MARKETING VIOLENT ENTERTAINMENT

TO CHILDREN:

A SIX-MONTH FOLLOW-UP REVIEW OF

INDUSTRY PRACTICES IN THE MOTION PICTURE,

MUSIC RECORDING & ELECTRONIC GAME INDUSTRIES

A REPORT TO CONGRESS

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

APRIL 2001
Federal Trade Commission

Robert Pitofsky Chairman

Sheila F. Anthony Commissioner

Mozelle W. Thompson Commissioner

Orson Swindle Commissioner

Thomas B. Leary Commissioner
TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................... i

I. INTRODUCTION ......................................................... 1

A. September 2000 Report on Marketing Violent Entertainment to Children ......... 1

B. Industry Response to the September 2000 Report ............................ 2

C. Congressional Request for Follow-up Reports .............................. 3

D. Sources of Information for this Report .................................... 3

II. MOTION PICTURES ...................................................... 5

A. Marketing to Children: Ad Placement .................................... 5

1. Industry commitments following the September 2000 Report .............. 5

2. Industry advertising placement since the September 2000 Report ........... 5

3. Analysis of industry’s practices since the September 2000 Report .......... 7

B. Ratings and Reasons for Ratings in Ads ................................... 8

1. Industry commitments following the September 2000 Report .............. 8

2. Industry advertising practices since the September 2000 Report ............ 9

3. Analysis of industry’s practices since the September 2000 Report ......... 13

III. MUSIC RECORDINGS ................................................... 13

A. Marketing to Children: Ad Placement ................................... 13

1. Industry commitments following the September 2000 Report ............. 13

2. Industry advertising placement since the September 2000 Report .......... 14

3. Analysis of industry’s practices since the September 2000 Report ......... 15

B. Advisory Label and Reasons for Label in Ads ............................. 15

1. Industry commitments following the September 2000 Report ............. 15

2. Industry advertising practices since the September 2000 Report ........... 16

3. Analysis of industry’s practices since the September 2000 Report ......... 18

IV. ELECTRONIC GAMES ................................................... 18

A. Marketing to Children: Ad Placement ................................... 18

1. Industry commitments following the September 2000 Report ............. 18

2. Industry advertising placement since the September 2000 Report .......... 19

3. Analysis of industry’s practices since the September 2000 Report ......... 21

B. Ratings and Reasons for Ratings in Ads .................................. 21

1. Industry commitments following the September 2000 Report ............. 21

2. Industry advertising practices since the September 2000 Report ........... 21

3. Analysis of industry’s practices since the September 2000 Report ......... 25

V. CONCLUSION .......................................................... 25

ENDNOTES ................................................................ 27
APPENDIX A: DATA COLLECTION METHODOLOGY AND TELEVISION AND PRINT

DEMOGRAPHICS ..................................................... A-1

I. SELECTION OF POPULAR TEEN MEDIA ................................ A-1

II. POPULAR TELEVISION SHOWS AMONG TEENAGERS .................... A-2

A. Network Television Monitoring ...................................... A-3

B. Syndicated Programs ............................................... A-4

C. First Airing Data .................................................. A-5

III. PRINT MEDIA ........................................................ A-9

A. Magazines Reviewed to Assess Ad Placement ........................... A-9

B. Magazines and Newspapers Reviewed to Assess Rating Information Practices . A-10

ENDNOTES ............................................................. A-11
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

In January 2001, the Senate Commerce Committee requested that the Federal Trade

Commission prepare a report following up on its September 2000 Report, Marketing Violent

Entertainment to Children: A Review of Self-Regulation and Industry Practices in the Motion

Picture, Music Recording & Electronic Game Industries. The earlier Report concluded that the

pervasive and aggressive marketing of violent movies, music, and electronic games to children

undermines the credibility of the entertainment media industries’ parental advisory ratings and

labels and frustrates parents’ attempts to make informed decisions about their children’s

exposure to violent content. The Commerce Committee asked the Commission to focus its

review on two of the issues examined in the September 2000 Report: 1) whether the

entertainment media industries continue to advertise violent R-rated movies, explicit-content

labeled music, and M-rated electronic games in popular teen media, and 2) whether the

entertainment media are including rating information in their advertising. This review answers

those two questions.

The Commission’s review indicates that the entertainment media industry has made some

progress both in limiting advertising in certain popular teen media and in providing rating

information in advertising. The industry must make a greater effort, however, if it is to meet the

suggestions for improvement included in the Commission’s Report as well as its own promises

for reform.

Specifically, the Commission’s review found that the motion picture industry has made

some positive changes to its advertising practices. The Commission found virtually no

advertisements for R-rated movies in the popular teen magazines reviewed. A spot-check of

movie trailer placement revealed general compliance with the industry’s commitment not to run

trailers for R movies in connection with G- and PG-rated feature films. The motion picture

studios now routinely include reasons for ratings in their print and television advertisements. 

Further, at least three-quarters of the official movie Web sites reviewed included the film’s

rating, the reasons for the rating, and links to sites where information on the rating system may be

obtained. However, ads for R-rated movies still appeared on the television programs most

popular with teens, and the rating reasons in ads were usually small, fleeting, or inconspicuously

placed.
ii

The Commission found that the music recording industry, unlike the motion picture and

electronic game industries, has not visibly responded to the Commission’s Report; nor has it

implemented the reforms its trade association announced just before the Commission issued its

Report. The Commission’s review showed that advertising for explicit-content labeled music

recordings routinely appeared on popular teen television programming. All five major recording

companies placed advertising for explicit content music on television programs and in magazines

with substantial under-17 audiences (in some cases more than 50 percent under 17). 

Furthermore, ads for explicit-content labeled music usually did not indicate that the recording

was stickered with a parental advisory label. Only 25 percent of the print ads, 22 percent of the

television ads, and about half of the 40 official recording company or artist Web sites reviewed

showed the explicit content label or otherwise gave notice that the recording contained explicit

content. Even when the parental advisory label was present, it frequently was so small that the

words were illegible, and the ads never indicated why the album received the label. None of the

recording company/artist Web sites the Commission reviewed linked to an educational Web site

for information on the labeling system. The single positive note was that almost 40 percent of

the Web sites included the music’s lyrics, a step that can help parents screen recordings.

The Commission’s review shows some improvement in the electronic game industry’s

advertising practices. The Commission found no ads for M-rated games on the popular teen

television programs reviewed. The game company print ads nearly always included the game’s

rating icon (or the rating pending icon) and, in a large majority of instances, content descriptors. 

Television ads gave both audio and video disclosures of the game’s rating, and more than 80

percent of the official game publisher Web sites displayed the game’s rating. However, the

electronic game industry has not stopped placing ads for M-rated games in magazines with a

substantial under-17 audience; rather, the Commission found such ads placed at the same rate as

before in gaming magazines with readerships of at least 40 percent under 17. (This may change

in the future; in mid-March 2001, the industry adopted an advertising guideline prohibiting the

placement of such ads in magazines with a 45 percent or more readership under 17.) The

Commission also found that rating icons and descriptors in the print ads were often smaller than

required by the industry code; television ads never included the content descriptors; only a little
iii

more than half the Web sites reviewed displayed the rating clearly and conspicuously; and just 25

percent displayed the content descriptors anywhere on the site. 

This review provides a snapshot of advertising practices by some industry members a few

months after publication of the Commission’s September 2000 Report. Thus, it cannot be

statistically projected to industry advertising as a whole. In addition, because this review relies

on advertising monitoring rather than internal industry documents, its results cannot be directly

compared to the results of the review conducted for the September 2000 Report. Also, this

review does not include information on children’s access to these products at the retail level. 

The Senate Commerce Committee has requested a second, more comprehensive, report in the

Fall of 2001, which will include information from individual industry members.

Because of First Amendment issues, the Commission continues to believe that vigilant selfregulation is the best approach to ensuring that parents are provided with adequate information to

guide their children’s exposure to entertainment media with violent content. The Commission is

encouraged by the motion picture and electronic game industries’ initial responses to its

September 2000 Report, but it is disappointed by the almost complete failure of the music

recording industry to institute any positive reforms. 

More remains to be done by each industry. To avoid undermining the cautionary message

in their ratings and labels, the industries should avoid advertising their products in the media

most watched and read by children under 17. The challenge remains to make rating explanations

as ubiquitous in advertisements as the rating itself and to present this important information

clearly and conspicuously. The Commission urges individual industry members to keep the

industry’s own commitments and to go beyond those commitments to meet the recommendations

the Commission made in its September 2000 Report.

I. INTRODUCTION

A. September 2000 Report on Marketing Violent Entertainment to Children

On September 11, 2000, the Federal Trade Commission issued a report entitled Marketing

Violent Entertainment to Children: A Review of Self-Regulation and Industry Practices in the

Motion Picture, Music Recording & Electronic Game Industries.

1

 The Report responded to a

request from President Clinton, and similar Congressional requests, that the Commission study

whether the motion picture, music recording, and computer and video game (“electronic game”)

industries market products with violent content to youngsters. Specifically, the study’s goal was

to determine whether the industries intentionally promote products that they themselves

acknowledge warrant parental caution in venues where children make up a substantial percentage

of the audience.

The Commission’s study found that for all three segments of the entertainment industry, the

answer was “yes.” The Commission found that although the motion picture, music recording,

and electronic game industries had taken steps to identify products whose content may not be

appropriate for children, companies in those industries routinely marketed such products to

children under 17. The Commission also found that children under 17 were frequently able to

buy tickets to R-rated movies and could easily purchase explicit-content labeled music recordings

and Mature-rated (“M-rated”) electronic games without being accompanied by an adult. The

Report concluded that the pervasive and aggressive marketing of violent movies, music, and

electronic games to children undermines the credibility of the industries’ ratings and labels and

frustrates parents’ attempts to make informed decisions about their children’s exposure to violent

content.

In its Report, the Commission recommended that all three industries enhance their selfregulatory efforts by: 1) establishing or expanding codes that prohibit target marketing to

children, for example by avoiding advertising in popular teen media, and impose sanctions for

violations;2 2) increasing compliance at the retail level, for example by requiring identification or

parental permission;3 and 3) increasing parental understanding of the ratings and labels, for

example by including the rating as well as the reasons for the rating in all advertising.4
2

B. Industry Response to the September 2000 Report

Following release of the Commission’s Report, the Senate Committee on Commerce,

Science, and Transportation conducted two hearings on the Commission’s findings.5 At the

September 13 and 27, 2000 hearings, several members of Congress urged industry members to

engage in more vigorous self-regulation. Industry members expressed their views of the Report

and most indicated steps they would take in response to its findings.6

The Motion Picture Association of America (“MPAA”) announced a 12-point initiative to

address the suggestions in the Commission’s Report. The MPAA’s members promised to avoid

running trailers for violent R-rated films before G-rated feature films, to review their policies

regarding marketing violent R-rated movies to children, to avoid using children in research for Rrated films, to install compliance officers to review their marketing practices, to encourage movie

theaters to enforce the R-rating restriction, and to take steps to include the reasons for ratings in

print advertisements, on Web sites, and in home videos.7 Individual studios made further

commitments.8

The National Association of Theatre Owners (“NATO”) also announced a 12-point

initiative.9 This initiative reaffirmed NATO’s existing ID-check policy for R and NC-17 films

and sought ways to improve compliance with that policy. NATO members agreed not to show

trailers advertising R films before any G or PG film, and to only show those trailers before PG-13

films if the trailers are consistent in tone and content with the feature film. In addition, NATO

members pledged to appoint an executive compliance officer and to seek ways to disseminate

rating information, for example by including rating information in Web sites and on posters at

theaters.

The Recording Industry Association of America (“RIAA”) referenced its own

recommended changes to the parental advisory labeling system that would take effect in October

2000, including the use of: 1) broad standards to make the labeling decision; and 2) guidelines

for placing the advisory in advertising for explicit-content labeled recordings and on retail Web

sites. In addition, the RIAA and representatives of two music recording companies, BMG Music

and Artemis Records, indicated that they would consider making the lyrics of explicit content

CDs available to help parents screen the recordings.10
3

The Interactive Digital Software Association (“IDSA”) created a task force of electronic

game company marketing executives to discuss how the industry should address the concerns

raised about target marketing.11 As a result, the IDSA Board of Directors adopted on March 14,

2001 a series of guidelines to govern the marketing of M-rated games to children under 17. 

These guidelines place limits on ad placements in magazines, television shows and Internet sites

popular with teens.12 In addition, the Entertainment Software Rating Board (“ESRB”) said it

would expand its self-regulatory program to monitor the disclosure of rating information in

advertising by bringing on additional staff, creating more sophisticated and extensive ad

monitoring and data collection systems, more aggressively challenging instances of

noncompliance, and keeping better track of violators. It promised “meaningful sanctions” for

serious or repeat violations of the ESRB code.13

C. Congressional Request for Follow-up Reports

In January 2001, Senator John McCain, Chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee,

Ranking Member Ernest Hollings, and Senators Max Cleland and Sam Brownback requested that

the Commission provide the Commerce Committee with two follow-up reports describing

whether violent movies, explicit-content labeled music, and electronic games continue to be

marketed to children under the age designated in the rating or label.14 They requested that the

first report examine two issues: 1) whether the industries continue to advertise violent R-rated

movies, explicit-content labeled music, and M-rated electronic games in popular teen media; and

2) whether rating or label information is included in the teen media or other advertising. This

report answers those two questions. The Senators further requested that the Commission provide

a second report in the fall of 2001 that would examine the same issues, but would include more

extensive information obtained from industry members.15

D. Sources of Information for this Report

To prepare this report, the Commission obtained information from four sources: television,

magazine, and newspaper advertising; a review of movie trailer placement; official industry

Internet Web sites; and industry trade associations.16 To answer the Senate Commerce
4

Committee’s question whether the industries continue to advertise these products in popular teen

media, the Commission focused on the television programs and magazines that the previously

submitted marketing plans indicated the companies used to reach children under 17. For

example, the Commission reviewed network and cable television advertising from December

2000 and January 2001 that aired in the after-school and early prime-time slots when children

under 17 are most likely to be watching television.17 This monitoring included programs ranked

by Nielsen as among the top ten syndicated programs in terms of youth audience during the

weekday after-school and pre-prime-time periods.18 (Details of the Commission’s data collection

are provided in Appendix A.)

