBFC’s industry partners in the online space include:

• content providers from the home entertainment industry, music industry and adult industry, such as Portland and Playboy
• online platforms such as iTunes, Netflix, Amazon Prime and YouTube
• access providers, including all the UK’s mobile networks.

17. These models involve the BBFC setting content standards and classifying material. Those standards and/or individual classifications are given effect through signposts for parents and consumers generally, including age ratings and content advice; parental controls linked to age ratings or standards; and internet filters.

18. For example, the BBFC is the independent regulator of content delivered via the UK’s four Mobile Networks Operators (EE, O2, Three and Vodafone). Using the standards in the BBFC’s Classification Guidelines, content that would be age rated 18 or R18 by the BBFC, is placed behind access controls and internet filters to restrict access to that content by those under 18. This includes pornography and other adult sexual content, pro-Ana (anorexia nervosa) websites and content which promotes or glorifies discrimination or real life violence.  In 2015, the BBFC and EE also adopted a Classification Framework for EE’s "Strict" parental setting, aimed at younger children, with filtering standards set at the BBFC's PG level.  

19. The BBFC also provides an appeals service to respond in a transparent and timely way to reported cases of over and under blocking by access controls/filters. Customers may only remove the network filters on mobile devices if they are able to prove (using robust age verification methods, such as credit card or in-person verification) that they are aged 18 or over.

20. None of the above models offer a panacea, either individually or collectively. However, they do make a substantial contribution to online child safety and consumer empowerment, and have been welcomed by parents in particular. Independent research commissioned by the BBFC in 2015 found that 85% of parents consider it important to have consistent classifications off and online (Bernice Hardie, 2015).  The BBFC believes its commercial partners should be recognised for the way in which they have engaged with ratings and content advice in order to protect children.  We look forward to continuing to work with industry to improve even further the use of BBFC symbols online, particularly to help parents filter content and set parental controls.   

21. In terms of how these systems could be improved to ensure parents are better informed, the BBFC has argued for a more consistent approach across different media.  For example, the current protections provided by MNOs based on BBFC classifications differ from those offered by public WiFi or home broadband.  These different approaches and standards can lead to regulatory confusion which is not conducive to child protection.

Legislation and Regulation

9.              What are the regulatory frameworks in different media? Is current legislation adequate in the area of child protection online? Is the law routinely enforced across different media? What, if any, are the gaps? What impact does the legislation and regulation have on the way children and young people experience and use the internet? Should there be a more consistent approach?

22. The BBFC classifies films and videos works according to its Classification Guidelines, with ratings ranging from ‘U’ for Universal to ‘R18’.  The BBFC’s Guidelines are the result of extensive public consultation, involving over 10,000 people across the UK in the 2013 Guidelines consultation.  Research demonstrates that the public agrees with the BBFC’s classification decisions more than 90% of the time (Bernice Hardie and Goldstone Perl, 2013).  The 2013 Guidelines consultation found most respondents - 84% of parents with children aged 6-15 - consider that the BBFC is effective at using classification to protect children from unsuitable content.  89% of parents (and 76% of teenagers) rate classification as important, and 95% of parents with children under 15 usually check the BBFC classification.  

23. While the BBFC’s classifications have statutory force for video works and film exhibition, the BBFC has no statutory power online.  However, independent research in July 2015 commissioned by the BBFC shows that the majority of viewers still consider it important to be able to check the suitability of audiovisual content they download.  As more viewing takes place online, consumers expect that the same level of regulation will apply online as currently applies offline.  85% of parents consider it important to have consistent BBFC classifications available for Video-on-Demand (VOD) content, rising to 91% of parents whose youngest child is under 10. (Bernice Hardie, 2015). 

24. As stated in response to question 6, in recognition of these public demands for regulatory protection online, the BBFC has worked in partnership with the home entertainment industry on a number of voluntary, best practice self-regulatory services which bring trusted BBFC classification standards and well known age ratings online. The BBFC provides labelling and content advice for content providers and platform owners (aggregators). This service covers VOD, Download To Own, Streaming and all forms of Electronic Sell Through. The BBFC has rated over 200,000 videos for online distribution, with BBFC ratings used by platforms such as iTunes, Netflix, Amazon, TalkTalk TV Store and BT TV.   Displaying BBFC labelling enables consumers to make informed choices when purchasing digital video, thereby empowering parents to protect their children.  

