As professionals involved in the Media and Entertainment (M&E) industry, we’re sure you are aware there are separate ratings for US film and TV content. What you may not be aware of are the differences between the two. This post will highlight these differences and describe how they impact the audience as content is distributed across various platforms.
The Basics
Ratings exist to inform parents and audiences about the appropriateness of content for their children and families. The problem ratings attempt to solve is that exposure to violent, sexual, adult, or suggestive language content can be harmful or offensive to specific audiences. Ratings provide a warning that those events are part of the production. Age is the primary determinant in assigning a rating, but presumed maturity within a rating category (e.g., PG vs. PG-13) may also be a factor. In other countries, criticism of the government, unflattering depictions of cultural norms, or negatively describing religion are grounds for content to be assigned higher age ratings or even banned. Those factors are not typically an issue with US age ratings for film or TV.
The first thing to understand is the fundamental difference in the purpose, type, and reach between the two platforms. Movie ratings were established for the content shown in movie theaters. TV ratings were created for content displayed on TV screens. The similarity is content; the difference is paid admission versus 24/7 access in our living rooms. The former is controlled access by requiring payment for a ticket, and the latter may not be controlled at all. Parents can be in the audience with a child in a theater but might be away while the show is on the living room TV. As a result, content notification requirements are more granular and specific for TV ratings than for film.
For example, there is no need for a comparable TV-Y or TV-Y7 rating in theaters because a G-rated film easily encompasses and addresses the guidance those ratings provide. Likewise, there is no market for NC-17 content on linear TV or streaming platforms, so TV has no comparable rating.
The next thing to understand is two different groups developed the US ratings systems. The Motion Picture Association (
MPA
), an industry trade group, developed US film ratings in 1968. Occasional updates have reflected changes in types of content, such as the introduction of the PG-13 rating following the release of an Indiana Jones film. We have previously written about this in more detail
here
.
Television ratings were developed and maintained by the TV Parental Guidelines Monitoring Board, also an industry trade group, in 1996. Its members include the MPA, the National Association of Broadcasters (
NAB
), the Internet and Television Association (
NCTA
), and five public interest groups. Their interests are related, but their ratings differ at the top and bottom of the age scale. TV ratings were created as a voluntary system following concerns expressed by the US Congress and complaints made to the US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) about objectionable TV content being aired without notice to parents. TV programs are self-rated by the networks or platforms in the US system.
The Ratings Matrix
Below is a comparison matrix that presents the difference between movie and TV ratings systems.
US TV ratings also contain "content descriptors” that specify specific types of potentially objectionable content. The elements within those descriptors are:
D – Suggestive dialogue (rarely used with TV-MA-rated programs)
L – Coarse language
S – Sexual content
V – Violence
FV – Fantasy violence (exclusive to TV-Y7-rated programs)
These elements are shown below the rating and displayed for 15 seconds at the program’s beginning and following any breaks.
Upon review, it’s clear that TV ratings closely resemble those used for movies; this is on purpose. The reason is to provide continuity and consistency for parents and regulators across all content distribution platforms, including theatrical, linear, retail, and online services. As a system, both have worked quite well and have served as a model for other countries worldwide who wish to provide consumers with helpful information about content and titles they may consider sharing with their children, families, and friends.
Spherex: Localized Age Ratings Services Provider
As the global industry authority and leading private provider of local age ratings worldwide,
Spherex
uniquely understands the importance of getting age ratings right, regardless of the platform.
Spherexratings™
and
Spherexgreenlight™
provide content creators with the necessary knowledge to tailor titles to fit any age rating and identify their best markets. Greenlight™ is a first-of-its-kind AI/ML technology that culturally adapts content for markets worldwide. With this technology, content creators can increase engagement, drive more revenue faster, and avoid legal and regulatory risks.
Take the guesswork and risk out of international expansion.
Contact us today!
Spherex announced the introduction of a newsfeed that aggregates stories from across the globe related to the globalization of TV and film content. Called World M+E News, the company is providing the newsfeed as a service to the entertainment industry as culture becomes more critical and TV and film content goes global.
ndia is the fourth largest film market on the planet. Besides Hollywood releases, the country’s Bollywood industry churns out film and TV shows at a prodigious rate, adding $2.4B annually to the Indian GDP. As readers of this blog are aware, India is one of 53 countries that have governmental film review or censorship boards. India’s regulator is known as the Central Board of Film Certification ( CBFC ). The CBFC reviews content intended for release for compliance and cultural appropriateness. If they find something they don’t like, they can mandate cuts, edits, change classification ratings and, in extreme instances, ban titles altogether. Up until April 4, 2021, content creators who did not agree with the CBFC rating or decisions could appeal to the Film Certification Appellate Tribunal (FCAT) for redress.
In two previous posts, “ Worldwide Content Classification – What Happens When You Get It Wrong ,” and “ Worldwide Content Classification – How Hard Can It Be? ” we’ve laid out the challenge facing content creators and distributors who want to market their content globally. In this post, we will discuss how to avoid making mistakes that can be costly either economically, legally or reputationally, and get your content released in international markets faster than ever before.
By 2025, eighteen years after Netflix became the first company to stream content into people’s homes, the expected global value of the Over-The-Top (OTT) market is expected to exceed $167B and reach two billion subscribers. These subscribers have access to hundreds of OTT and various flavors of Video-on-Demand (VOD) providers, serving dozens of countries and territories. While most enterprises focus on the sales value, they overlook what these two billion consumers are looking for – content.
Leading a team of data scientists, AI engineers and product developers, Phillips and her team are making sense of the crowded content landscape worldwide so media and entertainment companies don’t get lost in translation. Collaborating with major studios, networks, streamers and content creators, they are transforming how media and entertainment enterprises create, adapt, and deliver film and television to audiences worldwide through AI and machine learning. By matching TV and film content with their local audiences worldwide, Spherex’s expertise and technology offers media and entertainment companies the ability to adapt all of their content for every market and culture around the world.