In addition to television monitoring, the Commission reviewed the December 2000 and

January-March 2001 editions of magazines with a substantial or majority readership under 17.19

For in-theater trailers, a unique form of advertising, the Commission checked to see whether

trailers for R-rated movies appeared before certain G, PG, and PG-13 feature films.

To answer the second question posed by Congress, whether the entertainment media

industries are including rating information in their advertising, the Commission examined

television, magazine, and newspaper advertisements for movies, music, and electronic games to

determine if the ads contained rating, label, and content descriptor information, and, if so,

whether the information was clear and conspicuous.20 In addition, the Commission conducted a

review of industry Internet Web sites, including retail sites, to determine if they contained clear

and conspicuous rating and label information.

As discussed in more detail below, the results of this review provide a snapshot of current

advertising practices by some industry members following the Commission’s September 2000

Report. The advertising monitoring conducted for this report does not purport to be statistically

projectable to industry advertising as a whole.21 In addition, because this report relies on

independent advertising monitoring rather than internal industry documents for its assessments,

its results are not directly comparable to the results of the review conducted for the September

2000 Report.
5

II. MOTION PICTURES

A. Marketing to Children: Ad Placement

1. Industry commitments following the September 2000 Report

In the September 2000 Report the Commission found extensive marketing and, in many

instances, explicit targeting, of violent R-rated films to children under 17. The Commission

called on the motion picture industry to stop this practice and suggested that it “establish or

expand codes that prohibit target marketing and impose sanctions for violations.”22 More

specifically, the Commission recommended that industry stop placing advertising for R-rated

movies in “media or venues with a substantial under-17 audience.”23

In response, the MPAA promised that each studio would “review its marketing and

advertising practices in order to further the goal of not inappropriately specifically targeting

children in its advertising of films rated R for violence.”24 No industry-wide policy has been

announced to date; however, some studios have made specific commitments to avoid targeting

minors. Five studios (MGM, Warner Bros., Dreamworks, the Walt Disney Company, and

Twentieth Century Fox) generally agreed not to target those under 17 in marketing R-rated

movies.25 Three of those, MGM, Warner Bros., and Twentieth Century Fox, agreed not to place

ads for R-rated movies in print or television media with a substantial audience of children under

17, with “substantial” defined as more than 35% of the measurable audience.26 In addition,

Disney and Twentieth Century Fox agreed that their ABC and Fox television networks would

limit the times during which advertisements for R-rated movies would be run.27

2. Industry advertising placement since the September 2000 Report

a. Television ads

The September 2000 Report found that television advertising is the most important medium

in drawing an audience for a film: “Studio research shows that most moviegoers, and teens in

particular, become aware of movies through television.”28 The Commission’s review of studio

marketing documents for the September 2000 Report indicated that advertising on weekends and

during the “early fringe” and “prime access” hours, especially using “spot” (or local) ad buys, is

the best way to reach younger viewers.29
6

The Commission’s monitoring of television advertising placement for this report reveals

that studios continue to advertise R-rated movies at the times and on the programs that are most

effective in delivering those ads to teen viewers. Studios advertised R-rated films on syndicated

programs popular with under-17 audiences airing between 6 and 8 p.m. For example, Dracula

2000, Hannibal, Proof of Life, Shadow of the Vampire, Snatch, The Gift, The Pledge, Traffic, and

Valentine30 were advertised on Friends, Drew Carey, Seinfeld, Home Improvement, Spin City,

Moesha, and The Simpsons — all programs that rank in the top ten weekday syndicated shows in

terms of teen audience size.31

Although relatively few films rated R for violence were advertised during the prime-time (8

to 9 p.m.) programming reviewed,32 in some instances, such placement appeared to run counter

to at least the spirit of individual commitments made by studios in response to the September

2000 Report. For example, despite Disney’s pledge that its own ABC television network would

“not accept advertisements for R-rated films in prime[-]time entertainment programming prior to

9 p.m.,” Dimension Films (a division of Disney-owned Miramax) aired ads for Dracula 2000 on

the Fox Broadcasting Network during prime-time entertainment programming airing between 8

and 9 p.m.: That ‘70s Show, The Simpsons, and Titus.

33 In addition, by airing ads for that film

on these programs, Fox apparently breached its own promise not to accept ads for R-rated movies

on “any family programming.”34

In an important improvement, only one ad for an R-rated movie (Traffic) was found on

MTV’s Total Request Live — an afternoon program that had been frequently used to promote the

R-rated films studied for the September 2000 Report.35

b. Print ads

For this report, the Commission monitored advertisements in the December 2000 to March

2001 issues of magazines with substantial youth audiences (DC Comics, Electronic Gaming

Monthly, GamePro, Metal Edge, Unofficial PlayStation Magazine, Right On!, Seventeen, Teen,

Teen People, Thrasher, Tips and Tricks, Vibe, WWF Magazine, and YM).36 The Commission did

not identify any advertisements for R-rated movies currently in theaters in any of these magazine

issues,37 a notable improvement over the advertising practices documented in the September

2000 Report.38
7

c. In-theater trailers

As noted in the September 2000 Report, both studios and theaters jointly select the trailers

shown before films in theaters.39 Following the September 2000 Report, the MPAA indicated

that member studios would not show trailers for movies rated R for violence before G-rated films

in either theatrical release or on home video or DVD. All of the MPAA member studios, except

Paramount, orally agreed at the September 27, 2000 Senate Commerce Committee hearing not to

show trailers for R-rated films at PG-rated features.40 The National Association of Theatre

Owners (“NATO”), in its response to the FTC’s Report, made a further pledge: each member

theater agreed not to show trailers advertising R films before any G or PG film, and to only show

those trailers before PG-13 films if the trailers are consistent in tone and content with the feature

film.41

To determine whether trailers for R-rated films were being shown before PG-13, PG and G

features despite the MPAA and NATO pledges, the Commission contracted with a commercial

trailer checking service to check trailers shown before the following features: Monkey Bone (PG13), See Spot Run (PG), and Recess: School’s Out (G). The service surveyed trailers shown in

80 theaters in eight U.S. cities on March 2-3, 2001.42 

This review found substantial compliance with the industry pledges regarding trailer

placement. The few violations of the pledge not to run trailers for R-rated films before G- or PGrated feature films appear to be the result of decisions by individual theater operators rather than

the studios or the theater chains.43 The review did find that trailers for R-rated films were

frequently shown before the PG-13-rated Monkeybone,44 but this practice does not violate

MPAA’s commitment, which did not extend to PG-13 films. Based on the MPAA rating

reasons, it would appear that a few NATO member theaters violated their commitment to show

trailers for R films before PG-13 films only if the trailers are consistent in tone and content with

the feature film when they showed trailers for films rated R for graphic violence before

Monkeybone (“Rated PG-13 for crude humor and some nudity”).45

3. Analysis of industry’s practices since the September 2000 Report

These data suggest that movie studios continue to advertise R-rated films on television

programs with substantial teen audiences. Although the industry’s commitment not to advertise
8

R-rated movies on programs with a substantial under-17 audience is a positive step, the 35%

youth audience threshold adopted by some industry members will mean little practical change in

the ways R-rated movies are advertised on television, with the notable exception of certain

programming on cable television networks such as MTV and BET.46

By contrast, the studios have been effective in not placing ads in print media with

substantial youth readership. Furthermore, the Commission’s trailer check suggests general

compliance with the industry’s commitments regarding the placing of trailers for R-rated movies. 

The few violations identified suggest noncompliance on the part of a few individual theaters

rather than a systemic failure to heed those commitments, and suggest the need for additional

guidance to individual theater chains and theaters.

Moreover, anecdotal reports suggest that the studios’ commitments not to target audiences

under 17 are having some impact. For example, one press account describes steps taken to avoid

marketing Miramax Films’ Dracula 2000, MGM’s Hannibal, Warner Bros.’ Valentine, and

Paramount Pictures’ Lucky Numbers to audiences under 17.47 The article reports that Miramax

Films restricted Dracula 2000’s stars from appearing in venues popular with youth such as

MTV’s Total Request Live and teen magazines.48 Paramount Pictures avoided putting Lucky

Numbers star John Travolta on Total Request Live.

49 MGM indicated that it would not air ads for

Hannibal on MTV before 9 p.m. or in some magazines with substantial youth readership, while

Warner Bros. announced that it would advertise Valentine on MTV only after 11 p.m. and would

not produce a music video for the soundtrack.50

B. Ratings and Reasons for Ratings in Ads

1. Industry commitments following the September 2000 Report

In the September 2000 Report, the Commission found that although movie advertisements

generally displayed a film’s letter rating, they never contained the reasons for the rating. Given

that rating reasons had been incorporated into the MPAA rating system for ten years, and given

consumer survey findings indicating that consumers want more information from the rating

system, the Commission recommended that industry clearly and conspicuously display the rating

and the rating reasons in all advertising, product packaging, and Web sites. In response, the
9

MPAA committed to “seek ways to include” rating reasons in print ads and official Web sites

(but not television ads) for movies rated R for violence.51 The MPAA member studios also

pledged to link their official movie Web sites to educational Web sites where parents may obtain

information about the rating system and the reasons for film ratings.52

For this report, the Commission reviewed television and print ads and Internet sites in late

2000 and early 2001 to see if the Commission’s and the MPAA’s recommendations were being

met.

2. Industry advertising practices since the September 2000 Report

a. Television ads

The Commission’s review of television ads reveals that while the motion picture studios

include the letter rating in their commercials, and have generally incorporated the reasons for the

rating as well, the reasons frequently are difficult or impossible to read.

The Commission found that ads for R- and PG-13-rated movies on the syndicated programs

reviewed included the letter rating in every case.53 In addition, rating reasons were provided in

all but two of 60 ads for films rated R for violence. In more than half of the ads for R-rated

movies, however, the rating reasons were either unreadable or difficult to read.54 Of over 400 ads

for PG-13 movies reviewed, over one-half either did not provide rating reasons, or provided

rating reasons that were difficult to read.55 Apart from small type size, many ads display the

rating reason fleetingly, often with other information about the cast and production. Given these

practices, even an alert viewer would have difficulty finding and then reading the rating reason.

Still, these numbers reflect an improvement over pre-Report practices, when rating reasons

were not displayed at all. Moreover, the studios’ efforts to include rating reasons in television

ads go beyond the requirements of the MPAA’s initiative, which committed its members to seek

to include rating reasons in print and online ads but not television ads, and then only as to movies

rated R for violence. It also should be noted that certain ads, such as for Warner Bros.’ Miss

Congeniality, prominently displayed the rating reasons so an interested parent would be able to

find and read the information before it disappeared from the screen. Nevertheless, in most cases

the ads reviewed were not effective in providing parents with information about the reason for
10

2001 Official Movie Web Site Review

71% 74%

86%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Rating Displayed

on Web Site

Rating Reason

Displayed on Web

Site

Hyperlink to

Educational Web

Site

Percentage of Web Sites

the rating, whether because the information was displayed only briefly, in small type, or

surrounded by other text.

b. Print ads

For this report, the Commission reviewed movie advertisements in the same magazines

discussed in the Advertising Placement section above,56 as well as newspaper ads,57 to determine

whether the rating and rating reason were displayed, and to assess whether the rating reason was

legible. The Commission reviewed more than one thousand (1006) magazine and newspaper ads

for PG-13- or R-rated films. With very few exceptions, these ads either displayed the rating itself

or announced that the rating was pending, as required by the MPAA. The Commission’s review

also showed, again with very few exceptions, that studios are now placing rating reasons in their

ads.58 Ads by Sony Pictures’ divisions Columbia Pictures and Screen Gems, Touchstone (a

Disney division), Universal, and Warner Brothers featured rating reasons that were generally

readable and in some cases clear and conspicuous. Nonetheless, for the ads as a whole, the rating

reasons were not clear and conspicuous. In more than 300 advertisements, the rating reasons

were so small that the words were literally unreadable, or were at least partially obscured by ad

images or graphics.59 And in many other cases, though deemed legible, the print was small, even

though the rating reasons are often brief.60

c. Internet ads

(1) Studio Web sites

For the September 2000 Report, the

Commission surveyed 46 Web sites,

finding that 89% indicated the rating, but

none provided the film’s rating reason. In

response to the Report, the MPAA

committed that members would “seek

ways to include” rating reasons in official

Web sites for movies rated R for violence,

and would link their official movie Web

sites to mpaa.org, filmratings.com, and
11

parentalguide.org, which are informational sites where parents may obtain information about the

rating system and the reasons for film ratings.

