Machine-readable and interoperable age classification labels in Europe Grant agreement no: 621059 MIRACLE Impact Assessment Report Results from the online survey 2016 July 15 th 2016 Deliverable D6.1 Deliverable Type: Report Nature of the Deliverable: PU Editor: HBI Contributors: BBFC, NICAM, PEGI, FSM, NBCI, JusProg, OPTENET 1
Contents A. Background and objective of MIRACLE... 3 B. Key data of the MIRACLE online survey... 5 C. Results of the MIRACLE online survey... 5 1. Background of the participants... 5 2. General awareness of the MIRACLE project... 6 3. Source of information / knowledge... 6 4. Direct contact with the project... 7 5. Awareness of MIRACLE s technical specification... 8 6. Deeper understanding of the MIRACLE specification... 9 7. MIRACLE API awareness and usage... 10 8. Assessment of general usefulness of interoperable data... 12 9. Considerations to implement the MIRACLE specification or interoperable age labels in general... 13 D. Summary... 15 Annex: Questionnaire... 16 2
A. Background and objective of MIRACLE Information about media content is deemed an important aspect for ensuring rational consumer decisions in the digital market. In the field of suitable and unsuitable content for children, many EU Member States rely on age classification procedures and visual age labels. By informing children and parents about relevant media content such age labels empower them to exercise informed choices regarding media usage, literacy and education. Diag. 1: Status quo - National, media- and scheme-related age classification silos However, age ratings and classification schemes are highly fragmented among the Member States and in many cases rely on visual labels only. In digital contexts, though, electronic age labels open the chance for exchanging and processing classification information in digital realms. Given that one common data model is being used across borders and platforms, such an approach could fully utilise the knowledge comprised in these labels for the benefit of both end users and businesses along the supply chain and across borders, regions and devices. The MIRACLE project ( Machine-readable and interoperable age classification labels in Europe ) aims at providing one data model for electronic age classification information, implementing it in different classification schemes and showing the added value of interoperable classification data for businesses, educational institutions and end users. The eight project partners spread across five different member states and classification schemes, consisting of classification bodies, Safer Internet nodes, self-regulatory bodies and filter software providers. The 30-month technical pilot started in Spring 2014 and is co-funded by the ICT Policy Support Programme within the CIP ( Competitiveness and Innovation Framework Programme ) of the European Union. 3
Diag. 2: Advantages of interoperable age classification data After an initial draft and a public consultation phase, the project members published Version 1.0 of the MIRACLE specification in autumn 2014. With Version 1.0 the data model took into account current classification schemes and practices while considering existing electronic labelling schemes in order to be easily adapted. Its unrestrictive and open approach leaves enough flexibility for existing and future schemes to map their classification data to MIRACLE. More so, it even enables them to extend the specification to deliver more metadata, if desired. With the actual age label still at its core, the data model also provide fields for content descriptors and in the field of interactive media content feature descriptors, e.g. location-based services. By February 2015, four consortium partners had implemented the specification in their very own classification scheme context, offering API endpoints that provide MIRACLE datasets. For the first time, interoperable age labels are available across borders: UKbased BBFC, Netherlands-based NICAM as well as the Pan-European Game Information System PEGI have mapped their existing classification data on the MIRACLE data model and offer MIRACLE-compatible access to (parts of) their classification databases. The German FSM provides an online mapping service that translates existing age-de.xml labels into MIRACLE data sets on the fly. Moreover, NCBI as the safer Internet node in the Czech Republic started to pilot a MIRACLE-based database with an API endpoint from summer 2015. During the implementation phase, valuable experiences and insights have been made by the consortium regarding the overall strategy of implementing an interoperable data model, relevant context factors for opening up classification data to cross-border provision as well as regarding technical aspects of mapping a new specification to existing databases and schemes. Both the decision-making regarding the implementation strategies and the actual implementation steps have been documented by each of the five consortium partners. These reports can be of great value for third 4
