Somewhat behind original timelines, the government has today given further indication of how it will proceed with implementing the Audiovisual Media Services Directive into UK law.

Today has seen the publication of a press release, Ministerial Statement from Andy Burnham, and a document giving an overview of responses to the original consultation.

An initial glance (so forgive me if a more detailed read thows up further information) shows that whilst the main thrust of the government approach is made clear, there is still a long way to go on the detail.

Today’s documents state that the government wishes to apply the Directive only to those “mass media services whose principal purpose is to provide television programming to the public on demand.”

The scope of services that will be captured by the Directive has been one of ongoing concern and where clarity is urgently required - as stated strongly in the BSG’s response to the AVMS consultation.

As ever the devil will be in the detail. Watch this space for details of the Statutory Instruments that will carry this into UK law….

What is clear however is that the Culture Secretary has not shifted from his initial view on product placement (something that the Directive allows Member States to permit, should they wish).

The title of the press release perhaps gives it away: “preserving standards will be cornerstone of UK media services”.

This release then goes on to say that “mindful of the need to maintain public trust in television broadcasters and British television’s reputation for high standards” that the government has decided to go with the status quo and continue to prohibit product placement.

What is interesting however, is that the release also clarifies that product placement will continue to be allowed in films and overseas programmes (which we knew) but also in programmes made by and for UK Video on Demand (VoD) services.

And VoD services are described as “TV-like” in the Directive……..

Now, these are just questions rather than a statement of view at this point:, but:

- Is the government response to a policy development that is trying to regulate for a converged media world, actually then drawing distinctions between how broadcast and on-demand TV should operate and be funded?
- Will that become an irrelevance to the consumer as people become used to accessing TV-like content on the mix between their mobile phone, TV and computer and also a mix between real-time and on-demand?

Such questions aside, the line drawn in the sand here will come as a blow for ITV and others that have been pushing the case for product placement with the government.

It also prompts one to consider how this decision will impact on the development of the Digital Britain report, which gives considerable emphasis to possible measures to address the challenges for digital content.

Today’s announcement does say that the government will review its position in 2011/2 on the back of further research by Ofcom on product placement.

As other Members States take advantage of the opportunity to implement product placement however, the question is, will this timescale be too late?

Pamela Learmonth, Policy Manager, BSG

The Government’s Digital Britain report rightly devotes a chapter to how you can “equip everyone to benefit” from the digital future.

Whilst much of the commentary around the report has focused on infrastructure, broadband speeds and protection of copyright online, the important issue of how to drive take-up has been somewhat overlooked.

Such an oversight would be dangerous.

Without widespread take-up of broadband and the services which run over it, growth scenarios for the sector and the economy more widely will suffer.

Without tackling the various and often complicated reasons for people choosing not to get “online”, there is also the risk that a significant section of the population miss out on the opportunities that the digital future offers them.

Not a outcome that anyone would seek.

The Digital Britain report recognises that one of the reasons that people choose not to engage with digital technology is a lack of confidence.

The BSG agrees with this and believes that it is vital to resolve any consumer concerns and misgivings about how digital services work and their implications.

It may seem a self-evident point to make, but the provision of clear information about the nature of services can certainly go a long way to achieve this outcome.

This is the approach taken by the Good Practice Principles on Audiovisual Content Information, which were facilitated by the BSG. The Principles commit leading content players to give clear and easy to use information about commercial content that may be unsuitable to children and young people or cause more general offence, so that individuals can make informed choices about the content they want to access - whether online, on a mobile phone or through an on-demand TV service.

This week, leading social network providers across Europe committed to a set of principles to enhance the safety of children and young people using their services. These are to:

• Raise awareness of safety education messages and acceptable use policies
• Work towards ensuring that services are age-appropriate for the intended audience
• Empower users through tools and technology
• Provide easy-to-use mechanisms to report conduct or content that violates Terms of Service
• Respond to notifications of illegal content or conduct
• Enable and encourage users to employ a safe approach to personal information and privacy
• Assess the means for reviewing illegal or prohibited content/conduct

These principles embody existing practice of social network providers and further demonstrate the role that industry can play in giving the consumers the tools and confidence they need to engage with digital services in a safe and confident way.