To check current practices on the Internet, the Commission reviewed 35 official Web sites

for movies rated PG-13 or R where the rating was assigned, at least in part, based on violent

content.61 The results show significant progress in the movie industry’s online practices since the

earlier review of official motion picture Web sites in December 1999: nearly all the sites

checked still disclose the film’s rating, and almost three quarters now provide the rating reason.62

The Commission noted a wide range of rating information practices on these official Web

sites. Some sites went beyond the self-regulatory system requirements in highlighting the film’s

rating information.63 Some sites did not provide any rating information whatsoever.64 More

common, however, were those sites that displayed the rating information in such a manner that a

consumer might have difficulty locating it, by placing it well below the “screen break” or in

small print that contrasted poorly with the site’s background.

Three quarters of the sites (26 of 35) linked to at least one of the three rating information

Web sites that the MPAA indicated its members would link to.65 Two of the 35 sites contained a

warning, in addition to the film’s rating or content description, that children or younger visitors

should not view the site.66

(2) Theater Web sites

The Commission also examined the Web sites for eight major theater chains (AMC,

Carmike, Cinemark, General Cinemas, Loews Cineplex, National Amusement, Regal, and

United Artists) to check rating practices at their sites. All but two of these companies (Carmike

and General Cinemas) were, at the time the sites were checked, members of NATO, which

pledged that its member companies would “seek ways to include ratings information in their web

sites, and/or to link with sites that contain additional ratings information.”67 This review showed

that all the theater chains’ Web sites displayed the movies’ ratings, a quarter displayed the rating

reasons, and nearly two thirds linked to the informational Web sites.68
12

Theater Web Site Review Results

NATO

Theater

Chains

Non-NATO

Theater

Chains

Total

Site displays MPAA rating 6 of 6 2 of 2 8 of 8

Site displays MPAA rating reason 2 of 6 0 of 2 2 of 8

Site provides additional ratings information 5 of 6 1 of 2 6 of 8

Site links to MPAA.org, filmratings.com,

 or parentalguide.org

4 of 6 1 of 2 5 of 8

Site offers ticket sale 6 of 6 1 of 2 7 of 8

Site provides rating at point of purchase 6 of 6 0 of 1 6 of 7

Site provides rating reason at point of purchase 0 of 6 0 of 1 0 of 7

Site provides an additional warning or advisory 3 of 6 0 of 1 2 of 7

United Artists’ Web site is noteworthy. The site provides rating information, as well as a

statement of the company’s policy on restricting access to R-rated films.69

(3) Home video retailer Web sites

In the September 2000 Report, the Commission reported on a survey of retailers’ Internet

sites selling R-rated movies.70 The survey found that the sites did provide movie ratings and

displayed them in a place a user would likely see, but no site provided the rating reason for any

film. 

The Commission conducted a similar survey in February 2001 to review current practices. 

The Commission again examined five R-rated movies (Hollow Man, Scary Movie, Shaft, The

Matrix, and The Patriot) for sale at five online retailers’ sites (Amazon.com, Bestbuy.com,

Reel.com, SamGoody.com, and Towerrecords.com).71 Each of the five retailers displayed the

movie’s MPAA rating — usually just the letter rating, not the icon or the word “Restricted” — in

a clear manner, although none of the retailers provided the rating on the purchase page. Retailers

were not consistent in providing the rating reasons for the films: only two of the retailers

displayed the rating reasons, and then only for some films. Amazon.com also displayed a

statement that the R-rated movies were “Not for sale to persons under age 18.”
13

3. Analysis of industry’s practices since the September 2000 Report

Overall, the motion picture studios have clearly responded to the Commission’s

recommendation to include rating reasons in advertising so that parents can better judge the

appropriateness of a film for their children, and the self-regulatory system is very effective in

ensuring that advertisements show the rating. The remaining challenge is to make rating reasons

as ubiquitous as the rating in advertising, and to present this important information clearly and

conspicuously. Home video retailers, in contrast, are not providing the rating reason consistently

in their advertisements, and most theater chains do not provide this information on their official

Web sites. 

III. MUSIC RECORDINGS

A. Marketing to Children: Ad Placement

1. Industry commitments following the September 2000 Report

The September 2000 Report studied the marketing of 55 explicit content recordings and

found that all of them were marketed to children under 17.72 The Commission encouraged the

music recording companies to cease such marketing efforts and to adopt an industry-wide antitargeting code.73

Shortly before the Report’s release, the Recording Industry Association of America

(“RIAA”) announced that advertising for explicit-content labeled recordings should not appear in

publications, Web sites, or other commercial outlets whose primary (i.e., 50% or more) market

demographic is 16 years of age or younger.74 Immediately after the Report’s release, however,

the RIAA withdrew this anti-targeting recommendation, later informing the Commission that the

increased focus by Congress, the Commission, and several states on bringing law enforcement

actions against the entertainment companies caused the withdrawal. The association stated that

formally adopting such a provision would only increase the likelihood that its members would be

the subject of law enforcement actions and penalties and would “discourage participation in the

successful parental advisory program.”75 The RIAA’s withdrawal of its anti-targeting

recommendation represents a move away from measures adopted by the movie and electronic

game industries to prevent the marketing of violent entertainment products to children.76
14

Ads for Stickered Recordings in Magazines with a 

Majority or Substantial Youth Audience

20

15

10

25

7

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

BMG EMI Sony UMG WEA

Number of Advertisements

2. Industry advertising placement since the September 2000 Report

a. Television ads

For this report, the Commission examined whether recording industry members placed ads

for explicit content recordings during eight popular teen programs monitored.77 The seven-week

review found that advertising for explicit content recordings appeared regularly on MTV

programs that aired during after-school and early evening hours. Universal Music Group

Recordings (“UMG”) and Sony Music Entertainment (“Sony Music”) ran advertisements for

explicit content recordings by Blink 182, Crazy Town, DMX, Ja Rule, Rage Against the

Machine, SPM, Wu-Tang Clan, and Xzibit, as well as ads for the Dracula 2000 Soundtrack and

The Source Hip Hop Hits Volume 4, on MTV’s Total Request Live and WWF Heat.

78

Advertisements for the Dracula 2000 Soundtrack and the Up in Smoke Tour music video also

aired during WWF Smackdown. In addition, another review showed that all five music recording

companies — BMG Entertainment (“BMG”), EMI Recorded Music, N.A. (“EMI”), Sony Music,

UMG, and Warner Music Group (“WEA”) — advertised their explicit content recordings on

popular teen shows such as MTV’s Total Request Live, BET’s Top 10 Live, and UPN’s WWF

Smackdown.79 The Commission’s spot review of MTV’s Total Request Live further found an

advertisement for the Dracula 2000 Soundtrack. 

b. Print ads

For this Report, the Commission

reviewed the December 2000 through

March 2001 editions of six magazines with

a majority or substantial readership under

18 to determine whether they contained

advertising for explicit content recordings.80

The Commission’s examination revealed

that the five major recording companies

placed advertisements for explicit content

recordings in one or more of the following

magazines: Metal Edge, Right On!, Thrasher, and Vibe. 

81
15

3. Analysis of industry’s practices since the September 2000 Report

There has been neither self-regulatory guidance from the RIAA nor commitments from

individual music companies to limit the placement of advertisements for music recordings

stickered with the parental advisory label. The Commission’s review makes clear that industry

members continue to advertise explicit content recordings in magazines or on television

programs with substantial under-17 audiences.

B. Advisory Label and Reasons for Label in Ads

1. Industry commitments following the September 2000 Report

In its September 2000 Report, the Commission found that the music recording industry

members did not provide advisories in advertising.82 It therefore recommended that industry

members clearly and conspicuously disclose the explicit nature of a recording — with content

descriptors — in all advertising for these recordings. Shortly before the Report was issued, the

RIAA had asked its industry members to place the parental advisory label or other prominent

notice of explicit content: 1) in print advertising for explicit-content labeled recordings, and 2)

in online retail sites in all stages of the transaction from the catalog pages to the shopping cart. 

While the RIAA guidelines only address advisories in certain media, in February 2001 the

association indicated to FTC staff that it would consider recommending that all advertising for

explicit content recordings (e.g., television, radio, and artist Internet sites) provide an advisory.83

According to the RIAA, the recording companies have started to place the explicit content

label in print advertising, but because print advertising must be reserved several months in

advance, such disclosures are only now beginning to appear.84 The RIAA told the Commission,

however, that its industry members will not adopt the FTC’s recommendation to provide content

descriptors, or the reasons for the label, in advertising (contrary to the movie and electronic game

industries). The association also described the complexity and difficulty in making lyrics for

explicit content recordings publicly available, but noted that it would continue to explore this

possibility with music publishers.85 
16

2. Industry advertising practices since the September 2000 Report

a. Television ads

As noted above, the RIAA has not adopted the FTC’s recommendation that advisory labels

be placed in television advertisements. The Commission’s spot-check confirms that such

television advertising rarely provides such disclosures: of the 23 ads for explicit content

recordings that appeared on certain television programs with substantial teen audiences

(referenced above), only five of the ads contained the parental advisory label (ads for The Mark,

Tom, and Travis Show (two ads), the Dracula 2000 Soundtrack (two ads), and the Source Hip

Hop Hits Volume 4 (one ad)). Even when the labels displayed were visible, none was clearly

readable. 

b. Print ads

To assess industry compliance with the FTC and RIAA recommendations, the Commission

reviewed the December 2000 through March 2001 issues of music magazines: Metal Edge,

Right On, Rolling Stone, Seventeen, Spin, Teen People, Thrasher, and Vibe.

86 This review shows

that advertisements for explicit-content labeled recordings still rarely display a clear parental

advisory. Only 45 of 147 (31%) print ads for labeled recordings displayed any parental advisory

label; most of these advisories presented the advisory as a black and white blur, often too small

or inconspicuously placed to be noticed or read. The Commission’s review, however, did reveal

eight instances of clear and conspicuous disclosures about an album’s content, including ads for

Shyne (BMG), Amen and Fatboy Slim (EMI), and Disturbed and Slimm Calhoun (WEA).

c. Internet ads

To determine whether recording industry members were providing online disclosure of

explicit content, the Commission conducted two Web site surfs: a surf of 40 artist/recording

company sites and a surf of five major music retailer sites. 

(1) Recording company Web sites

The review of official music Web sites shows that less than half of such sites provided

notice of a recording’s explicit content.87 Of the 40 official music Web sites surfed,88 38 sites

showed a picture of the CD cover, with the advisory label appearing on 15 of the 38 (39%)

covers. Only two of these advisories were legible.89 Many sites used other methods to
17

communicate the explicit nature of a recording, however. Eighteen of the 40 sites (45%)

provided consumers with additional information, usually in the form of an enlarged parental

advisory placed somewhere on the site or a text disclosure stating “explicit” placed near the

picture of the CD on the purchase page (e.g., the Nelly, Ludacris, Cypress Hill, and Crazy Town

Web sites).90 In addition, 15 of the 40 sites (38%) provided the lyrics for the explicit content

recordings. None of the sites surfed linked either to www.riaa.com or to

www.parentalguide.org.91

(2) Retailer Web sites

A review of the Web sites of five major music retailers showed that these sites more

frequently provided some information about the explicit nature of the recording for sale than the

recording company/artist sites did. Most of the retail sites made some disclosure about an

album’s explicit content, but only one fully complied with the RIAA-recommended guidelines.92

The Commission reviewed Amazon.com, Bestbuy.com, Cdnow.com, Samgoody.com, and

Towerrecords.com to see how these sites promoted five top-selling explicit content albums.93

Four of the five retailers provided some information, usually in a text disclosure that read

“explicit lyrics,” “explicit,” or simply “PA” (presumably short for “parental advisory”), about the

content of the recording. Only Amazon.com, however, fully complied with the RIAArecommended disclosures by providing consumers with advisories that read “explicit lyrics” and

that appeared in large easy-to-read print, prominently displayed, throughout the purchasing

process. Best Buy, CD Now, and Tower Records provided some form of more limited

disclosure, such as an “explicit” disclosure at one point on the site or the abbreviation “PA.”94

Samgoody.com only used the disclosure “clean” next to the edited version, providing consumers

with no information about the content of the explicit version.
18

Music Retailer Web Site Surf 

Amazon Best Buy CdNow Sam

Goody

Tower

Records

Does the advisory appear on

the album cover art? 3 of 5 1 of 5 3 of 5 2 of 5 4 of 5

Is the advisory readable? 1 of 3 0 of 1 0 of 3 0 of 2 0 of 4 

Is there other clear and

conspicuous information

about explicit content?

5 of 5 5 of 5 3 of 5 0 of 5 3 of 5

“explicit

lyrics”

“parental

advisory”

“explicit”

and “explicit

version” 

only “clean”

version

noted

“explicit” 

Are the disclosures provided

throughout purchasing

process?

5 of 5 0 of 5 0 of 5 0 of 5 0 of 5

3. Analysis of industry’s practices since the September 2000 Report

The Commission’s review shows that most advertisements for explicit content recordings

do not contain the clear disclosures recommended by the Commission. Of the three advertising

media reviewed (television, print, and Internet), the Web sites were the most likely to provide

some notice of a recording’s explicit content, with retail sites often providing an advisory and

record company/artist sites more frequently providing lyrics. The lack of clear and consistent

disclosures points to the need for industry-wide guidelines recommending advisories in all

advertising and increased efforts by individual industry members to provide such information.95

In March 2001, the RIAA informed the Commission that it had begun discussions about whether

all future advertising for explicit content recordings should clearly display an advisory.96 Neither

the RIAA nor any of its members, however, is willing to provide content descriptors in

advertising or labeling.