parties when it comes to implementing MIRACLE as well. Based on the experiences made during the implementation as well as on remarks from industry stakeholders regarding additional requirements in electronic age labels the consortium has published an optimized version 2.0 of the MIRACLE specification in September 2015. Aiming at becoming a de facto standard for electronic age classification information, MIRACLE put specific efforts in disseminating the pilot project s objectives, the MIRACLE specification as well as general information about the added value of interoperable data in the field of digital child safety. Being a pilot project that is open to and interested in third-party uptake, all relevant stakeholders are invited to provide or use MIRACLE-compatible data. The project members are in constant talks with classification bodies, content producers, distributors, platforms and online services on potential surpluses of using MIRACLE data. This Impact Assessment Report documents the results from the online survey, where all stakeholders relevant for the MIRACLE project have been invited to participate in a survey to assess the impact the project had. B. Key data of the MIRACLE online survey Invitations to participate in the survey have been sent out by all consortium partners; more than 3.500 stakeholders among the different partners networks have been contacted, usually by sending out newsletters. Stakeholders identified as the most relevant parties have been contacted directly in addition during May and June 2016. The online survey had been set up using the Questback survey software. Interested parties could participate in the survey if they received the link; no additional passwords or tokens had been necessary to make participation as simple as possible. The online survey ran from 9 May 2016 to 20 June 2016. The number of fully completed survey participations is 205. There were additional 23 survey started but discontinued surveys that have not been considered in this report. C. Results of the MIRACLE online survey 1. Background of the participants The 205 participants came from a wide range of relevant stakeholders: 50% (102) of the participants marked that they have an industry background, e.g. they have a position at a publisher, content provider, platform provider, telco/mobile operator, service provider, device manufacturer, etc. 19% (39) of the survey have been filled out by policy bodies or regulators, 16% (32) by civil society NGOs and 10% (20) by classification bodies or self-regulatory institutions. The rest of 5% (11) have other backgrounds and marked that they come from a media association background (6) or are individuals with no current affiliation (5). 5
2. General awareness of the MIRACLE project Of the 205 survey participants, 202 (99%)stated that they are aware of the MIRACLE project. Only 2 people stated that they don t know the pilot project (1%). The high level of awareness among the participants is a natural outcome of such kind of survey: People that know the survey s focus are generally much more likely to participate in an online survey, while people that never heard of MIRACLE had almost no incentive to take part in the survey. 3. Source of information / knowledge When asked how the participants heard about the MIRACLE project 101 out of 202 marked that they got to know MIRACLE by attending an event where a talk or presentation about MIRACLE had been given. This is a strong confirmation of the project partners activities when it comes to dissemination of the project at the most relevant events and forums. 6
24% stated that they have been contacted directly by mail, which is also pointing at the significant measures that all partners put in electronic communication when it comes to inform stakeholders about the project. Moreover, 18% became aware of the project by visiting the website directly, while 7% have heard about MIRACLE from colleagues or gossip. The rest of 1% stated that they have learned about MIRACLE in individual meeting with FSM representatives. 4. Direct contact with the project 195 of 202 participants stated that they have discussed the project with members of the project consortium or that they have visited the project's website. While 60% have discussed the project directly with one or more of the MIRACLE partners, 37% have got more information about the pilot on the MIRACLE website. Only 3% are aware of the project and have had no further contact with the project. 7
5. Awareness of MIRACLE s technical specification We wanted to know in detail how far the knowledge regarding the MIRACLE and its objectives reaches among the participating stakeholders and explicitly asked whether the participants are aware of the most important objective of the project, being the common data model for electronic classification information in form of a technical specification. 84% of the 201 participants that are aware of the MIRACLE project stated that they know the MIRACLE specification; the other 16% had no knowledge on this technical approach. 8
6. Deeper understanding of the MIRACLE specification To look even more thoroughly at the depth of knowledge among the participants we asked who of the polled had a look at the technical specification in order to understand how MIRACLE aims at achieving technical interoperability. On this level of engagement with the project 41% stated that they have dealt with the technical specification, while more than half of the participants said that haven t looked as deep into the MIRACLE project. This is an interesting finding, since this marks a significant breaking point in stakeholder engagement that we could find on many different levels in our dissemination activities. Overall project objectives of MIRACLE and the general approach to reach the project s aims could be communicated in a reasonable manner, but the step from theory to practice including diving into software code resulted in a significant loss of engagement. 9
