Interesting People mailing list archives
IP: Cybertimes on International Ratings
From: David Farber <farber () cis upenn edu>
Date: Sat, 25 Sep 1999 12:39:29 -0400
Date: Sat, 25 Sep 1999 11:31:39 -0400 To: David Farber <farber () cis upenn edu> From: Barry Steinhardt <Barrys () aclu org> Dave, The International movement to rate the net grows. Attached is a piece from Cyber Times. Barry http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/99/09/cyber/articles/25ratings.html September 25, 1999 Internet Rating System Plans to Globalize By PAMELA MENDELS In response to the increasing globalization of the Internet, a content rating and filtering system that was originally developed primarily for the United States will be expanded to encompass a more global audience. Sometime next year, the Internet Content Rating Association is scheduled to launch a re-vamped version of a major ratings and filtering system called RSACi in the hope that it can appeal to parents and Web publishers worldwide. "RSACi was an American response to an American concern," said Stephen C. Balkam, executive director of the Internet Content Rating Association, a four-month old organization that has offices in the United States and Britain. "We need to internationalize the system and governing structure." RSACi was launched in 1996 largely in response to federal government attempts in the United States to regulate indecent content online. The system was an offshoot of an earlier effort to rate the content of computer games by a group called the Recreational Software Advisory Council. (RSACi is an acronym for Recreational Software Advisory Council on the Internet.) Currently, the RSACi system calls on Web publishers to rate their content on a scale of 0 to 4 in four categories: sex, nudity, violence and language. Parents then decide what level of content they will permit their children to see and can set their Web browsers to block rated material they deem objectionable. They have the option to decide whether to admit or block content that has not been rated. To date, about 120,000 Web sites have rated themselves using RSACi, Balkam said. That is a small number compared to the millions of sites that are online. But Balkam says those who have rated include many of most heavily trafficked Web sites, as well as numerous pornographic sites that wish to keep children out and children's sites that wish to invite children in. The idea behind a re-vamped RSACi is to develop a rating system that considers the sensibilities of parents around the world, not just American parents, as the Internet begins to attract a bigger global audience. For example, Balkam said that Europeans as a whole have less concern about online nudity and more concern about violence than their American counterparts. In addition, he said, Europeans harbor a stronger consumer resistance to the idea of personal information being bought or sold, and so might want ratings to reflect Web sites' privacy protections for children. The possibility of an international rating system has been in the spotlight lately, because of an ambitious but controversial proposal released at a conference in Munich earlier this month. The document, drawn up by the Bertelsmann Foundation, a German policy research group, recommends a number of ways in which the Internet industry could police itself to help parents prevent their children from accessing potentially harmful material online. Among them is the creation of a new international system whereby Web publishers would rate their own content and parents could then choose either to block or allow access to material based on how the ratings mesh with their values. Supporters of the proposal say it could stave off the possibility of Internet censorship from governments around the world that are growing increasingly concerned about children's easy access to harmful material online. But the plan has drawn fire from free-speech advocates who say a global ratings system could invite action by governments that might be tempted to require publishers to rate themselves or punish those who misrated their content. Free-speech advocates remain deeply troubled by the prospect of any global rating system. Balkam says the Internet Content Rating Association plans to look closely at the Bertelsmann proposal as well as a number of other ideas before it overhauls the current rating system and introduces a new one, probably next summer. Although RSACi is perhaps the best known Internet rating system, it is not the only attempt to rate online content. Another effort called SafeSurf, which was founded in 1995 and is based in California, has rated about 175,000 sites through a combination of self-ratings and ratings by "third party" observers, according to Wendy G. Simpson, the group's former president. Efforts to reach the current president were unsuccessful. A major difference between the two groups is that SafeSurf is a for-profit business that makes money from advertising and other sources. The Internet Content Rating Association is nonprofit. Last May, the Recreational Software Advisory Council, also a nonprofit, transferred its assets, including the RSACi system, to the new Internet Content Rating Association, which is incorporated in Britain and maintains offices there and in the United States. The Council has financial backing from some major North American and European companies and associations, including the Microsoft Corp., Bell Canada, British Telecommunications PLC and the Bertelsmann Foundation, Balkam said. In coming months, Balkam said, the Internet Content Rating Association plans to establish an advisory council made up of about a dozen scholars, child development experts and others from around the world to look at various rating system ideas, including comments being solicited now on the association's Web site. Among the ideas the group plans to examine are proposals expected from INCORE, a European group that has received money from the European Union to study the concerns Europeans have about Internet content. No matter how the new system is fashioned, free-speech advocates remain deeply troubled by the prospect of any global rating system, said Barry S. Steinhardt, associate director of the American Civil Liberties Union. He said one big fear is that because relatively few sites have so far voluntarily rated themselves under existing systems, governments with a global system at their disposal will require publishers to rate or take other intrusive steps. "Without that element of coercion, RSACi, either in a domestic or international version, will fail," Steinhardt said. Balkam responds that so far no governments have mandated that content providers use online rating systems. "It is possible, sure," he said. "But because something is possible does that mean we should dismantle the system and abandon the tool?" Balkam also said he believed a new system could attract more interest from both parents and publishers with some fine-tuning -- beyond figuring out what parents outside the United States would like to see filtered. He hopes, for example, to translate the system into languages other than English, most likely French, German, Spanish, Japanese and Mandarin to start. He would also push to have the rating system appear more prominently in Web browsers, to make it easier for parents to find. Balkam also hopes to get the rating system integrated into Web authoring tools, so publishers can rate themselves more easily and to launch an intense public relations campaign to promote the system. "We feel if more and more parents use the system, the market will obviously respond by making sure sites are rated," he said.
Current thread:
- IP: Cybertimes on International Ratings David Farber (Sep 25)