IV. ELECTRONIC GAMES

A. Marketing to Children: Ad Placement

1. Industry commitments following the September 2000 Report

In the September 2000 Report, the Commission noted that the electronic game industry has

a comprehensive self-regulatory system that includes a prohibition on marketing games to
19

children under the age designated in the rating. However, the Commission found widespread

violation of this anti-targeting provision, as evidenced by many instances of express targeting of

violent M-rated games to underage children, in addition to advertising in magazines or on

television shows with a majority or substantial under-17 audience.97 The Commission

recommended that the industry enforce its anti-targeting code provision.

In response, the Interactive Digital Software Association stated that “the IDSA does not

condone or excuse the marketing of Mature rated products to persons under 17 and, indeed, we

condemn it.” But it questioned whether magazines with a large or even majority under-17

readership, and other media popular with young teens, should be off-limits to industry members

seeking to market M-rated games:

[W]e reject the FTC’s operating assumption that ads in publications that happen to

have some noteworthy percentage of young readers, but a substantial and perhaps

even dominant share of older readers and users, is inappropriate.98

In mid-March, the IDSA Board of Directors adopted guidelines that would limit the placement of

advertisements for M-rated games in magazines where 45% or more of the readers are under 17,

and on television shows where 35% or more of the viewers are under 17.99 

2. Industry advertising placement since the September 2000 Report

a. Television ads

In the September 2000 Report, the Commission found that game companies frequently

targeted M-rated games to teen audiences by advertising on television programs popular with

teens aged 12 to 17. For this report, the Commission examined whether ads for M-rated games

continued to be shown during certain television programs popular with teen audiences.100 The

seven-week review of eight top teen network and cable programs (Total Request Live, WWF

Heat, The Simpsons, Malcolm in the Middle, That ‘70s Show, Titus, 7

th Heaven, and WWF

Smackdown) did not reveal a single instance of an ad for an M-rated game appearing during these

broadcasts. Nor did the Commission’s spot check of syndicated programs favored by teens

(Friends, Drew Carey, Seinfeld, Home Improvement, Spin City, Moesha, and The Simpsons) find

ads for M-rated games. The spot check did identify numerous ads for Teen- and Everyone-rated

games. These findings are encouraging; however, given the limited scope of the review, the
20

Game Pro and Electronic Gaming Monthly Advertising

Composition By Rating

(“Rating Pending” ads are grouped by the rating they later received.)

Rated E

38%

Rated M

12%

Rated T

50%

absence of M-rated game ads on the shows reviewed does not rule out the possibility either that

ads for M-rated games may have appeared on other teen programming during the period,101 or

simply that few M-rated games were advertised on TV during the period reviewed.

b. Print ads

In the September 2000 Report, the Commission found that game companies frequently

placed ads for M-rated games in GamePro and Electronic Gaming Monthly,102 game enthusiast

magazines that are widely read by young teens and pre-teens. These magazines have at least 40%

16 and under audiences.103 For this report, the Commission reviewed four months (from

December 2000 through March 2001) of GamePro and Electronic Gaming Monthly to see if Mrated games were still being advertised in these publications. This review found virtually no

change in the percentage of ads for M-rated

games in these magazines: 12% of the ads

were for M-rated games, compared to 13%

in the earlier review. A breakout of the

magazine ads by rating104 is presented

below.

Specifically, eight industry

members105 placed in those magazines a

total of 41 advertisements for 12 violent Mrated games over that four-month period: 

Activision (Blade, Quake III Arena), Capcom (Dino Crisis 2, Onimusha: Warlords, Resident Evil

Code Veronica, Spawn: In the Demon’s Hand), Eidos (Fear Effect 2: Retro Helix),106 Fox

Interactive (Alien Resurrection), Infogrames (Unreal Tournament),107 Konami (Silent Scope),

Sierra Studios (Half-Life), THQ (Evil Dead: Hail to the King).108 

Notably, the April issue of GamePro contains only two M-rated ads, perhaps indicating a

positive change in industry’s ad placement practices in GamePro. Moreover, IDSA’s new Mrated Ad Guides would prohibit continued placement of M-rated ads in GamePro, although it

would allow such advertisements in Electronic Gaming Monthly and other publications with a

very substantial but less than 45% 16 and under readership.109
21

3. Analysis of industry’s practices since the September 2000 Report

The Commission’s review of print and television ads for electronic games suggests that the

electronic game industry may be limiting its advertising on popular teen television programs,

while continuing to advertise in popular teen game enthusiast magazines. Although industry’s

new guidelines limiting print and TV ad placements are an improvement, they still sanction the

advertising of M-rated games in gaming and other magazines with a substantial under-17

readership and permit ad placements on most of the teen-oriented television shows previously

used by industry members to market M-rated games to children. Their continued allowance of

such ad placement practices undercuts industry’s commitment to avoid targeting children

younger than the age designated in a game’s rating.

B. Ratings and Reasons for Ratings in Ads

1. Industry commitments following the September 2000 Report

In the September 2000 Report, the Commission noted that the electronic game industry

requires the display of rating icons and, in most cases, content descriptors on packaging, in print

ads, and online. The industry code also requires television ads to include a voice-over stating the

game’s rating (but not the content descriptor).110 The Commission suggested that all advertising

contain both the rating and the content descriptors, but the electronic game industry has not

changed its advertising code (“Adcode”) to require content descriptors in television or radio

advertising.

2. Industry advertising practices since the September 2000 Report

a. Print ads

To check whether ratings and content descriptors are being clearly and conspicuously

disclosed, for this report the Commission reviewed print ads appearing in four popular gaming

enthusiast publications – GamePro, PC Gamer, Computer Gaming World, and Electronic

Gaming Monthly – during a four-month period (December 2000-March 2001).111 Overall, the

review found that most of the time the ads contained the ratings and the content descriptors as

specified by the ESRB. However, nearly half (47%) of the ads reviewed either failed to display
22

Disclosure of Rating Information in Game Ads

(EGM, Game Pro, Computer Gaming World and PC Gamer)

Proper Rating 

Icon and 

Descriptor

53% Rating 

Icon/Descriptor 

Too Small

32%

Missing/Wrong 

Descriptor

15%

the ratings and descriptors required by the ESRB (15%),112 or used icons or descriptors that failed

to meet the ESRB’s minimum size or position requirements (32%).113

While the ads of 10 companies

(Atlus, Bethesda Softworks, Black Isle

Studies, Blue Byte, Jo Wood Production,

NC Interactive, Rage Games, Squaresoft,

Take 2 Interactive, and The Learning

Company) were in complete compliance

with the Adcode’s requirements, 22

companies114 placed at least one ad not in

substantial compliance. Six of those 22

placed four or more non-complying ads.115

In nearly all instances, the ads failed to include content descriptors as required by the Adcode and

as suggested by the Commission. One company twice ran an ad for a game without any rating

information at all.116 In numerous other instances, companies placed ads that displayed rating

icons and descriptors smaller in size than required by the Adcode.

The Commission also reviewed retailer ads (Best Buy, Electronics Boutique, Wal-Mart,

Babbages/Funcoland, R20games.com, Target, and Chips & Bits, Inc.) in these same magazines. 

Generally, these ads promoted several electronic game titles of various ratings.117 With the

exception of Chips & Bits,118 all of the retailers displayed the rating icon, usually on the picture

of the package cover. None displayed any content descriptors. 

b. Television ads

The Commission’s spot review of television programs broadcast during the months of

December 2000 and January 2001 did not find any instances where the ad failed to include a

voice-over of the game’s rating, but did find a few instances where the visual depiction of the

rating icon was smaller than required by the Adcode.119 None of the ads contained content

descriptors.
23

c. Internet ads

(1) Game publisher Web sites

The Adcode has several specific disclosure requirements for game publisher Web sites. 

Web sites must include the rating icon and, on the purchase page, any applicable content

descriptors issued by the ESRB for that title.120 For game demos and trailers accessed online, the

site must display the rating icon next to the name of the game on the Web page where the demo

and/or trailer is accessed.121 

For the September 2000 Report, the Commission found that three-quarters of the 40 game

publisher Web sites122 surfed in 1999 complied with the basic requirement to display the ESRB

rating icon, but that less than 30% displayed the rating icon where a demo could be downloaded

or viewed, and only 9% displayed the content descriptors at the point where one could order a

game.123

For this Report, the Commission reviewed official game publisher sites for 40 Maturerated games and found slightly improved results. Over four-fifths of the sites displayed the

ESRB rating,124 although only 9% gave the game’s rating where a demo could be downloaded. 

Nineteen percent displayed the content descriptors at the point where one could order a game

(although 25% of the sites displayed the descriptors somewhere on the site).125

Most sites displayed the game’s rating, although less than half displayed that rating clearly

and conspicuously. For example, Tecmo’s Deception III: Dark Delusion126 and Capcom’s

Onimusha Warlords127 both provided a very large rating icon. Acclaim’s Turok 3: Shadow of

Oblivion128 not only provided a rating icon larger than the industry norm, but also displayed the

rating on virtually every page of the site, rather than just the home page. Other sites, however,

did little to draw attention to the game’s rating information.129 Although more than half of the

sites provided either a trailer or “movie” showing excerpts of the game play, or a playable demo

of the game, only two sites provided the game’s rating or some other indication before providing

access to the trailer or demo that it contained mature content (two others provided the rating on

the trailer itself).130

As with the 1999 surf, few Web sites reviewed for this report provided the game’s content

descriptors, and some that did, displayed them in ways that made it unlikely that the visitor
24

would see them. For example, the content descriptors may appear only if the visitor happens to

place the cursor over the rating icon.131 A majority of the sites offered the visitor the opportunity

to purchase the game. Of these sites, nearly all provided the game’s ESRB rating at the point of

purchase; however, only four provided the game’s content descriptors on the purchase page.132

Electronic Arts’ online store — EA.Com — was clearly the best, disclosing, clearly and

prominently, both the rating and the descriptors on both the product information and ordering

pages.133

Web Site Adcode Issues

Summaries by Sites Percentage Yes

Yes No N/A

ESRB rating displayed? 33 7 83%

ESRB content descriptors displayed? 10 30 25%

Game clip available for downloading or

viewing?

23 17 58%

Rating at point of download or viewing? 2 21 17 9%

Games offered for sale? 21 19 53%

ESRB rating at point-of-sale? 17 4 19 81%

ESRB content descriptors at 

point-of-sale?

4 17 19 19%

(2) Retailer Web sites

For the September 2000 Report, the Commission’s spot-check of five online retailers’ Web

sites revealed that the sites generally indicated the M rating in a place the user would likely see it,

though they did not necessarily display the rating icon. Only one game retailer provided content

descriptors. For this report, the Commission conducted another spot-check of six online

electronic games retailers’ sites (Amazon.com, EBWorld.com, Express.com, Outpost.com,

BestBuy.com, and ToysRUs.com) to see whether they were providing rating information as

recommended by the Commission.134

Although retailers are not subject to the same self-regulatory requirements as game

publishers, they have been encouraged to use the ESRB rating system in connection with their
25

sales practices.135 Most of the retailers surfed displayed a game’s rating on the product

information page,136 but only a few provided descriptors for the games surveyed.137 Two of the

sites provided game trailers so that visitors could view excerpts of a game, but without any

statement that the game had been rated as unsuitable for children under 17.

ToysRUs.com (currently run in conjunction with Amazon.com),138 for example, displays

the games’ ratings clearly and conspicuously but rarely displays the games’ content descriptors.139

For all the games surfed on ToysRUs.com, the retailer displayed the statement “Content suitable

for ages 17 or older” on the information page, and provided a link within the Amazon.com site to

information about the ESRB ratings and content descriptors.140

3. Analysis of industry’s practices since the September 2000 Report

Overall, the review shows some improvement from the Commission’s September 2000

Report141 and likely reflects increased efforts by the ESRB to encourage greater adherence to the

Adcode’s requirements. Still, the industry should address the paucity of clear and conspicuous

displays of rating icons and content descriptors on official Web sites and the absence of content

descriptors in television commercials. Further, the industry should do more to encourage

retailers of electronic games to provide parents with this important information.

V. CONCLUSION

Six months after the Commission’s September 2000 Report, it appears that the motion

picture and electronic game industries have taken a number of significant steps to limit marketing

violent R-rated films and M-rated games to children and to provide parents with more

information regarding the content of their products. In contrast, the music recording industry has

not taken any visible steps with respect to explicit-content labeled music.

The Senate Commerce Committee has requested, in addition to this report, another followup report in the Fall of 2001. The Committee requested that the second follow-up report include

information from the industry members themselves. At that time, the Commission will be in a

better position to assess the extent to which the entertainment media industries have taken steps

to avoid targeting children under 17 in their marketing of violent R-rated movies, explicitcontent labeled music, and M-rated electronic games. 
26

Because of First Amendment issues, the Commission continues to believe that vigilant selfregulation is the best approach to ensuring that parents are provided with adequate information to

guide their children’s exposure to entertainment media with violent content. The Commission is

encouraged by the motion picture and electronic game industries’ initial responses to its Report,

but more remains to be done, especially by the music recording industry. To avoid undermining

the cautionary message in the industries’ ratings and labels, the industry should avoid advertising

their products in the media most watched and read by children under 17. And now that ads are

including reasons for ratings, that information should be legible. The Commission urges

individual industry members to keep the industry’s own commitments and to go beyond those

commitments to meet the suggestions the Commission made in its September 2000 Report.
27

1. Federal Trade Commission, Marketing Violent Entertainment to Children: A Review of SelfRegulation and Industry Practices in the Motion Picture, Music Recording & Electronic Game

Industries (Sept. 2000) (“September 2000 Report”).