Splitting the answers into the different backgrounds of the polled people shows that the engagement with the technical specification has been highest among the NGOs (58%), followed by the industry representatives (42%), and has been lower on side of the policy bodies and regulators (34%) as well as the classification bodies (29%). 7. MIRACLE API awareness and usage Five MIRACLE partners have implemented the MIRACLE specification into their IT environments and offer MIRACLE-based services in form of API endpoints: BBFC, NICAM, PEGI, FSM, NCBI and JusProg. When asked whether they are aware of these services, 70% of the polled stated that they are not aware of the APIs. Most of the participants that knew about the APIs also stated that they had a look at the specification (78%). 10
The 30% of the participants who stated that they are aware of the MIRACLE APIs (n=61) have then been asked whether they made use of at least one of the services. 62% (38) of the polled stated that they actually did. The API endpoint that has mostly been named as one of the APIs used is the BBFC s, followed by PEGI, NICAM and JusProg. 11
8. Assessment of general usefulness of interoperable data Regardless of whether a survey participant stated the she or he is aware of the MIRACLE project, we asked the polled about their general assessment of interoperable electronic age labels to get to know more about their general acceptance of such an approach. The result is overwhelmingly positive: 198 (97%) of the 205 participants think that interoperable age labels are useful in general. The 205 participants then have been asked who they think will benefit from interoperable age labels. Almost three third (74%) marked publishers and content providers as stakeholder who profit from this, while still 65% think that interoperable age label will (also) be useful to software and web developers. Still more than half (55%) of the polled reply that policy makers or regulators as well as end users benefit from such an approach. Usefulness for device manufacturers is still being seen by 40%. Where 20% named additional groups that could use such age labels they referred to either all groups, platform operators, host providers and parents specifically. 12
9. Considerations to implement the MIRACLE specification or interoperable age labels in general Finally, the participants have been asked whether they are considering to implement or use interoperable age labels in the future in general, and whether they specifically plan to implement or use MIRACLE datasets and labels in their own infrastructure. 84% of the 205 participants claim that they consider implementing or using interoperable age labels in the future (45% absolutely, 39% probably). 8% are still undecided, while another 8% state that they don t consider this at all. 13
When asked for issues or aspects that hinder the participant or her/his institution to implement or use interoperable age labels these 8% state that they wait for a recognized standard or for a legal obligation to implement a standard, that they are not a content provider, that they don t have kids or that they still need to be persuaded of a surplus value. Finally the participants have been asked whether they are considering using the MIRACLE specification: Here, 39% replied that they do so. Since people from several stakeholder groups participated where a MIRACLE implementation is varyingly relevant, the following chart is split by stakeholder category. Here it becomes clear that among the survey participants with an industry background 54% consider implementing MIRACLE, followed by 35% of the participating classification bodies. The share of interested stakeholders from NGOs and policy bodies is of course significantly lower, since they might not have a direct opportunity to implement MIRACLE-based services in their environments. The ones stating that they do not consider implementing or using MIRACLE have been asked for any hurdles or reasons that are keeping them from doing so. The reasons the persons (n=125) stated where that they do not have enough technical experiences to decide this, have a weak technological knowledge and background, do not provide any relevant infrastructure (e.g. a regulator), plan to have an internal decision making process or discussion internally, or do not deem it necessary. One respondent referred to the low level of MIRACLE use in practice ( How many of the top 10,000 websites support this label? ), while another stated that his or her institution has their own electronic age classification system. 14