As the final findings of Stephen Carter’s Digital Britain report are crafted, we hope it will conclude that in order to empower the digital citizen of the future, knowledge and confidence is key.

Pamela Learmonth, Policy Manager, BSG

The government’s Digital Britain Interim Report has been launched. The press release is available here, and the report itself is available here. The BSG press release responding to the launch is available here.

We have produced an initial analysis of the report in a special edition of our newsletter. We are keen to hear the views and opinions of members of the BSG community, and anyone else with an interest in the broadband value chain, on the issues raised in the report.

If you have any views you wish to share please either comment on this blog or send us an email. We will pass on all views to the government’s Digital Britain team.

It may have been the holiday season, but broadband was rarely off the news cycle in one form or another, so here’s a round-up of some of the most interesting stories from the Christmas period.

Most interestingly, David Cameron yesterday committed the Conservatives to fibre optic ‘high speed broadband’ for the majority of the population within five years, and, ‘to as near as possible, universal coverage within ten years’. A bold promise, although we are still waiting to see the detail of this policy. This followed Gordon Brown suggesting in an Observer interview that high-speed broadband could play a similar role to investment in infrastructure during previous recessions. Prior to this, also in the Observer, Professor Christopher Bishop, chief scientist at Microsoft Research Cambridge had suggested that the government could ‘do no better than rewire the nation with fibre optics’ if it was looking for an infrastructure project to stimulate the economy.

At the same time, we were given an indication of what could be included in Stephen Carter’s Digital Britain report. In an article in The Times, a universal broadband service of 2Mbps was suggested, alongside a comprehensive reform of the existing universal service obligations. Carter’s interim report is due to be published this month, with the full report later this year.

Gordon Brown wasn’t the only global leader to reference broadband over Christmas. President-elect Barack Obama spoke of his plan to provide a stimulus to the US digital economy, including improving broadband and increasing take-up. He described the US performance on broadband as ‘unacceptable’.

Staying in the States, the Recording Industry Association of America has decided to abandon its strategy of suing individual downloaders of copyright material. Instead it will adopt a more constructive approach, working with ISPs to identify those who upload copyright material in a move similar to the approach being taken in the UK.

Coming back to the UK, Culture Secretary Andy Burnham made headlines with an interview in the Telegraph in which he suggested that cinema-style age ratings could be applied to the Internet, and said he wanted to work with Obama’s administration to develop international deceny rules for English-language websites. This has caused an interesting debate to occur, with many comment boards filling up in response, and the majority not in favour.

Finally, fulfilling one of the recommendations of the Caio Review, the Valuation Office Agency set out how it will rate fibre in next generation broadband deployments. This is a timely clarification by the VOA, and although containing few surprises, helps to remove some of the uncertainty facing potential investors in NGA.

Peter Shearman, Policy Manager, BSG

On Friday last week the government announced it would be undertaking a Digital Britain Report, led by the new minister for technology, communications and broadcasting Stephen Carter. This represents an opportunity for Government to tackle a range of issues in a coordinated, strategic way. Hopwever, doing so requires that the report is not a stock-taking exercise of ongoing issues, but a proactive plan of action that provides strong government direction.

The value of this report would be in bringing together the various activities going on in the area of convergence, across different departments, in a coordinated, strategic way. In doing so, government can provide a strong direction, with the ultimate aim of ensuring that the UK’s digital infrastructure (and the surrounding policy and regulatory frameworks) is fit for a world-leading knowledge economy.

Commenting on the report, Peter Mandelson stated that ‘the digital economy will be central’ to Britain getting through the worst of the current crisis and preparing for the upturn; with this focus the report could be a valuable contribution to the health of the sector and the economic activity that it supports.

Looking at the issues identified for the report, there are already numerous initiatives either completed or underway that are tackling these. Indeed, one key issue for government is how this report interacts with these ongoing activities such as the Convergence Think Tank or the implementation of the Audio Visual Media Services Directive. A report that simply reviews these various policy debates will be of limited value.

The opportunity here is to bring together a range of ongoing issues that all relate to convergence but often sit across a number of government departments and lack an overall coordination. Addressing these at a strategic level, with government providing strong direction and leadership would be of benefit to the development of the converging industries.