2. More specifically, the Commission recommended that all three industries institute codes of

conduct that:

< Prohibit placing advertising for R-rated/M-rated/explicit-labeled products in

media or venues with a substantial under-17 audience.

< Prohibit licensees from marketing action figures, toys, and other products

associated with R movies and M games to under-age audiences and require a

disclosure that the product is based on an entertainment product rated R or M.

< Provide for no-buy lists of media outlets popular with under-17 audiences

(including school venues, youth-oriented comic books, top teen TV shows, and

younger teen magazines).

< Encourage the auditing of ad placement to verify that advertisements are not

reaching a substantial under-17 audience.

< Encourage media screening of ads for consistency with these principles.

< Provide for the associations to monitor and encourage member compliance with

these policies, and to impose meaningful sanctions for noncompliance.

Id. at 54.

3. The Commission recommended that the industries encourage their members, as well as thirdparty retailers, to:

< Check age or require parental permission before selling or renting R-rated/Mrated/advisory-labeled products.

< Clearly and conspicuously display the ratings and advisories on packaging and in

advertising, and avoid covering or obscuring them.

< Avoid sales of R-rated/M-rated/advisory-labeled products on retail Internet sites

unless they use a reliable system of age verification.

< Develop guidelines for the electronic transfer of movies, music, and games.

Id. at 55.

4. The Commission recommended that the industries “expand their outreach programs to parents

to facilitate informed choice and raise awareness and understanding of the ratings, content

descriptors, and advisory labels.” The Commission suggested that the industries specifically

should:

< Clearly and conspicuously display the rating or advisory label and the descriptors

in all advertising and product packaging.

< Encourage the media to include rating and labeling information in reviews. This

information often is included in movie reviews, but less frequently is included in

game or music reviews.

< Take additional steps to inform parents, especially by including rating and

ENDNOTES
28

labeling information in retail stores and on Web sites, where products can be

sampled, downloaded, or purchased.

Id.

5. Marketing Violence to Children: Hearing Before the Senate Comm. on Commerce, Science

and Transp., 106th Cong. (Sept. 13, 2000); Marketing Violence to Children II: Hearing Before

the Senate Comm. on Commerce, Science and Transp., 106th Cong. (Sept. 27, 2000). In addition,

on September 20 and 21, 2000, the Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing on whether the

entertainment industries should be given an antitrust exemption to facilitate the development of

industry-wide codes of conduct restricting the marketing and sale of violent entertainment

products to children. Antitrust Law and the Marketing of Violent Entertainment to Children: 

Hearing Before the Senate Comm. on the Judiciary, 106th Cong. (Sept. 20 and 21, 2000).

6. Several members of Congress also questioned whether the Commission could take law

enforcement action against the practice of target marketing to children products rated or labeled

as inappropriate for children or with a parental advisory. In response to those inquiries, the

Commission initiated a review of whether the advertising and marketing practices documented in

the Commission’s Report might violate the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act

prohibiting the use of unfair or deceptive acts or practices in commerce. After a careful review

of the entertainment industry’s marketing practices and an analysis of the law, the Commission

concluded in November 2000 that there are a number of significant legal limitations, including

substantial and unsettled constitutional questions, to effective law enforcement actions under the

FTC Act. Instead, the Commission suggested that the most prompt and viable option might be

for Congress to continue to encourage further, needed reforms to the self-regulatory systems. See

Letter from Robert Pitofsky, Chairman, Federal Trade Commission, to Senator John McCain,

Chairman of the Senate Comm. on Commerce, Science and Transp. (Nov. 20, 2000), available at

www.ftc.gov/opa/2000/11/violence.htm.

7. The MPAA member studios are the Walt Disney Company, Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer,

Paramount Pictures, Sony Pictures Entertainment, Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp., Universal

City Studios, and Warner Bros. Dreamworks SKG – not an MPAA member – also signed on to

the initiative. Motion Picture Association of America, A Response to the FTC Report (Sept. 26,

2000).

8. See generally Marketing Violence to Children: Hearing Before the Senate Comm. on

Commerce, Science and Transp., 106th Cong. (Sept. 13, 2000), 2000 WL 1340874; Marketing

Violence to Children II: Hearing Before the Senate Comm. on Commerce, Science and Transp.,

106th Cong. (Sept. 27, 2000), Fed. News Serv., LEXIS, Legis Library, Hearng [sic] File.

9. National Association of Theatre Owners, Response of the National Association of Theatre

Owners to the Report and Recommendations of the Federal Trade Commission (Nov. 2, 2000)

(on file with the Commission).
29

10. Marketing Violence to Children II: Hearing Before the Senate Comm. on Commerce,

Science and Transp., 106th Cong. (Sept. 27, 2000), Fed. News Serv., LEXIS, Legis Library,

Hearng [sic] File.

11. The IDSA directed the task force “to explore whether and how to define target marketing, to

consider policies covering licensing of action figures, to consider possible development of

general industry guidelines for marketing M rated product and to discuss potential monitoring

tools [for the ESRB] to determine whether companies are improperly targeting M rated products

to young users.” Letter from Douglas Lowenstein, President of the IDSA, to FTC staff (Mar. 2,

2001) (on file with the Commission). The IDSA notes that its members see several difficulties in

drafting such guidelines:

Guidelines that deny company’s access to outlets where there is a large population

of adult users because they may also be popular with kids, raise very difficult

questions. . . . Overly restrictive self regulation in this case may seriously

undermine a company’s ability to reach the appropriate adult market, and is a

factor to weigh in considering how to define target marketing.

Id. In addition, IDSA members are concerned “about the legal implication of adoption and

enforcement of guidelines, including the potential for legal actions by publishers objecting to the

rating assigned to their products, or from game publication affected by publishers’ decision to

comply with guidelines.” Id. Moreover, the potential for legislation broadening the FTC’s

power to bring actions against companies that violate the guidelines raises additional concerns,

according to the IDSA. Id. 

12. See Letter from Douglas Lowenstein, President, IDSA, to FTC staff (Mar. 28, 2001) (on file

with the Commission). “In sum, we believe the guidelines we have adopted strike a delicate

balance between setting reasonable limits, protecting free speech, and promoting parental

responsibility and choice.” Id.

13. Letter from Dr. Arthur Pober, President, ESRB, to FTC staff (Feb. 20, 2001) (on file with the

Commission).

14. See Letter from Senator John McCain, Chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee,

Ranking Member Ernest Hollings, and Senators Max Cleland and Sam Brownback, to Robert

Pitofsky, Chairman, Federal Trade Commission (Jan. 22, 2001) (on file with the Commission).

15. Id.

16. Unlike the earlier Report, in preparing this report the Commission did not review

information from individual industry members, such as internal marketing plans and marketing

research data. Accordingly, it does not include the companies’ express statements regarding their

target audiences, nor does it include information on promotional activities such as the

distribution of free passes, flyers, stickers, etc., in teen hang-outs, which the September 2000

Report revealed to be an important way to target teens.
30

17. The Commission contracted with a commercial advertising tracking firm, Video Monitoring

Services (“VMS”), to track advertisements for rated or labeled products on television programs

popular with teens and younger children. For seven weeks during December 2000 and January

2001, VMS continuously monitored eight programs that were the highest rated among teens or

where teens comprised the largest percentage of the audience: Malcolm in the Middle, Seventh

Heaven, That ‘70s Show, The Simpsons, Titus, Total Request Live, WWF Heat, and WWF

Smackdown. The Commission selected these shows because they are ranked among the top

shows in terms of number of teen viewers or the percentage of teen viewers of the viewing

audience. All of these programs are televised before 9:00 p.m. For additional details, see

Appendix A (Data Collection Methodology and Television and Print Demographics).

18. The shows were: Friends, Seinfeld, Drew Carey, Home Improvement, Spin City, Seventh

Heaven, Moesha, and The Simpsons, as aired in Chicago, Cleveland, Dallas, Los Angeles, San

Francisco, and Seattle, on selected dates from mid-December 2000 to mid-January 2001 between

4:00 and 8:00 p.m. For additional details, see Appendix A.

19. The magazines were: DC Comics, Electronic Gaming Monthly, GamePro, Metal Edge,

Right On!, Seventeen, Teen, Teen People, Thrasher, Tips and Tricks, Unofficial PlayStation

Magazine, Vibe, WWF Magazine, and YM. Industry marketing plans reviewed for the September

2000 Report identified ad placements in these magazines when the target audience included

children under 17. The Commission reviewed ads from 23 publications in total, but to assess ad

targeting the Commission focused on 14 publications with a substantial youth audience that were

identified in Appendix I to the September 2000 Report. For additional details, see Appendix A.

20. See Appendix A. In order to assess rating practices (whether a rating or rating reason was

displayed clearly and conspicuously) — but not to assess whether ads were targeted to children

— the Commission also examined ads in issues of other publications in addition to those

identified in note 19 above: Computer Gaming World, Nintendo Power, Official SEGA

Dreamcast, PC Gamer, Rolling Stone, Spin, Teen Celebrity, Teen Movieline, and The Official

U.S. Playstation Magazine. 

21. In the September 2000 Report, the Commission’s findings regarding television advertising

were based on company media plans and other documents detailing the firms’ television

advertising dissemination schedules; the Commission did not independently monitor television

advertising. In addition, whereas for the September 2000 Report the Commission was able to

review marketing plans extending over several years, for this report the Commission examined

only a small number of television programs for a short time. Therefore, the results of the

monitoring conducted for this report cannot be directly compared with the September 2000

Report’s findings on the companies’ television advertising practices. That is, the data are not

sufficient to reveal whether the level of advertising of these products on popular teen programs is

more or less than it was a year or two ago. Rather, the data simply show whether R-rated

movies, explicit content-labeled music, and M-rated games are currently being advertised on

programs with substantial teen audiences.
31

22. September 2000 Report at 54.

23. Id.

24. Motion Picture Association of America, A Response to the FTC Report, Sept. 26, 2000. See

also Marketing Violence to Children II: Hearing Before the Senate Comm. on Commerce,

Science and Transp., 106th Cong. (Sept. 27, 2000) (statement of Mel Harris, President and Chief

Operating Officer of Sony Pictures Entertainment) (presenting MPAA initiatives), available at

2000 WL 1530870. Also, the Directors Guild of America announced its support for the creation

of a self-regulatory — not government-imposed — code of conduct to address marketing of films

intended for mature audiences, as well as for a universal ratings system to apply to a variety of

entertainment products. David Robb, DGA Calls for Industry Code on Marketing, Hollywood

Reporter, Sept. 15, 2001, at www.hollywoodreporter.com/crafts/briefs/0915.asp (visited Mar. 6,

2001). 

25. Marketing Violence to Children II: Hearing Before the Senate Comm. on Commerce,

Science and Transp., 106th Cong. (Sept. 27, 2000), Fed. News Serv., LEXIS, Legis Library,

Hearng [sic] File.

26. Id. MGM pledged to use the 35% audience share as a guideline, but not as an absolute. Id.

(testimony of Chris McGurk, Vice Chairman and COO of MGM).

27. For example, Disney agreed not to run ads for such movies on entertainment programming

airing before 9 p.m. Press Release, The Walt Disney Co., The Walt Disney Company Announces

Policies for Marketing Its Motion Pictures, Sept. 12, 2000 (on file with the Commission). The

Disney pledge extended to “any of its films released under the Touchstone, Hollywood Pictures

and Miramax Film banners.” Id. According to a News Corporation press release, Fox

Broadcasting Company will no longer “accept advertising for R-rated films in any family

programming, or in any program in which 35 percent or more of the audience is anticipated to be

under 17.” Press Release, News Corporation, www.newscorp.com/news/newscorpplan.html

(undated) (visited Mar. 6, 2001).

The 9 p.m. cutoff is one hour earlier than the 10 p.m. cutoff used by the Federal

Communications Commission for limiting the time that “indecent” programming may be

broadcast on television. The FCC presumes children are in the audience between 6 a.m. and 10

p.m. and therefore prohibits “indecent” programming during that time. 47 C.F.R. § 73.3999.

28. September 2000 Report at 14.

29. Id. at 14-15. “Early fringe” and “prime access” times are after school and before prime-time

network programming begins at 8 p.m.

30. Other data provided by VMS show that ads for at least five other movies rated R at least in

part for violence were aired between 6:00 p.m. and 9:00 p.m. between October 1, 2000 and

February 8, 2001 on programs that were the highest rated among teens. The movies were
32

Artisan’s Book of Shadows: Blair Witch 2, Paramount’s The Gift, and Warner Bros.’ 3000 Miles

to Graceland, Proof of Life, and Valentine. For additional details, see Appendix A.

31. The Commission’s monitoring of syndicated programs showing Monday through Friday that

are in the top ten in terms of number of viewers aged 12 to 17 (Friends, Drew Carey, Seinfeld,

Home Improvement, Spin City, Moesha, and The Simpsons) showed that the R-rated films

Dracula 2000, Hannibal, Proof of Life, Shadow of the Vampire, Snatch, The Gift, The Pledge,

Traffic, and Valentine were advertised on those programs on 60 occasions.

32. Based on VMS’s continuous monitoring of eight network programs with a substantial youth

audience for seven weeks during December 2000 and January 2001, the Commission found that

three R-rated movies – Snatch, Dracula 2000, and Traffic – were advertised. Miramax

advertised Dracula 2000 a total of six times on That ‘70s Show, The Simpsons, and Titus. Sony

Pictures aired four advertisements for Snatch on WWF Heat (two ads), That ‘70s Show, and

WWF Smackdown. USA Films (an independent studio and not an MPAA member) aired four

advertisements for Traffic on WWF Heat, That ‘70s Show, Titus, and Total Request Live. Of the

14 advertisements for these films, 10 were national advertising buys and four were “local” buys

purchased only in the market monitored. The number of local buys may be expected to vary

depending on the market monitored. For additional details, see Appendix A. 

