- with readers working within the Oil & Gas industries
- within Cannabis & Hemp, Law Practice Management and Privacy topic(s)
Last week, as part of its ongoing work to implement the Media Act, Ofcom published its review of audience protection measures (APMs) used by on-demand programme services (ODPS). This review is crucial as part of Ofcom's work to make sure that the new standards requirements which are imposed on ODPS by the Media Act protect audiences with "measures such as age ratings, content warnings, parental controls and age assurance".
The review found:
- Widespread adoption: Across the notified ODPS landscape, providers generally deploy APMs judged broadly adequate to help protect audiences from harm. Age ratings or classification labels are commonly shown on thumbnails and at playback; content warnings appear on landing pages or on-screen; and parental controls are widely available, especially on larger SVoDs and BVoDs. Even where measures are lighter, services often insert friction points such as sign‑in or payment that reduce accidental exposure.
- Different approaches: There is no single system in use. Global SVoDs typically apply granular, age‑based classifications to content, while UK BVoDs often use "binary systems" (such as the 'G' rating system applied by the majority of PSB VoDs). Content warnings and parental controls also vary, with this diversity reflecting differing catalogues, risk profiles, and legacy models.
- Some adaptation for UK audiences: Several global providers localise their content classification to align with UK audience expectations, including drawing on BBFC age ratings (i.e. U, PG, 12, 15, 18).
- Content warnings could be more detailed: Viewers strongly prefer "specific, accurate and easy to understand" warnings which use plain and direct terms (e.g. using "contains swearing" rather than "course language"). Some ODPS include warnings that identify issues, indicate severity/frequency, and—crucially for series—flag episode‑specific risks.
- Lack of information: Audiences often cannot easily find available APMs. Help pages exist but vary in clarity and accessibility, and device‑level differences can create confusion when settings do not carry over. Services can improve the accessibility of APMs by providing clear information about APMs, surfacing "how‑to" guidance at decision points, and using in‑app prompts, QR codes or embedded FAQs.
- Viewers like parental controls and PINs: Ofcom's research indicates that parental controls vary more between services than any other APM. Parents value simple set-ups, which could include profile‑level controls, age filters, default safeguards (e.g. pre‑set thresholds on new profiles), and purchase locks. Consistency across devices also matters: where settings cannot transfer, accessible explanations also "help users make the most of available protections in line with their needs".
- Need for proportionality: Audiences favour APMs that match the risk. They support robust age assurance where legally required (e.g. R18 services) but consider invasive checks disproportionate for mainstream ODPS. The balance is clearer when services combine right‑sized measures without unnecessary friction or data intrusiveness.
Overall, Ofcom's assessment finds that APMs are widely in place and improving, with audience insights pointing to practical refinements: clearer explanations of rating systems, more precise content warnings, streamlined and better‑signposted parental controls, and device‑consistent implementations, all applied in a proportionate, audience‑led way.
Ofcom will carry out another review of APMs used by Tier 1 services after the Secretary of State has made regulations to determine which services are subject to enhanced regulation under the new Tier 1 regime.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
