About Advertising Industry

BNET Advertising provides daily industry trends and news coverage with insights for managers and executives about the major agencies in advertising, marketing, and public relations. In addition to detailed company and agency profiles, we bring you detailed industry analysis on new partnerships and acquisitions, ad buying and cost, new investments, inventory issues, and other issues critical to the marketing sector.

CARU Snookered by MPAA on Advertising Violent or Sexy Movies to Kids

By Jim Edwards | Jun 17, 2009

The relationship between The Children’s Advertising Review Unit and the Motion Picture Association of America is non-functional, raising questions about what, exactly, each self-policing body is hoping to achieve with the other.

CARU has sent out a stream of press releases indicating it believes that sexy, violent movies are being wrongly advertised to kids — and the MPAA, per its agreement with CARU, has done nothing about it. BNET first noted the issue back in December. (Pictured: Anne Hathaway in Get Smart, which was advertised on kids’ TV and which CARU cited MPAA rated for “rude humor, action, violence and language.”)

Often, CARU discovers that the movie studio intentionally placed the ad on kids’ TV. That happened recently with an ad for Star Trek. The film is rated PG-13 for “sci-fi action and violence, and brief sexual content,” but was advertised during children’s programming hours. CARU’s rules state that advertisers “should take care to assure that only age appropriate videos, films and interactive software are advertised to children.”

But the studio, Paramount, told CARU that it had placed the ad deliberately. So CARU referred the ad to MPAA for sanctions. CARU and MPAA have an agreement — as the movie business has its own set of voluntary standards and disciplines, CARU will defer to MPAA on advertising matters.

MPAA tells BNET that it has never found a movie studio in violation of its advertising rules, even though CARU has referred dozens of movies to MPAA over the years for alleged violations just like Paramount’s. Greg Goeckner, MPAA’s evp/general counsel:

We haven’t had anybody deliberately violate the rules.

UPDATE: The MPAA and CARU both disagree with BNET’s interpretation of what is going on here — check out their full statements in the comments section below.

It turns out that MPAA’s idea of what’s appropriate for kids is different from CARU’s. MPAA notes that PG-13 is a cautionary rating, not a restrictive one. It suggests 13-year-olds shouldn’t see the movie, but 12-year-olds can still buy their own tickets if they want to. So PG-13 movies can be advertised to under-13s.

As MPAA applies ratings to movie ads as well as the movies themselves, all movie ads are virtually guaranteed to be within MPAA’s rules unless a studio truly screws up. MPAA can refuse to rate a movie — thus killing it at the box office — if studios don’t cooperate.

So why does CARU bother admonishing movie studios for advertising on kids’ TV? Director Wayne J. Keeley, admitted that it defers to MPAA on advertising issues, but added:

CARU has established a public record of PG-13 advertising to kids, offering parents another resource as they consider which films are appropriate for their families.

MPAA’s Goeckner said:

It’s a relationship I think has worked well.

Indeed!

The problem seems to be that MPAA is receiving an advantage from a loophole in CARU’s own rules. CARU acts as the ad industry’s voluntary police force, but agrees to defer to any industry that has its own self-regulatory procedure for advertising. MPAA has one, and it has a whole different set of standards than CARU’s. Thus MPAA members are essentially immune from CARU, under CARU’s own rules.

Worst-case scenario: Less reputable industries notice this hole and take advantage of it, leaving CARU regulating almost nobody.

Jim Edwards, a former managing editor of Adweek, has covered drug marketing at Brandweek for four years, and is a former Knight-Bagehot fellow at Columbia University's business and journalism schools. Follow him on Twitter or send him an email.

BNET User Analysis

Web Buzz:
  • MPAA Under Fire as FTC Asked to Examine Violent Movie Ads Targeting Kids

    BNET Advertising - 230 days 10 hours 5 minutes ago

    The Campaign for a Commercial Free Childhood on Wednesday sent a letter to the FTC demanding that the government stop films rated PG-13 being advertised to children, the NY Times reported. The move explains why the Motion Picture Association of America was so unhappy with a BNET post on June 17 that claimed the movie industry’s self-regulation...