33. Miramax advertised Dracula 2000 a total of six times on Fox Broadcasting Network

programs That ‘70s Show, The Simpsons, and Titus.

34. Press Release, News Corporation, www.newscorp.com/news/newscorpplan.html (undated)

(visited Mar. 6, 2001). 

35. The ad for Traffic was placed by non-MPAA member USA Films.

36. See Appendix A.

37. There were several ads for R-rated videocassettes or DVDs. For example, MGM ran an ad

in Vibe for Silence of the Lambs (rated R) and Raging Bull (rated R). Retailers such as

netflix.com and Tower Records also advertised R-rated videocassettes or DVDs in these

publications.

38. September 2000 Report at 18.

39. September 2000 Report at 15-16. Studios send completed features to theaters with one

trailer physically attached; other unattached trailers are sent to the theaters with a request that

they be shown with a particular feature. At the time the September 2000 Report was issued,

National Association of Theatre Owners (“NATO”) members were required to show the attached

trailer, and had discretion (subject to pressure from studios) to play the trailers that were not

attached.
33

40. Marketing Violence to Children II: Hearing Before the Senate Comm. on Commerce,

Science and Transp., 106th Cong. (Sept. 27, 2000), Fed. News Serv., LEXIS, Legis Library,

Hearng [sic] File.

41. NATO’s pledge extended to any trailers that are attached to the film by the studio, which

would require theaters to physically detach those trailers from the film reel. NATO members

also agreed not to show “red band,” or restricted, trailers or trailers for films rated NC-17 before

any G, PG, or PG-13 film. 

42. Only one G-rated film and one PG-rated film were released nationally in the mid-January

through mid-March time period during which the Commission could contract for a trailer check.

43. The trailer checking service found a trailer for one R-rated movie, Paramount’s Along Came

a Spider (“Rated R for violence and language”), showing before the G-rated feature Recess: 

School’s Out at two Regal theaters in the same metropolitan area. Nine of the 17 movies for

which trailers were shown before Recess: School’s Out at the theaters checked were not yet

rated. Two PG-13-rated features, Universal’s The Mummy Returns and Buena Vista’s Just

Visiting, were also shown before Recess: School’s Out at two theaters each. 

Two R-rated features by Twentieth Century Fox (Freddy Got Fingered and Say It Isn’t

So) were shown before the PG-rated See Spot Run at the same Cinemark theater in Houston. Of

the 18 films for which trailers were shown before See Spot Run, eight were unrated and three

were rated PG-13. 

The large number of trailers for films that were not yet rated suggests that the MPAA

might want to consider adopting a position similar to the electronic game industry’s code, which

provides that ads for games not yet rated should, to the extent practical, only be placed in media

whose audience would be suitable for the game’s content. See infra note 105.

44. Trailers for Enemy at the Gates (“Rated R for strong graphic war violence and some

sexuality”), Freddy Got Fingered (“Rated R for crude sexual and bizarre humor, and for strong

language”), House of 1000 Corpses (not yet rated but expected to receive an NC-17 rating due to

graphic violence), Say It Isn’t So (“Rated R for strong sexual content, crude humor and

language”), and Tomcats (“Rated R for strong sexual content including dialogue and for

language”) were among those shown before Monkeybone. 

45. Two Regal Theaters outside of Philadelphia showed trailers for Enemy at the Gates (“Rated

R for strong graphic war violence and some sexuality”) before Monkeybone. An AMC theater

outside Atlanta showed a trailer for House of 1000 Corpses (which is not yet rated but which

Universal Pictures reportedly announced it would not distribute because it expects the film to

receive an NC-17 rating due to its graphic violent content) before Monkeybone. See Patrick

Goldstein, Horror Flick Scares Off Universal, L.A. Times, Mar. 6, 2001, at

www.latimes.com/print/calendar/20010306/t000019674.html (visited Mar. 8, 2001);

www.robzombie.com/h1kcrelease.html (visited Mar. 7, 2001).

46. See Appendix A.
34

47. Robert W. Welkos, Studios Cut Back Marketing of Violent Movies to Teens, L.A. Times,

Dec. 22, 2000, www.latimes.com/news/state/updates/lat_drac001222.htm (visited Mar. 2, 2001). 

48. Id. In addition, Miramax did not create a Web site for the film or a music video for the

soundtrack. As noted above, however, television ad monitoring showed that Dracula 2000 was

advertised on a number of television programs with large teen audiences.

49. Id. 

50. Id. Another press account suggests that these types of marketing curbs may have hurt ticket

sales for certain films. However, the same article points out that other factors may also be at

play, and one of the films mentioned in the article as avoiding marketing to youth, Hannibal, has

been a huge box office success. Sharon Waxman, Marketing Curb on Gory Films May Slash

Profits, Wash. Post, Jan. 13, 2001, at A1,

www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A55171-2001Jan12.html (visited Mar. 1, 2001). 

Another press account reports that studios have begun to include rating reasons in radio ads as

well. Rachel Uslan, Does the Ad Say It All?, L.A. Times, Mar. 11, 2001,

www.latimes.com/news/asection/20010311/t000021254.html (visited Mar. 12, 2001).

51. Motion Picture Association of America, A Response to the FTC Report, Sept. 26, 2000. In

addition, three studios — Disney, MGM, and Warner Bros. — also promised not to advertise Rrated films on children’s Web sites. Greg Schneider, Studios Make Limited Vows on Violence,

Wash. Post, Sept. 23, 2000, www.ncvc.org/flash/sep00.htm (visited Mar. 12, 2001).

52. Motion Picture Association of America, A Response to the FTC Report, Sept. 26, 2000.

53. For a description of the syndicated programs reviewed, see supra note 18 and Appendix A. 

In the course of its review of television ads generally — as opposed to the review of syndicated

programs — the Commission did find one television ad with no rating (or rating pending)

information, for Paramount Pictures’ PG-13 film Save the Last Dance on MTV’s Total Request

Live.

54. In 35 of 60 ads for movies rated R for violence, the rating reasons were unreadable or

difficult to read.

55. Specifically, 226 of 401 ads for films rated PG-13 for violence either did not include rating

reasons or provided rating reasons that were difficult to read.

56. The Commission reviewed all of the magazines identified in notes 19 and 20, supra.

57. The Commission reviewed ads in the following newspapers with a general circulation for the

dates shown: Atlanta Journal-Constitution (1/5/01, 1/12/01, 1/26/01); Chicago Sun-Times

(12/15/00, 12/22/00, 1/5/01, 1/12/01, 1/19/01, 1/26/01); Chicago Tribune (12/15/00, 12/22/00,

12/29/00, 1/5/01, 1/19/01, 1/26/01); Dallas Morning News (12/15/00, 12/22/00, 12/29/00,

1/5/01, 1/12/01, 1/19/01); Los Angeles Times (12/15/00, 12/29/00, 1/5/01); New York Times
35

(12/15/00, 12/22/00, 12/29/00, 1/5/01, 1/12/01, 1/19/01, 1/26/01); The [Cleveland] Plain Dealer

(12/8/00, 12/15/00, 12/22/00, 12/29/00, 1/5/01, 1/12/01, 1/19/01, 1/26/01); Seattle PostIntelligencer (12/15/00-12/21/00, 12/22/00-12/28/00, 1/5/01-1/11/01, 1/19/01-1/25/01); Seattle

Times (12/15/00, 12/29/00, 1/5/01, 1/12/01, 1/19/01); Washington Post (12/15/00, 12/22/00,

12/29/00, 1/5/01, 1/12/01, 1/19/01, 1/26/01).

58. All but six of 1006 ads reviewed contained rating reasons. 

The Commission also reviewed 29 ads for R- and PG-13-rated films for sale on

videocassette or DVD in the same magazines and newspapers. Some of these ads presented

several films for sale, and other ads focused on a single film. The advertisers include retailers, as

well as studios. Of these ads, 13 did not provide the films’ ratings at all. In other cases, the

ratings were displayed only on images of the package cover art, making them difficult to see, or

were present on some videos but not others. Rating reasons were provided in five of the 29 ads. 

Notably, Universal Pictures provided both the rating — separate from the cover art and thus

easier to read — and rating reasons in an ad for home videos. Sony’s Columbia Tri-Star Pictures

also provided rating information for each film separate from the cover art in an advertisement for

several DVDs.

59. See Rachel Uslan, Does the Ad Say It All?, L.A. Times, Mar. 11, 2001,

www.latimes.com/news/asection/20010311/t000021254.html (visited Mar. 12, 2001):

Graphic Orb, a motion picture advertising firm, has been told by its clients --

including Universal, MGM and Columbia -- “to be big and legible so the MPAA

has nothing to take issue with,” said Laura Noble, an account executive. But on

some ads, like the ones for USA Films’ “Traffic” and Paramount Classics’

“Company Man,” the explanations run in a type smaller than both the stock tables

and the sports agate in the Los Angeles Times. 

60. In most of the ads, the rating reason is shorter than the statement “For rating reasons, go to

www.filmratings.com” that studios began including in some ads in 2000 in lieu of providing the

rating reason itself.

61. The films selected were all released after October 1, 2000.

62. Thirty of the 35 sites (86%) displayed the film’s rating, while 25 provided the film’s rating

reason. By contrast, in the December 1999 review of Web sites, 89% (41 of 46) of sites

contained the movie’s rating, and none provided the rating reason.

63. For example, the official home page of Universal’s The Watcher,

www.thewatchermovie.com, presented the viewer with a large pop-up window that contained the

rating and rating reason. This pop-up window effectively obscured the home page itself until the

viewer closed that window. Other sites displayed the ratings particularly prominently. For

example, the official home page for MGM’s Original Sin, www.mgm.com/originalsin.com,

provided very large and readable rating information. The official site for Twentieth Century

Fox’s Quills, www.foxsearchlight.com/quills/options.htm, provided a rating icon and rating
36

reason in large, contrasting print (a second icon and rating reason was also displayed, but this one

was too small to read unless the viewer placed the cursor over the rating in order to display a

readable version of it). The official site for Quills did include another page that displayed clear

and conspicuous ratings information, but this page appeared in a window behind the window

containing the heart of the site.

64. When checked in January 2001, the official home pages of Lion Gate Films’ Shadow of the

Vampire and USA Films’ Series 7: The Contender, for example, provided no rating information

at all. The Shadow of the Vampire site, when rechecked on February 21, 2001, did display the

rating icon and rating reason and link to other rating information. The home page for Series 7: 

The Contender was modified after the site was brought to the attention of the MPAA, and the

updated site currently provides rating information.

65. Eighteen sites linked to the MPAA Web site, www.mpaa.org; 26 provided a hyperlink to the

MPAA’s informational site, www.filmratings.com; and 26 sites linked to

www.parentalguide.org. Eighteen sites linked to all three sites. By way of comparison, in 1999

no site linked to other sites with rating information. 

66. Two of the sites reviewed for this report took the additional step of providing a warning that

the site contained material, or dealt with a subject matter, inappropriate for children. The Quills

Web site provided a warning that a portion of the site contained adult content. However, the

official site for the New Line film Blow, www.getsomeblow.com, provided a mock “warning”: 

“WARNING. Parental discretion is advised. This site will be objectionable for younger viewers. 

This site contains SEX, DRUGS, & ROCK N’ ROLL.” Rather than serve as a true mechanism

for informing consumers about content, the “warning” appears intended to titillate the viewer’s

interest in the film. 

In addition, six sites asked the visitor to disclose his or her age when the visitor attempts

to register for the studio’s online newsletter. The visitor is asked to verify that he or she is over

the age of 13 when registering for the newsletter, apparently in order to comply with the

Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 6501-6505 (1999). That Act imposes

certain obligations on Web site operators that collect personal information from children under

the age of 13 in order to protect children’s privacy and security online.

67. National Association of Theatre Owners, Response of the National Association of Theatre

Owners to the Report and Recommendations of the Federal Trade Commission (Nov. 2, 2000)

(on file with the Commission). The AMC theater chain resigned from NATO in late March

2001, but was a NATO member throughout the period that the Commission collected

information for this report and is included as a NATO member for purposes of this report. 

68. Web sites that do not provide a film’s rating reason but do provide a link to an educational

Web site also allow a consumer to find the rating reason by clicking on the hyperlink to the

educational Web site and inputting a search in the film database. Nevertheless, the Commission

did not count such sites as providing the rating reason because of the extra steps required to
37

obtain it. In addition to the rating reason database, the educational Web sites also include

detailed explanations of the different movie ratings.

69. Through moviefone.com, the site provides an opportunity to purchase tickets, but if one

attempts to purchase a child’s reduced price ticket for an R-rated feature, a message appears:

“Sorry, children under 17 will not be permitted into an R Rated feature without an adult.” 

70. See Appendix H to the September 2000 Report. The survey also looked at sales of M-rated

games and explicit-content labeled music.

71. The same five retailers were examined in both reviews, except that Bestbuy.com replaced

Cdnow.com.

72. Though the explicit content label makes no reference to age, common sense suggests that the

“parental advisory” is meant for the parents of minor children.