25. The BBFC considers that, when protecting children from harmful content online, the three most pressing concerns are as follows:  first, online pornographic content; second, online music videos; and finally, greater consistency of approach for online filters.

A.  Online pornographic content

26. The BBFC classifies all pornographic content released on a physical format. It will not classify material that is potentially harmful or otherwise illegal, including so-called 'rape porn'. The BBFC's regulation of pornography offline is well established and largely effective at preventing access by children.

27. Online the situation is quite different. The BBFC works with a small number of UK adult content providers in the online space on a best practice, voluntary basis, to ensure that their content meets UK standards of acceptability and that it is kept away from children. The BBFC also supports Ofcom’s work under the Communications Act 2003 to regulate online 'TV-like' adult content hosted in the UK by determining the standards that Ofcom applies and advising Ofcom in individual cases.

28. However, the work described above covers only a small proportion of pornographic content that is accessed in the UK. Most online pornography accessible in the UK is unregulated because it is hosted elsewhere in the EU or from outside the EU (particularly the US). It is therefore easily available to children in the absence of filters. A significant proportion of this content would not be classified by the BBFC if it was offline (because for example it features content that would be deemed obscene under CPS guidelines; involves violence and/or implied lack of consent; involves the infliction of pain or acts which may cause lasting physical harm; or features material likely to encourage an interest in sexually abusive activity).

29. The BBFC therefore welcomes the inclusion in the Digital Economy Bill of clauses that seek to ensure effective age verification by all commercial sites containing pornographic material to restrict users to those who are 18 or over. The Bill also places an obligation on the age verification regulator to review whether such sites contain content that would either not be classifiable in the UK or would be illegal.  The BBFC agrees with Government that although no system to protect children from such content can ever be 100% effective, robust age verification is an important child protection measure that will reduce the chances of children accessing pornography online. 

B.  Online Music Videos

30. There are serious public concerns regarding online music videos which are not covered by the BBFC’s statutory remit under the Video Recordings Act (VRA).  For example, whilst the majority of music videos are appropriate for children, a report jointly commissioned in 2014 by EVAW, Object and Imkaan concluded:

'Some have argued that music videos use conventions of pornography: they are constructed around a ‘pornographic imagination’, featuring ‘pornographic performances’. The ways in which women’s bodies are relentlessly dissected and displayed makes music videos a form of ‘everyday pornography’, because they are based on ‘representation of something which is recognised as pornographic in a context which is not itself pornographic’. This everydayness is precisely what concerns many, since music videos are integrated into everyday environments'.[4]

31. The report continues:

'Findings from studies that examine the impact of music videos are consistent and persuasive in highlighting associations between representations of women as sexualised body parts, and attitudes that condone sexual violence. Similar correlations are well documented in the evidence of access and exposure to pornography with respect to young people.'

32. In October 2014, the BBFC, the UK's three major record labels, Vevo and YouTube launched a pilot project with Government support for the age rating of online music videos featuring content that is unsuitable for younger children. (It is worth noting that the experience of this pilot suggests that a significant majority of music videos released by the UK’s major record labels are suitable for younger children.)  In August 2015, the Government announced that the UK music industry, Vevo and YouTube had agreed that the measures trialed with the BBFC would be made permanent for videos produced by artists signed to major UK labels and that independent labels would also pilot this voluntary initiative.