  • US officials step up pressure on Craigslist

    Financial Times - 275 days 10 hours 46 minutes ago

    Law enforcement officials in the US are again putting pressure on Craigslist, hoping to capitalise on increased media scrutiny of the classified-advertising website and press it into more stringent self-policing. But their efforts seem unlikely to work. An Illinois sheriff sued Craigslist in March, seeking compensation for funds his county spent...

  • Google's Gmail Had Lousy Kids' Privacy Protection, Says Watchdog

    BNET Advertising - 182 days 12 hours 7 minutes ago

    Google’s Gmail doesn’t protect children’s privacy enough, according to the Childrens Advertising Review Unit of the Council of Better Business Bureaus. Google agreed to change the way kids register for the site in response, CARU said. The problem is that kids under 13 years old are tipped off to the fact that Google does not want...

  • More Input On Outputs

    Multichannel News - 91 days 7 hours 58 minutes ago

    Forces massed against the Motion Picture Association of America's request for a waiver of the commission's prohibition on selectable output controls on set-top boxes continue to press their case in Washington. The studios want to selectively block the copying of HD movies via cable set-top boxes in order to move up the multichannel video on...

  • Glickman Defends Movie Industry's IP Meeting With Biden

    Multichannel News - 53 days 13 hours 35 minutes ago

    Motion Picture Association of America chairman Dan Glickman called this week's meeting of copyright industry representatives with Vice President Joe Biden, as well as the attorney general, head of the FBI and the secretary of Homeland Security, "very productive," and said the folks who criticized it were "dead wrong." He also defended the...

Links from the Web Buzz:
 
Reply to Story

BNET TalkbackShare your ideas and expertise on this topic

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

  •  
    1

    lbean@...

    06/18/09 | Report as spam

    RE: CARU Snookered by MPAA on Advertising Violent or Sexy Movies to Kids

    We appreciate your interest in and concern over advertising directed to children, but would like to clarify a couple of points that your article either downplays or ignores.

    In assessing whether a product or advertising is inappropriate for children, one source of information for CARU is the applicable industry ratings system. In most cases, that is a fairly straightforward review of the ratings and the audience.

    In the case of motion pictures, as your article states, the industry rating body takes the position that the PG-13 rating is not a statement that the product is inappropriate for children under 12. Indeed, there are a broad range of films in this category, from films like ?Harry Potter? that many parents would consider appropriate for younger children, to films containing content that most parents would consider inappropriate for children.

    CARU, by necessity, must look to the industry body for guidance. It is in that spirit that CARU forged its relatively recent working agreement with the MPAA, which rates both films and advertising for films. CARU has referred advertising for 15 films or DVDs to the MPAA in the past 18 months.

    When CARU sees advertising for films rated PG-13 in media directed to children under 12, CARU notifies the MPAA, without making a determination as to whether that film is or is not inappropriate for children.

    While BNET may question the judgments made by the MPAA about films that are appropriate, CARU?s continued monitoring and referrals serve to alert the MPAA to advertising that may be problematic, creates a public record of which films are being advertised to children and provides parents with an additional resource to judge the appropriateness of films for their children.

    Thank you,

    Wayne J. Keeley, Director
    Children?s Advertising Review Unit

  •  
    2

    slinn

    06/18/09 | Report as spam

    RE: CARU Snookered by MPAA on Advertising Violent or Sexy Movies to Kids

    Mr. Edwards is accurate in his conclusion that the MPAA?s refusal to issue sanctions against companies that market PG13 movies during children?s programming is emblematic of limits to the effectiveness of self-regulation, as is the fact that the MPAA does not see the PG13 rating as restrictive. But he misses the point of CARU?s press releases which publicly document the MPAA?s consistent and cynical refusal to adequately police the film industry?s irresponsible targeting of young children with ads for violent, sexualized, movies that the industry itself says may contain material not suitable for kids. Within the limited framework of self-regulation, the fact that CARU is noting its concerns publicly performs a valuable service for children, parents and advocacy groups by building a body of evidence demonstrating the MPAA?s blatant disregard for the wellbeing of children.