73. The Commission’s Report found that the marketing plans for all 55 recordings for which the

Commission obtained information detailed plans to market the recordings in media that would

reach a majority or a substantial percentage of teens. The plans for 15 of the 55 explicit content

recordings expressly identified teenagers as part of their target audience. See September 2000

Report Section Section V.

74. www.riaa.com/Parents-Advisory-5.cfm.

75. See Letter from Mitch Glazier, Senior V.P., Recording Industry Ass’n of America, to FTC

staff (undated but faxed Mar. 28, 2001) [hereinafter RIAA March 2001 Letter].

76. Thus, unlike the movie and game industry associations, the RIAA continues to focus only on

the benefits of the current labeling system, which does not address targeting explicit content

recordings to children. In addition, none of the individual recording companies has indicated that

it would voluntarily cease marketing to children, even though several of these companies

(Warner Bros., Sony, and Universal) have announced participation in the industry-wide (and, in

the case of Warner Bros., company-specific) anti-targeting initiatives regarding the marketing of

R-rated violent films. 

The National Association of Recording Merchandisers (“NARM”) informed the

Commission that the association supported the (now-rescinded) RIAA guidelines that restricted

advertising for explicit content recordings in media targeting those aged 16 and below, but does

not support any sanctions for failure to comply with a voluntary system. Letter from Pamela

Horovitz, President, NARM, to FTC staff (Mar. 21, 2001) at 5 [hereinafter NARM March 2001

Letter].

77. The Commission monitored advertising on eight television programs with substantial teen

audiences (MTV: Total Request Live and WWF Heat; Fox: The Simpsons, Malcolm in the

Middle, That ‘70s Show, Titus; WB: 7

th Heaven; UPN: WWF Smackdown). See supra note 17.
38

78. The VMS data show that 21 ads for explicit content recordings ran during the seven weeks

of these MTV programs.

79. VMS data for the first airing of advertisements for explicit-content recordings showed that

BMG ran ads for explicit content recordings on WWF Smackdown and Top 10 Live; EMI ran ads

for explicit content recordings on Top 10 Live; Sony Music ran ads for explicit content

recordings on Total Request Live, Top 10 Live, and WWF Smackdown; UMG ran ads for explicit

content recordings on WWF Smackdown, Top 10 Live, Jackass, and Total Request Live; and

WEA ran ads for explicit content recordings on Top 10 Live. See Appendix A. 

80. The Commission examined advertisements for recordings placed in Metal Edge (12/00 and 

1 - 3/01), Right On! (12/00 and 1 - 3/01), Seventeen (1 - 3/01), Teen People (1 - 3/01), Thrasher

(12/00 and 2 - 3/01), and Vibe (12/00 and 1 - 3/01).

81. No ads for explicit content recordings were found in the issues of Seventeen and Teen People

reviewed. BMG ran 20 ads in Right On!, Thrasher, and Vibe. EMI ran 15 ads in Metal Edge,

Right On!, Thrasher, and Vibe. Sony ran 10 ads in Metal Edge and Vibe. UMG ran 25 ads in

Metal Edge, Right On!, Thrasher, and Vibe. WEA ran 7 ads in Metal Edge and Vibe. 

82. See September 2000 Report Section IV.

83. See RIAA March 2001 Letter at 4. In addition, the NARM supported formulating a

recommendation for the inclusion of a standardized parental advisory in radio advertising for

explicit content recordings. See NARM March 2001 Letter at 2.

84. Thus, because the companies’ advertising practices may be just beginning to change, the

Commission would expect to see the clear advertising disclosures, now recommended by the

RIAA, in the follow-up report the Commission expects to issue in Fall 2001. 

85. The RIAA March 2001 Letter provides three reasons why providing lyrics may be difficult

or undesirable. First, certain artists may object to providing lyrics to their works because it

extracts the words from their musical content and “severely distorts their work and is not

indicative of the total expression.” Second, it may be “counterproductive to collect all ‘labeled’

lyrics for presentation on a single web site (such as parentalguide.org)” as children may gain

access to such lyrics. Third, such lyrics may already be available on other Web sites, such as the

artist or publisher Web site. However, the RIAA states that it will “continue to discuss with

music publishers the ways in which lyrics can be made more readily available to parents in a

manner that respects artists and avoids unintentional results.” RIAA March 2001 Letter at 2-3. 

The NARM also reports that it is involved in the discussions about directing parents to lyrics for

explicit content recordings, possibly via the parentalguide.org Web site. NARM March 2001

Letter at 4.

86. Along with the magazine issues described in supra note 19, the Commission also reviewed

the January through March 2001 issues of Spin and four issues of Rolling Stone (December 2000

and January, February, and March 2001).
39

87. 

Recording Company Web Site Surf 

YES NO

# % # %

Does the site contain album cover art? 38 95% 2 5%

 Does the advisory appear on the cover art? (of 38) 15 40% 23 61%

 Is the advisory readable? (of 15) 2 13% 13 87%

Is there other clear & conspicuous information

about explicit content?

18 45% 22 55%

Are there lyrics? 15 38% 25 63%

Are there audio clips? 32 80% 8 20%

Are there video clips? 29 73% 11 28%

Is the record offered for sale? 23 58% 17 43%

Is there a link to www.parentalguide.org? 0 0% 40 100%

Are there age restrictions on listening or

purchase?

0 0% 40 100%

88. The Commission selected the Web sites based on a listing of the top 200 albums as ranked

by Billboard on January 13, 2001. The official site was either the artist’s or band’s site or a

recording company site. 

89. The RIAA states that it has clarified to its members that “the parental advisory logo and any

accompanying language indicating that an edited version is available used in consumer print

advertising should be ‘clear and conspicuous’.” RIAA March 2001 Letter at 3.

90. Although several recording company sites provide an advisory, most of the online advisories

are provided by retail sites. Many of the recording sites surfed allowed a consumer to purchase

an album by linking directly to a specific page on a retail site. It is these retail Web sites that

usually contain the improved disclosures.

91. These sites should be able to come into compliance in the very near future because revisions

to online disclosures can be made almost immediately (unlike magazine ads, which require a

longer lead time between changing ad copy and publication date). The NARM now indicates it

will discuss promoting the parentalguide.org Web site and encouraging links to this site on

retailers’ Web sites and on in-store promotions. NARM March 2001 Letter at 2-3.

92. The NARM has informed the Commission that the retailers rely on the record companies to

provide them with graphics for retail ads that include the parental advisory, and that the music
40

retail association expects “that increasing numbers of ads for new releases will contain the

Parental Advisory,” while ads for already-released recordings “will take longer to bring into

compliance.” Id. at 2. The NARM also stresses that a “comprehensive effort” is underway to

encourage its members to display the parental advisory consistently on their Web sites. Id. at 2-

3.

93. 

Music Retailer Web Site Surf 

Amazon Best

Buy CDNow SamGoody

Tower

Records

Does the site contain album cover art? 5 of 5 5 of 5 5 of 5 5 of 5 5 of 5

Does the advisory appear on the

cover art? 3 of 5 1 of 5 3 of 5 2 of 5 4 of 5

Is the advisory readable? 1 of 3 0 of 1 0 of 3 0 of 2 0 of 4

1 other

partially

readable

only

2 partially

readable

1 partially

readable

3 partially

readable

Are there audio clips? 5 of 5 0 of 5 5 of 5 0 of 5 5 of 5

Are there video clips? 0 of 5 0 of 5 0 of 5 0 of 5 0 of 5

Is there other clear and conspicuous

information about explicit content?

5 of 5 5 of 5 3 of 5 0 of 5 3 of 5

“explicit

lyrics” and

“PA”**

“parental

advisory”

“explicit,”

“explicit

version,”

and

“edited”

only

“clean”

version

noted

“explicit,”

“edited,”

and

“PA”** 

Are disclosures provided throughout

purchasing process? 5 of 5 0 of 5 0 of 5 0 of 5 0 of 5

Is there a link to

www.parentalguide.org? 0 of 5 0 of 5 0 of 5 0 of 5 0 of 5

Are there age restrictions on listening

or purchase? 0 of 5 0 of 5 0 of 5 0 of 5 0 of 5

*readable if consumer chooses to enlarge the image of the cover art. Otherwise the image is visible but not readable.

** The letters “PA” were not counted as an understandable disclosure of explicit content.

94. Best Buy provided the disclosure “parental advisory” near the picture of the cover art, but

not throughout the purchasing process. CDNow at times used the terms “explicit” and “edited”

next to the album cover art, but in other cases either provided no information regarding an

album’s explicit content or provided this information buried several screens down, after the

consumer could purchase, read about, and listen to clips from the album. Tower Records would
41

at times use the disclosure “explicit” but more often provided the cryptic abbreviation “PA”

throughout the purchasing process.

95. The Commission’s December 1999 surf of 39 artist Web sites or Web pages showed that

four of the 39 sites examined provided the advisory label on the recording cover art in readable

form and that 14 of the 39 sites provided other information about an album’s explicit content.

96. See RIAA March 2001 Letter at 4.

97. These core violations of the industry’s own self-regulatory code were evidenced foremost by

internal company marketing documents for M-rated games that expressly targeted children

(typically boys) under age 17. The marketing documents provided to the Commission indicated

that at least 70% of the violent M-rated games studied were targeted to children under 17. Fiftyone percent had at least one marketing or media plan or creative brief that expressly included

children under 17 in the game’s target audience. The incidence of express targeting was much

higher for console games (72%) than for personal computer games (26%).

98. See Marketing Violence to Children: Hearing Before the Senate Comm. on Commerce,

Science, and Transp., 106th Cong. (Sept. 13, 2000) (statement of Douglas Lowenstein, President,

Interactive Digital Software Ass’n [hereinafter IDSA testimony]), available at 2000 WL

1340874, at *68. Mr. Lowenstein stated: 

We agree that placing an ad for a Mature rated product in a publication that is

clearly and squarely aimed at young readers, such as Nickelodeon or SI for Kids,

is a violation of our standards. But we reject the FTC’s operating assumption that

ads in publications that happen to have some noteworthy percentage of young

readers, but a substantial and perhaps even dominant share of older readers and

users, is inappropriate. We do not think it is unreasonable for a company to place

an ad for a game in GamePro magazine where the average age of the readers is 18. 

We do not feel it is inappropriate to place an M ad in Electronic Gaming Monthly

where, according to the magazine, 59% of its readers are 17 and over.

See also statements by Peter Moore, President and C.O.O., Sega of America, and Gregory

Fischback, President and C.E.O., Acclaim Entertainment. Id. at 78, 102.

99. The Guidelines seek to explain the different percentages used for print and television

advertising:

Note: The distinction between the 45% under 17 audience allowed for print

publications and the 35% under 17 audience allowed for TV advertising

recognizes that the most effective and in some cases the only cost-effective way to

reach adult game enthusiasts is through magazines that have a substantial adult

readership along with some younger readers. The 35% demographic for TV

advertising is utilized because TV is a mass medium and does not present the

same issues when seeking to reach an adult audience.

See Guidelines Addressing Marketing of Mature Rated Games to Persons Under 17, attached to

Letter from Douglas Lowenstein, President, IDSA, to FTC staff (Mar. 28, 2001) [hereinafter M-
42

rated Game Ad Guides] (on file with the Commission). 

The Guidelines also set a 45% under-17 audience limit for advertising on Internet sites,

and oblige game publishers who license third parties to sell action figures and other products

based on their M-rated games to require that packaging for the products include the following

statement: “This [state item] is based on a Mature rated video game.” Id.

100. The Commission contracted with VMS to monitor advertising on eight television programs

with substantial teen audiences (MTV: Total Request Live and WWF Heat; Fox: The Simpsons,

Malcolm in the Middle, That ‘70s Show, Titus; WB: 7

th Heaven; UPN: WWF Smackdown). See

Appendix A.

101. A separate report received from VMS verifies that one M-rated game — THQ’s Evil Dead

— was being advertised on television during the period monitored. At least one ad for that game

was placed during the week of December 21, 2000 on an early morning MTV show that likely

has a substantial teen audience.

102. An October 1999 article in Newsweek included GamePro and Electronic Gaming Monthly

in a list of the 10 most-read magazines by 12- to 15-year-olds. Barbara Kantrowitz & Pat

Wingert, The Truth About Tweens, Newsweek, Oct. 18, 1999, at 62. The editors of GamePro

recently described its readership this way: 

[A]nd here’s how the age range for you crazy “kids” breaks down according to

GamePro’s last reader survey: 33 percent, age 18 and older; 58 percent, age 12-

17; and 9 percent, under age 12. Nine percent of half-a-million readers is nothing

to sneeze at . . .

Editor’s Letter: Sharpe and Savage, GamePro, Nov. 2000, at 20. 

103. In response to a recent inquiry from the Commission, GamePro indicated that 58% of its

readership is age 16 or younger. In response to contacts by the IDSA, Electronic Gaming

Monthly indicated that 41% of its readership is 16 or younger. See IDSA testimony, supra note

98. M-rated games are classified as suitable for those 17 and over. Although the magazines

typically break out their demographics by those 17 and under, demographic information showing

high under-18 audiences should also be a concern for game companies seeking to avoid exposing

their ads to large young teen audiences.

104. In preparing the chart, Rating Pending (“RP”) ads were included in the rating category that

the game later received. The IDSA’s Advertising Code of Conduct (“Adcode”) provides that RP

ads should “to the extent practical” be placed “only in publications . . . whose audiences would

be appropriate for the content portrayed in the title.” Adcode (on file with the Commission) at

V.D. The chart does not include 17 ads for games that as of March 2001 had not yet received

their final rating. 