It is rare that a new minister already has a command of their brief upon entering a new role, but in Stephen Carter this is exactly what has happened. With his knowledge and experience he should be able to hit the ground running, and use the Digital Britain report to drive government action, rather than simply set the scene for further reviews.

Peter Shearman, Policy Manager, BSG

“If our children were leaving the house, or going to a swimming pool or going to play in the street, we would take all the care possible about their safety - is there proper policing, is there proper safety? When a child goes on to the computer and on to the internet or on to a video game we should be thinking in the same way.”

This was the response from the Prime Minister to the review published last week by psychologist Tanya Byron, setting out recommendations to ensure that children and young people are protected from inappropriate and harmful material on the internet and in video games.

The publication of this landmark review reflects a growing policy emphasis on how web 2.0 should be effectively regulated.

Whilst no one would disagree with the importance of ensuring child protection on the web and on video games, there is a vocal concern from industry that regulation should not inhibit innovation. The new media industry is one of the UK’s most vibrant and is constantly developing new services – the principal users of which are, in many cases, children and young people.

Byron’s report is a considered and ambitious response to this important issue. Whilst many of last week’s headlines focused on her recommendation to extend the range of age classification for video games, a closer read of the 200+ page report (for those of you with the stamina) also reveals an important proposal on how regulation of web 2.0 should be driven forward.

Her solution to this quandary is the establishment of a UK Council on Child Internet Safety to develop a child internet safety strategy, that will cover both illegal and legal (though potentially harmful or inappropriate) activity.

Built on the structure of the existing Home Secretary’s Task Force on Child Protection on the Internet, the Council will be co-chaired by the Home Office and the Department for Children, Schools and Families, involve other relevant government departments and be staffed by a cross-departmental secretariat. It will report directly to the Prime Minister.

The Council will also be supported by an expert advisory group and research sub-group and involve industry through working groups to deliver specific initiatives such as codes of practice.

Byron also strongly recommends that mechanisms should be established by the Council to effectively involve parents, children and young people.

At first glance, this seems like an eminently sensible solution. It draws the relevant stakeholders together and an over-arching strategy would arguably reduce confusion about the array of policy developments individual departments are currently pursuing in this area.

However, it is an ambitious task, and Byron’s recommended deadline of Spring 2009 for both the establishment of the Council and publication of the strategy is a challenging timescale.

It remains unclear at present who will drive forward the development of the strategy, and what regulatory issues it will cover. Elsewhere in her report, Byron throws down a gauntlet to industry to develop codes of practice on areas such as user generated content, improving access to parental control software and safe search features, and better regulation of online advertising.

This builds on the vast array of work the industry has already taken to set common standards on issues that are important to their consumer. One example of which is the Good Practice Principles on Audiovisual Content, which were facilitated by the Broadband Stakeholder group (www.audiovisualcontent.org).

However, looking forward, could further regulatory proposals emerge under the strategy as a whole? Would this regulation be developed under a self or co regulatory model? And who will police and enforce these standards?

It has to be recognised that Byron has done an admiral job in pulling a wide array of issues together in her review. When it comes down to a more detailed look at how child internet safety will be regulated, however, there is still a very long road to travel.

By Pamela Learmonth, Policy Manager, BSG

The 9pm watershed has long been the bastion of parental control when viewing content: if it was on after the watershed, then it probably wasn’t suitable for younger viewers (or those with a nervous or squeamish disposition, or the easily offended).

In a converged world, however, content provision is no longer just the preserve of television. A range of suppliers now provides content over the Internet, and on mobile phones. Further, this content is often on-demand (as are new TV services), being viewable at all times of the day.

So, how to identify what is appropriate content to view? If it is no longer as simple as a watershed, information about the content needs to be provided to viewers so that they can make an informed choice. This is particularly important for protecting children from potentially harmful content.

This is why the BSG coordinated the production of Good Practice Principles for the provision of information about commercially created content. The work drew on all existing practices to bring together the underlying principles.

The launch of these principles this week showed the commitment of the industry to ensuring information about content is appropriately provided. Good content information will help consumers, particularly parents, make informed choices for themselves and their families.

The BSG will review the impact and effectiveness of the principles in 2009. For more information regarding the principles, see www.audiovisualcontent.org

Peter Shearman, Policy Manager, BSG