D. Summary The results of the survey show that the MIRACLE project achieved a high impact in all relevant stakeholder communities, especially regarding the general awareness and knowledge of the project s approach. This has mainly been achieved through the many instances of MIRACLE presentations or talks as well as individual contacts between stakeholders and the project partners. Besides this the website seems another relevant source for information about the project and its objectives. The participating stakeholder representatives show a very positive attitude towards interoperable age labels in general and see their surplus value for almost all stakeholders along the value chain. A significant amount of stakeholders currently consider implementing interoperable age labels in general, and a high percentage of the industry stakeholders (54%) that participated in the survey consider implementing the MIRACLE specification specifically in the future. However, it also became clear that the more technical the project (and its respective dissemination activities) gets the lower the awareness. Once they have to enter the realm of software code, many stakeholders state that they don t have the technological background to understand or evaluate the MIRACLE approach and the feasibility of its implementation in third party environments. Those who are able to follow into technical details and who are aware of the partners APIs, though, show considerable amounts of MIRACLE API usage. 15
Annex: Questionnaire 16
Druckversion 21.06.16, 09:56 Fragebogen 1 Home MIRACLE Online Survey Over the last two years, the MIRACLE project has developed a technical specification for interoperable age classifications and implemented the standard in different age rating contexts. With this survey we want to know a little bit more about our stakeholders, their knowledge regarding the MIRACLE project, their use of its specification and services and, finally, your assessments when it comes to interoperable age labels. The survey will only take 3 to 5 minutes. Please take a brief moment of your precious time to give us a better insight into your world and how it's connected to the MIRACLE objectives. Thank you! Disclaimer: All submitted data will be treated anonymously. You won't be asked for any individual information like your name, company, age etc. Your IP address will not be logged. 2 Start Please tell us about your background / position. Due to the variety of stakeholders affected by the MIRACLE project we would like to know a little bit about your background. I'm working for the industry (e.g publisher, content provider, platform provider, telco/mobile operator, service provider, device manufacturer, etc.) a classification body (age rating bodies, classification bodies, co- or self-regulatory bodies) a policy body or regulator a civil society NGO (child safety institutions or initiatives, family organisations, media literacy institutions) something else 3 MIRACLE project recognition During the last two years, have you heard about the MIRACLE project that aims at making electronic age classifications machine-readable and interoperable? No Yes 4.1 MIRACLE project recognition 2 How did information about the MIRACLE project reach you? Email Weblink Websearch Brochure Talk or presentation Mention of a colleague / gossip Other Have you discussed the project with any of the project consortium members or have you visited the project's website at http://www.miracle-label.eu? Direct contact with people from the MIRACLE project http://unipark.de/www/print_survey.php?syid=736852& menu_node=print2 Seite 1 von 3
Druckversion 21.06.16, 09:56 E-mail contact with the MIRACLE consortium Website visit No 4.2 MIRACLE specification awareness Are you aware of the MIRACLE specification, providing a common data model for all existing age classifications? Yes No 4.2.1.1 MIRACLE specification awareness 2 Have you had a look at the specification to understand how it enables machine-readability and interoperability? Yes No Have you considered making use of the specification or implementing it in your infrastructure? Yes No (please name a reason) 4.2.1.2 MIRACLE API awareness Are you aware of the MIRACLE-based APIs of several classification bodies, providing access to their classification database in a standardised format? Yes No Have you made use of at least one of the MIRACLE-based API endpoints yet? Yes, regularly Yes, sporadically No 4.2.1.2.1.1 API usage Which MIRACLE-based APIs / endpoints did you use already? BBFC's MIRACLE API NICAM's MIRACLE API PEGI's MIRACLE API & feed FSM's MIRACLE translation service NCBI's MIRACLE API JusProg's MIRACLE API OPTENET's MIRACLE feature 5 Usefulness of interoperable data Do you think machine-readable and interoperable age labels are useful in general? Yes http://unipark.de/www/print_survey.php?syid=736852& menu_node=print2 Seite 2 von 3
Druckversion 21.06.16, 09:56 No (please name a reason why you think so) In your opinion, who will benefit from interoperable age labels? Publishers and content providers Software and web developers End device manufacturers Policy makers and regulators End users and consumers Others (please name them) Are you considering to implement or use interoperable age labels in the future? Yes, absolutely Yes, probably Maybe No 6.1 Reason for non-implementation You stated that you are currently not considering to implement the MIRACLE specification in your environment. Can you name the issues or aspects that hinder you or your institution to implement or use interoperable age labels? 7 Endseite Your survey data has been saved successfully. Thank you for your time and effort! http://unipark.de/www/print_survey.php?syid=736852& menu_node=print2 Seite 3 von 3