    Even more troubling than the fact that the MPAA is ignoring CARU is that fact that it is also ignoring the Federal Trade Commission. In January, 2008, in response to a complaint filed by my organization, the Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood, the staff of the FTC urged the MPAA to devise a policy for marketing PG13 films that is consistent with the rating. As families face yet another summer of violent PG13 blockbusters being marketed directly to young children, and given MPAA?s refusal to act responsibly, it is our hope that the FTC will take action.

    Susan Linn, Ed.D.
    Director, Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood


    CCFC's complaint can be found at: http://www.commercialfreechildhood.org/pressreleases/transformers.htm
    The FTC's recommendation can be found at: http://commercialfreechildhood.org/ftcrecommendation.pdf

  •  
    3

    MPAA

    06/23/09 | Report as spam

    RE: CARU Snookered by MPAA on Advertising Violent or Sexy Movies to Kids

    I was disappointed to read in Jim Edwards' story that he believes that the MPAA does nothing about CARU's referrals to the MPAA of motion picture advertising placed during children's programming, particularly since I had spoken to him and had provided him with a thorough description of the process we undertake when we receive CARU's referrals.

    The MPAA takes very seriously its role in ensuring that motion picture advertising is placed properly, particularly during times when children may be watching. The MPAA made very clear to Mr. Edwards that each and every referral by CARU is investigated. In nearly every case, we have found that the advertising was placed at times and during programs approved by the MPAA Advertising Administration. I believe that is a testament to the fact that movie distributors respect the MPAA's advertising approval process and that the process works.

    The MPAA both rates motion pictures and reviews and approves for appropriate placement all advertising in the U.S. for rated motion pictures. The MPAA's Advertising Administration considers several factors when approving television advertising for rated motion pictures, including the content of the advertisement, the time of day, the channel and program on which the ad will air, the anticipated audience watching at that time, and the content and rating of the motion picture. The PG-13 rating, as with all of the MPAA's CARA ratings, is intended to provide parents with information regarding the content of the film so that they can determine what is appropriate for viewing by their children. And, unlike the R or NC-17 ratings, which specifically limit who may be admitted to watch pictures with those ratings, the PG-13 rating is not a restrictive rating. PG-13 is a stronger caution to parents than G or PG ratings, indicating that they should consider the content of the motion picture seriously before allowing their children to attend.

    However, parents understand that children mature at different ages and may be more sensitive to one type of material than another. Thus, the PG-13 rating entrusts the decision of what content is appropriate to the parent. The PG-13 rating does not indicate that all PG-13 films are inappropriate for children under 13 and efforts by groups such as CCFC to distort its meaning are not consistent with the intent of the rating.

    The goal of the advertising approval process is to ensure that ads placed during children's programming are appropriately placed. The MPAA Advertising Administration reviews tens of thousands of ads each year. Many (including many ads for PG-13 movies) are not approved for children's television programming at all. Those that are approved for children's programming we believe are appropriate because of the content of the motion picture and of the ad itself.

    We appreciate the role CARU plays in this process. We work hard to evaluate and respond to their referrals. CARU's monitoring of children's programming allows us to verify that motion picture advertising placed during those programs complies with the specific approvals we have given for each ad.

    Greg Goeckner
    Executive Vice President, General Counsel
    Motion Picture Association of America, Inc.

Please add your comment:

  1. You are currently: a Guest |
  2.  

Basic HTML tags that work in comments are: bold (<b></b>), italic (<i></i>), underline (<u></u>), and hyperlink (<a href></a)

advertisement
advertisement
Click Here