33. Clear age ratings are the first step to improve child protection with online music videos and were welcomed by the public in independent research into the pilot commissioned by the BBFC in 2015.  The research found that:

• up to 60% of children aged 10 to 17 were watching music videos that they did not think their parents would approve of 
• 78% of parents value age ratings on online music videos 
• 75% would like online channels to link those ratings to parental controls 
• there was a clear preference for more online platforms to carry BBFC ratings and for US labels in particular to be included in the age rating of online music videos (Bernice Hardie, 2015)[5]  

34. The BBFC is therefore working with Government, the music industry and platforms to improve the effectiveness and coverage of online age ratings. However, the lack of coverage for videos by US-repertoire artists in particular is a serious gap in protection. The BBFC believes that if there is no further progress towards including any potentially harmful content by these artists the Government needs to set a deadline to ensure that US repertoire artists are included in the scheme. It also believes that video hosting platforms such as YouTube should improve signposting for ratings and consider linking them to effective parental controls.

C.  Greater consistency of approach for online filters

35. As stated in response to question 6, it is vital that parents understand and respect the basis on which parental filters operate.  There is presently a lack of consistency of approach across different platforms.  The BBFC believes that its work with the MNOs represents a trusted and transparent system that is based on standards that are thoroughly researched and have widespread public support and could be used on other platforms. 

10.              What challenges face the development and application of effective legislation? In particular in relation to the use of national laws in an international/cross-national context and the constantly changing nature and availability of internet sites and digital technologies? To what extent can legislation anticipate and manage future risks?

36. There are significant technical challenges to the regulation of content online.  In particular, the BBFC considers the issue of encryption to be of crucial importance.  Encryption of websites is starting to degrade the child protection measures put in place by, for example, the MNOs and the BBFC as filters find it difficult to cope with the https protocol.  In addition, increasingly children are downloading content through Apps and this also limits the effectiveness of any parental filters.

11.              Does the upcoming General Data Protection Regulation take sufficient account of the needs of children? As the UK leaves the EU, what provisions of the Regulation or other Directives should it seek to retain, or continue to implement, with specific regard to children? Should any other legislation should be introduced?

37. In May 2016, the Commission published its proposal for amendments to the Audiovisual Media Services Directive to increase regulatory scrutiny of video on demand services and video-sharing platforms.  Currently, the Directive only requires video on demand platforms to put in place measures to protect children from content that might "seriously impair the physical, mental or moral development of minors" (Article 12).  Under the country of origin principle, this standard is set by the Member State in which the video on demand service is located.  The proposed amendments retain this principle but increase the proportion of content on video on demand services that is subject to regulation to include any content which might "impair" rather than "seriously impair" children.  To a lesser extent, video-sharing platforms would also be required to implement measures to protect children from harmful content. 

38. The BBFC welcomes the Commission's efforts to improve standards of online child protection and supports the decision to lower the benchmark to “impair”.  These proposals are likely to significantly increase the volume of content broadcast to UK consumers that is regulated on a statutory basis outside the UK.  The BBFC is concerned that the implications of this new statutory oversight in other Member States have not been fully considered and have the potential to undermine current protections for UK children online.

39. Under the Commission’s new proposals, it appears that UK consumers (including parents) would be required to address concerns about harmful content shown on a video on demand service to the regulatory body of the Member State in which the service is based.  In most cases this would mean that a UK Regulator would not have jurisdiction to consider the complaint. This would confound the expectation of UK consumers who, based on the regulatory framework for linear broadcasters and the BBFC’s system of classification, have a reasonable expectation that content is regulated according to UK standards that are set in consultation with the British public and enforced by a UK Regulator to whom they have the right to complain. 

40. Under the terms of the proposed amendments, where the video on demand service is located in another Member State, the Regulator in that Member State would have no obligation to address the specific concerns and expectations of UK consumers with regard to content broadcast to the UK.  Content standards set by other Member States differ markedly from UK standards on a wide range of issues, including dangerous imitable behaviour, pornography, sex, violence, language, self-harm and suicide.  The Commission is also promoting the concept of developing an EU Code of Conduct for content descriptors which could be adopted by Member States across the EU which would be even further removed from reflecting national differences.  Annex A contains a representative list of recent films and shows how age rating standards differ across the EU.

