Context/Framework:
To varying degrees, global audiences consuming entertainment content have come to expect and rely on having access to some degree of information about the audience appropriateness of a title and, in many cases, additional context about content elements. In many countries/regions, there are groups, entities, and/or government regulatory bodies that manage the application of content ratings to provide relevant information that is meaningful to their regional constituents.
In many ways, you are likely familiar with seeing this information prior to consuming content, such as a high-paced thrilling theatrical trailer that notifies you at the end that it has been rated by the Motion Picture Association (a US-based Trade Association) as ‘PG-13’ or you see a TV-14 symbol in the corner of a comedy sitcom on a local broadcast channel with initials under it indicating something about the rating reasons (‘V’ for Violence, ‘L’ for strong language, etc.). All of these things are indicators to you about the type of content you are watching and how you might think about the cautionary elements it may or may not contain.
In this exercise, you will select one of these rating entities/boards that manage this classification determination in non-US regions (specifically, Singapore, South Africa, Brazil and/or Great Britain) to analyze their guidance on rating classifications in their respective regions as it pertains to one classification subject driver (Language/Profanity, Nudity, Sex, or Violence). We will ask you to analyze the selected classification driver and how the selected regional rating board offers guidance (or lack thereof) on the topic.
Below are detailed questions to assist you in providing this analysis, keeping in mind that your approach to these questions should seek to provide clarity on how a regional rating board approaches the selected classification element and how it might impact the rating classification and information assigned to a piece of content. We have provided links to the classification guidelines of each regional Board as the primary source for your analysis but you should feel comfortable pulling from other resources if applicable and useful to your analysis.
The average analysis/guidance document will be 2-4 pages in length but may be shorter/longer if it feels appropriate for your specific feedback/discussion. You should not feel limited by the questions provided but rather leverage them as guiding context for how to frame your discussion.
Relevant Terms:
Rating Classification - Refers to the numeric and/or abbreviated value assigned to a piece of content to indicate the audience appropriateness of the title (for example, in US theatrical releases that use MPA rating classifications this would include G, PG, PG-13, R, and NC-17)
Classification Driver - The specific content subject matter (e.g. Violence, Profanity, Sex) that has a measurable impact on the rating-level classification and/or rating information provided to the audience prior to content viewing
Rating Advisory/Information - This refers to the respective terms and/or phrases provided to the audience to provide meaningful information about the content (e.g. “Contains strong violence”, “sexual depictions”, “strong language”)
Rating Board - In this context, a ‘rating board’ refers to the entity or body that is charged with classifying visual content (movies, shows) to assign an audience appropriate rating indicator(s) and additional written context for usage when the content is distributed to a regional audience for mass consumption
Classification Driver Options (choose one):
Language/Profanity, Nudity, Sex, OR Violence
Analysis of Board Guidelines (choose one):
BBFC (Great Britain),
FPB (South Africa),
Ministry of Justice (Brazil),
OR BFC (Singapore)
Analysis Questions:
Overall, how does the board view rating classifications of content and their role for audiences in their region?
How do the Rating Boards leverage the selected classification driver to guide relevant ratings and audience guidance? To what degree do you believe the classification driver is a relevant factor in how this board interacts/interprets the appropriate audience for this content? In other words, would you argue that this is a significant factor in how a classification would be determined?
Do you believe regional and/or cultural sensitivities play a significant role in how the classification driver should be interpreted?
Provide examples of one or more titles (does not need to be available on Netflix service) that contain the discussed classification driver element but may have mitigating and/or aggravating themes/context that may potentially impact the interpretation of the classification driver.
Imagine you are asked to provide guidance to someone viewing a piece of content and assigning a rating for the selected Board. What is some key guidance and/or flags that you would have them look for when viewing the content and thinking about this specific classification driver? Where do you think this classification element may be “unclear” or more difficult to discern in its application to the rating for the content? Feel free to provide content title examples and specific descriptions of visual or verbal elements if you believe it aids your guidance.
