The Cultural Algorithm

Consider this scenario: A platform has commissioned a new series seeking the broadest possible appeal for the teen demographic worldwide. As the final master English versions are completed, a producer suspects scenes involving heavy partying, drinking, and drug use may be too hedonistic for some Asian territories targeted for the upcoming release.

Does this scenario sound familiar? You have a catalog of hundreds or thousands of titles you’re about to release onto a major streaming platform. Many titles are old TV shows and films ranging from kids’ animated movies to action dramas containing violence and fighting. Others are recent releases that include well-known titles. The platform is available in multiple countries that require age ratings. You think, “I’ve got nothing to worry about” because all your films have U.S. theatrical ratings, and the TV shows have ratings for each episode. If you don’t have age ratings for all countries, you can look up the US rating and apply a comparable foreign rating. How hard can it be, right?   If only.   Here’s the problem. Most professionals working in international distribution understand that many of the world’s major film and TV markets require country-specific age ratings before airing or releasing it. They may not be aware that there are sometimes nuanced and significant differences in how age ratings are defined and applied to a movie or TV title. Getting it wrong can mean your title reaches a smaller audience, which can directly impact revenue and minutes watched.   In a previous blog post , we’ve documented the differences between movie and TV ratings. We encourage you to read it to familiarize yourself with the differences between the two. A key point of that post is that TV and theatrical audiences are different in both size and access. The ratings reflect those differences. For example, the “G” rating is applied to all US films acceptable for any age level. TV, conversely, because of the broad range of programming available, is broken into four: “TV-Y,” “TV-Y7,” “TV-Y7 FV,” and “G.” Likewise, NC-17 content is available in theaters and age-restricted online channels, but not on linear TV. As a result, there is no comparable rating to NC-17 for television.   It gets more complicated with film because there are distinctly different age categories a title must fit, but cultural and linguistic norms must be considered as they can affect a rating. The table below provides examples of film age ratings across seven countries and how they align with those used in the US. As you can see, there are few countries with straight-line comparable age ratings (shown in red) with similar content criteria to those created by the MPA. Considering the film “ Divergent ,” a US PG-13 rated title, self-rating it for other countries by simply following a row in a ratings chart would rate the film as a 15+ title in Australia and Japan, and a 16 in Germany, France, and South Africa. While a two- or three-year difference may not sound significant, it is when it blocks several million viewers from the potential audience. In Germany, the difference in the potential audience from a “12” to a “16” is approximately 2.6 million youth. In France, the audience difference is 3.3 million youth. The average French movie ticket price is $13.33, so self-rating as a “16” means a potential loss of $44 million in box office revenue. From a streaming standpoint, if parents have specific age ratings enabled in their children’s profile, that title won’t appear in their search results even though it is age-appropriate. Either way, self-assigning an uninformed age rating risks less revenue, bad press, and a smaller audience. Awareness of the problem isn’t enough to adequately address it. Distributors may not know the many factors that regulators and consumers consider when choosing a title to view. Examples include alcohol and drug use, blasphemy, discrimination, violence, sexuality, horror, and imitable acts, each of which must be identified and examined to determine their suitability for international audiences. There are also concerns about language, metaphors, slang, and cultural references. To do this properly requires knowledge of those events and the skills to know how much they will matter to regulators and viewers. Below is a screenshot from Spherex greenlight ™ AI/Ml product to demonstrate how complex this is. The graphic below displays the events within “Divergent,” including timestamp flags and a description that can affect a title’s ratings for a given country. Across the entire film, Greenlight mapped 124 identifiable event types and 56 that will change in-countries ratings (aka "exceptions"). This means there are 56 events that someone working at the distributor must know about and be willing or able to address in a post-production process that impacts the title’s rating, including making edits, blurring scenes, or deleting the scene altogether. While the desire to cut costs and self-assign ratings quickly is understandable, the risks outweigh the rewards. Analyzing the event types across a single title, it becomes clear that simply drawing a straight line across a ratings chart cannot reliably provide ratings that platforms, regulators, or audiences will accept. Whether your catalog has dozens or thousands of titles, ensuring appropriate ratings for each title is a critical step in guaranteeing your titles are findable, age-appropriate, and enjoyed by viewers worldwide.

Data and technology company Spherex has introduced what it calls “the first-ever global newsfeed that aggregates stories from around the world related to the globalization of TV and film content.”

Media companies spend a lot of time and money studying and modeling consumer behaviors. It's big business and a critical component of today's media marketplace. Entire companies, platforms with specialized engineering teams, academic researchers, entrepreneurs, and the public attempt to find the Holy Grail of search algorithms that provide the best way to recommend titles, so you don't change the channel.

From the first commercial television broadcast at W3XK in Washington DC in 1928 through the inauguration of the first basic cable TV station ( WTCG ) until the launch of streaming video-on-demand (VOD) by Netflix in 2007, how and what people watch on television hasn't changed much. Television sets were how entertainment, sports, and news entered people's homes. Large networks created shows aired by their affiliates, broadcasting in communities across the country. Station and network operations, including content creation, were funded through commercial advertising. Even the programming schedule was primarily determined by the station or network's ad sales. Most stations went off the air at midnight and returned at 5 AM the following day.

Spherex and Parrot Analytics released the findings from a first-ever report on the connection between local age ratings, cultural factors and TV show audience demand in key markets worldwide. The ‘Global TV Snapshot’ report analyses the age ratings and cultural content of five popular US-originated TV shows worldwide while considering the audience demand for each show in seven targeted markets.

Spherex and Parrot Analytics today released the findings from a first-ever report on the connection between local age ratings, cultural factors and TV show audience demand in key markets worldwide. The Global TV Snapshot: Culture, Age Ratings and Audience Demand analyzes the age ratings and cultural content of five popular U.S.-originated TV shows worldwide while considering the audience demand for each show in seven targeted markets.

During Netflix Q4 2021 earnings call , COO and Chief Product Officer Greg Peters revealed the company "subtitled 7 million run-time minutes in '21 and dubbed 5 million run-time minutes" of content to reach their 222 million subscribers worldwide. That's 116,666 hours of subtitles and 83,333 hours of dubs they produced before releasing titles anywhere across their 192-territory footprint. That's a massive undertaking.

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!