41. Currently, the BBFC works on a voluntary, best practice basis with all major video on demand services operating in the UK – many of them based outside the UK - to provide consumers with familiar, well understood and trusted age ratings and content advice.  This voluntary system is based on UK standards expressed in the form of BBFC symbols and content advice and provides children with the level of protection expected by UK parents.  Although there is no statutory basis for the BBFC's work with the platforms it is a logical extension of the BBFC's statutory role in the offline space and the BBFC believes its platform partners should be recognised for their commitment to offering the same high regulatory standards online which reflect the expectations of the UK public.  

42. If the proposed amendments pass into EU law, the BBFC is concerned that the legal obligation on VOD services to comply with alternative, potentially lower standards (set outside the UK, potentially on an EU-wide basis) risks the consequence that VOD services will be less willing to also engage on a voluntary basis to offer UK consumers more meaningful and helpful information.  This would lead to a diminution of online child protection standards for children in the UK. 

43. The Commission proposes that there should be a system of descriptors indicating the nature of the content on an audiovisual media service. The BBFC already provides this service for the home entertainment industry who have adopted BBFC classifications and content information voluntarily online as set out in our response to Question 9.  Examples of BBFC symbols and BBFCInsight are set out below:

44. The British public would not be well served if these symbols and insight were replaced with unfamiliar age ratings and content descriptors online which would be treated with suspicion, poorly understood or ignored. 

45. These EU Commission proposals could therefore inadvertently lead to a diminution of online protection standards for children in the UK.   Instead of UK standards being reflected with UK symbols and content descriptors, the UK could move to VOD content broadcast to UK consumers with EU content descriptors and standards which are unlikely to offer the same level of protection or sensitivity to UK cultural norms.  The UK has led the way in terms of child protection online and the BBFC believes the UK Government should continue to ensure that online child safety standards can be determined on a national level based on national standards. 

46. It is unlikely that proposed amendments to the Directive will come into force before the expected date that the UK leaves the EU under the Article 50 process.  However, the UK may opt to subscribe to the Directive on a voluntary basis or as part of a wider agreement on a free market in services.  The BBFC notes that UK-based broadcasters consider the retention of the country of origin principle to be essential in securing their continued access to European markets and the BBFC would not wish to see the UK creative industry put at a disadvantage.  However, the BBFC believes that the British public, in particular children, would not be well served by the regulatory framework proposed in the Directive in relation to protection from harmful content broadcast to the UK.  The BBFC also believes that retaining the country of origin principle in relation to broadcast rights is compatible with establishing the right of any Member State (not just the UK) who wishes to set national standards for online child safety in line with public policy and what it considers will impair the physical, mental or moral development of minors in their own country according to national concerns and sensitivities. 

47. The BBFC agrees with the Commission that more can and should be done in relation to User Generated Content (UGC), irrespective of the UK’s relationship with the EU.  EU Kids Online research shows that children are concerned about accessing unsuitable content on UGC video hosting services.   There is no reason why action should not be taken immediately by video-sharing platforms to better protect children online.

48. The BBFC and its Dutch counterparts NICAM developed YouRateIt (YouRI) at the request of the Brussels-based CEO Coalition to make the Internet a better place for kids, led by the former Commissioner Neelie Kroes.   YouRI is a tool that provides age ratings for user-generated content (UGC) available via online video-sharing platform services. The tool is a simple questionnaire, designed to be completed by those uploading videos onto a site, or by the crowd, or both. Those who use it are asked a series of questions about the content to be rated. The tool, and the methodology behind it, is scalable on a global basis.  The questionnaire itself would be the same in each country or territory but it produces bespoke, national ratings and content advice that take into account cultural and societal differences. It is a low cost means of capturing the enormous, and rapidly expanding, amount of UGC content that is not currently being rated, and is not susceptible to being rated, under other models operated by ratings bodies around the world.  The tool can also be linked to parental controls.

49. The BBFC and NICAM have recently completed a pilot project with the Italian media company Mediaset, and now need new global partners to develop and test the questionnaire. The BBFC is willing to offer its expertise to any platform that is considering developing its own bespoke ratings tool to protect children from harmful content.  YouRI is a voluntary initiative that could be pursued by the UK Government irrespective of our relationship with the EU.

August 2016

Annex A - Different EU Classification Standards – August 2016