105. Six of those eight companies had been contacted by the Commission for the September

2000 report.
43

106. Eidos has also placed two ads for Legacy of Kain, Soul Reaver 2 in both GamePro and

Electronic Gaming Monthly, using the RP (Rating Pending) designation since the game has not

yet been rated by ESRB. The prequel to this game, Legacy of Kain, Soul Reaver, is rated M.

107. The ad in GamePro for Infograme’s Unreal Tournament (Rated M, Animated Violence,

Animated Blood and Gore) featured a “Head Blow’d Up Repair Kit.”

108. All of the ads were for M-rated games that had a descriptor indicating violent content.

109. The April issue of Electronic Gaming Monthly carried four advertisements for M-rated

games. The Preamble to the new M-rated Game Ad Guides, which have not yet gone into effect,

expressly notes that industry members are free to adopt stricter guidelines for their own

marketing practices. See M-rated Game Ad Guides, supra note 99. 

110. Adcode at VII.A. 

111. The Commission did not review the March 2001 issue of PC Gamer and Computer Gaming

World.

112. These ads either: a) displayed no rating icon at all; b) displayed no descriptors; c) left off a

descriptor assigned to the game; d) changed the wording of the descriptor in a way that

understates the level of violence, sex or bad language in the game; or e) for RP ads, left off the

ESRB required box containing the phone number and Web site address for the ESRB to check if

the game had subsequently received a rating. ESRB regulations do not require advertisements

for multiple titles to include descriptors (although the Commission recommends that all ads

display both the rating and the descriptors). Those ads were counted as compliant if a properly

sized rating icon appeared in the ad. 

113. Also included in this category were instances where the wording of the descriptor was

changed from what ESRB assigned the game, but the change did not appear to understate the

level of violence, sex or bad language in the game.

114. Agetec, Capcom, Eidos, Electronic Arts, Gathering of Developers, Hasbro, InfoBank,

Infogrames, Innerloop, Interplay, LucasArts, Microsoft, N’Lightening, Rockstar, Sega,

ShoLodge, Sierra, Sony Computer Entertainment, Tecmo, THQ, and Westwood Studios. These

22 companies failed to include the required rating information in a total of 62 ads over the fourmonth period.

115. Agetec (5), Gathering of Developers (6), Infogrames (4), Interplay (4), Microsoft (4), and

Sega (5).

116. This was a ShoLodge ad for Dark Ore.

117. One Best Buy ad placed in the February 2001 issue of Electronic Gaming Monthly

promoted Capcom’s M-rated Resident Evil games, offering a $5 off coupon. It used the
44

following headline, “WASTE Zombies. SAVE Money.” The phrase, “All titles shown are

mature rated,” appeared in small print. It is not possible to tell whether this promotion was a coop ad with the game manufacturer. 

118. Chips & Bits mail-order ads feature hundreds of games. No rating information is provided

for most of the games listed in these two-page ads. For a few games, the ads display the games’

cover art, which usually shows the ESRB rating icon.

119. Adcode at VII.A. The required voice-over, “Rated M for Mature,” applies to television

spots longer than 15 seconds. For spots 15 seconds or shorter, the required voice-over is

shortened to “Rated M.” ESRB requires that the rating icon be 22 scan lines in size.

120. Adcode at VII.B, D. Online stores run by the game publisher must include the rating icon

and content descriptors on the page where game information, e.g., price, is provided.

121. Adcode at VIII.C.

122. In addition, the Commission reviewed the sites of five game developers (all non-IDSA

members). None of these sites displayed the game’s rating anywhere on the site. That review

highlights an apparent weakness of the Adcode in that it covers only the company that submits a

game to the ESRB for rating, typically the game publisher. Accordingly, game developers, who

generally do not submit games for rating, can promote and sell their games online outside the

restrictions of the Adcode. The Commission did not look at developer sites for this report.

123. In a smaller review conducted in May 2000, one site from each of the 18 companies was

randomly revisited to determine if compliance had improved since the Adcode was revised

effective January 2000. Only one company had made changes to comply with the online Adcode.

124. Some displayed the rating only on the cover art, while others buried the rating in text

describing the game; still others only displayed the rating at the point of purchase. 

125. Only six of the sites displayed the content descriptor in a way that would be noticeable to

visitors. For example, on some sites visitors will only see the content descriptor if they place the

mouse over the rating icon or the ESRB icon, while other sites distanced the descriptors from the

easily identifiable ESRB icon.

126. www.tecmoinc.com/deception.htm (visited Jan. 22, 2001).

127. www.capcom.com/onimusha_teaser.htm (visited Jan. 25, 2001).

128. www.turok.com/turok3/index.html (visited Jan. 25, 2001).

129. Sierra’s Gunman Chronicles displays the game’s ESRB rating only at the point of purchase,

fails to use the ESRB's easily recognizable rating icon, and does not use the word Mature at all. 

www.sierrastudios.com/games/gunman/ (visited Jan. 23, 2001). The Web site for Infogrames’
45

Koudelka contains the rating icon on the game’s cover art and renders it almost microscopic in

size. www.koudelka-thegame.com (visited Jan. 24, 2001). Electronic Arts’ Alice appears to

downplay the significance of a mature rating. The warning states, “Due to its collection of

certifiable characters, its challenging environments, and its furious, nearly always terminal (to

some) action, American McGee’s Alice is rated ‘M’ for Mature.” www.alice.ea.com/main.html

(visited Jan. 22, 2001). Alice’s content descriptors indicate that it is rated M for “Animated

Violence” and “Animated Blood and Gore.”

130. Some sites that permit visitors to access game clips and demos for violent M-rated games

appear to downplay the violent nature of the clip. For example, Acclaim’s Turok 3 site “warns”

visitors: “We've got some more QuickTimes for you, but they're pretty gory, so we've decided to

keep them on a second page to protect our children from being traumatized. Click through if

you're 17 or older.” While this message ensures that younger surfers (and parents, if they are

monitoring their child’s use of the Internet) know what type of content they are getting before

they download it, the warning and the link itself – “Take me to the Gore” – appear to make light

of the parental advisory notion and may serve to heighten interest. 

www.turok.com/turok3/index.html (visited Jan. 25, 2001).

131. See, e.g., Electronic Arts’ Undying, www.undying.ea.com (visited Jan. 22, 2001). Sony’s

Syphon Filter 2 placed the content descriptors at the bottom of the page, below the “screen

break,” while the ESRB icon was at the top of the page. 

www.scea.com/games/categories/actionadvent/syphon2/ (visited Jan. 25, 2001).

132. Very few of the sites, seven of 40, provided any additional advisory concerning the content

of the site itself. Two sites cautioned the visitor that the Web site contains adult content; four

sites warned the visitor that the trailer or demo contains material not suited for children; one site

cautioned potential purchasers with a pop-up window at the point of purchase; and another site

advised the visitor that only adults over the age of 18 could participate in an activity related to the

game. Only six of the 40 sites provided a hyperlink to ESRB’s Web site.

133. See, e.g., Electronic Arts ordering page for Alice, www.ea.com (visited Jan. 22, 2001).

134. Because availability of the games differed across the six retailers’ sites, the Commission

examined at least six games per site from the following list: Diablo II, Resident Evil: Code

Veronica, Quake III: Arena, Eternal Darkness, Parasite Eve II, Turok 3: Shadow of Oblivion,

Half Life: Counter Strike, Fear Effect 2: Retro Helix, and Metal Gear Solid. 

135. According to the Interactive Entertainment Merchants Association (“IEMA”), which

represents 19 of the top 20 retail companies in the video and computer gaming sector (K-B Toys

is not a member), all member companies are required to make their best efforts to display

educational information about the ESRB system, and are “encouraged” to enforce the rating

system. 

The IDSA and the ESRB have asked retailers to adopt programs that restrict children’s

access to M-rated games, such as the ESRB’s “Commitment to Parents” program where retailers
46

promise to “make their best efforts not to sell games rated ‘M’ to children under age seventeen.” 

The ESRB notes that seven retailers have adopted the “Commitment to Parents” program: 

Babbages, Electronics Boutique, Funcoland (owned by Babbages), Kmart, Hastings, ShopKo,

and Toys “R” Us. 

 It remains to be seen how these retailers implement such restrictive sale policies. The

undercover shopper survey of electronic game retailers conducted for the Commission’s

September 2000 Report found that children ages 13-16 were able to purchase M-rated games at

85% of the 380 stores visited. Even at the four retailers that had adopted the “Commitment to

Parents” program at the time of the Commission’s shop, underaged shoppers were able to

purchase an M-rated game 81% of the time.

136. Outpost.com displays the Mature rating for two of the six games surveyed, and then only on

the box art that is too small to read or is inconspicuously located at the bottom of the Web page. 

137. The Commission gave credit to online retailers if they displayed a product’s content

descriptors anywhere on the site. Two of the retailers did not display content descriptors for any

of the games surveyed, and three displayed content descriptors for only a selection of the games. 

For example, a visitor can view the descriptors for Turok 3: Shadow of Oblivion on the

Express.com site, but only if the visitor knows to click on the cover art for the game displayed on

the product information page.

www.express.com/consumer/products_games_fr.asp?PRODUCTNUMBER=19546 (visited Jan.

26, 2001). While Amazon.com displayed content descriptors for a majority (four of six) of the

games checked, the site applies its own content descriptors in lieu of the official descriptors

provided by the ESRB. Amazon.com’s content descriptors closely resembled the ESRB

descriptors but were not identical. None of the retailers provided any mechanism for age

verification, but a potential purchaser has to provide a credit card number to purchase a game,

reducing the likelihood that unsupervised children would be able to buy these games online. And

although none of the sites provided a link to rating information at the ESRB Web site, two of the

retailers, EBWorld.com and Amazon.com, give detailed information about the ESRB ratings on

their own sites.

138. For Toys “R” Us, the Commission looked at practices involving seven games (two were

unavailable at this retailer’s site). For five of the seven games — Diablo II, Metal Gear Solid,

Quake III: Arena, Turok 3: Shadow of Oblivion, and Half Life: Counter Strike — the

ToysRUs.com name was displayed together with Amazon.com at the top of the information page

for the game. For the other two, only Amazon.com’s name was displayed.

139. The information pages for the five games that are branded with both Amazon.com’s and

ToysRUs.com’s names do not display any content descriptors. The two games branded solely

with Amazon.com’s name do display content descriptors created by Amazon.com.

140. Amazon.com’s own site contains the same caution on the information page for each Mrated game.
47

The Commission purchased an M-rated game, Diablo II (published by Blizzard

Entertainment) directly from ToysRUs.com. Unlike the practice at Toys “R” Us bricks-andmortar stores, see September 2000 Report text accompanying note 304, online Toys “R” Us did

not ask the purchaser’s age, require parental consent, or confirm that the buyer knows he or she is

purchasing an M-rated game. Moreover, when the game arrived, its packaging did not display

the game’s content descriptors (Animated Violence and Animated Blood & Gore) on the back of

the box as required by the ESRB, although it did display the M-rated icon on the front of box.

141. The Commission’s earlier review for the September 2000 report found that at least 16

companies placed five or more ads without any rating information, with two companies each

placing at least 33 ads without any rating information. The review also found that in the

February through the June 2000 magazine issues, at least 13 companies had placed five or more

ads without descriptors, despite the new IDSA requirement, beginning in February 2000, to

include descriptors in print ads.

A-1

APPENDIX A: DATA COLLECTION METHODOLOGY AND TELEVISION AND

PRINT DEMOGRAPHICS

This Appendix describes the media monitoring the Commission undertook to gather the

data for this report. It also sets out demographic data for the audiences for the television

programs and publications discussed in the report. In requesting this report, the Senate

Commerce Committee asked that the Commission examine whether violent R-rated movies,

explicit-content labeled music, and M-rated video games are advertised in “popular teen media,”

and whether rating information is included in the advertising.

I. SELECTION OF POPULAR TEEN MEDIA

In determining which popular teen media to review, the Commission focused primarily on

the television programs and magazines that the industry marketing plans reviewed for the

September 2000 Report indicated were used when the target audience included children under

17. For example, the internal marketing plans reviewed for the September 2000 Report revealed

that certain programs were popular advertising outlets for movie studios trying to target children. 

These programs included those in the top 25 teen shows according to Nielsen ratings (i.e., the

programs drawing the largest teen audience); those ranked as the “favorite” with the under-17

age group in opinion polls; and those airing during the after-school and early evening hours that

the media plans indicated were the most effective time to reach children aged 12 to 17.1

For this report, therefore, the Commission reviewed ad placement on the programs highest

rated with teens and airing during the time of day the companies previously used to target teens. 

For magazines, the Commission reviewed the same magazines that the industry marketing plans

reviewed for the September 2000 Report revealed were used when the industry’s target audience

included children under 17. These magazines have a readership that is between 40% and 80%

under age 18.

Following the Commission’s September 2000 Report, several entertainment industry

members expressed disagreement with the criteria used to judge which media have a substantial

youth audience. For example, some industry members criticized the Commission’s

characterization of television programs as having a substantial youth audience when their
A-2

percentage of viewers under 17 was under 25%, and advocated 35% under 17 as a more

appropriate threshold. However, the industry marketing plans reviewed for the September 2000

Report showed that companies who wanted to reach teen audiences did so by advertising widely

and heavily on programs whose audience was less than 35% under 17.2 Indeed, Nielsen data

indicate that few of the programs most popular with teens garner an audience that is 35% or more

under 17. Only three of eleven programs that marketing plans reviewed for the September 2000

Report revealed were outlets used to reach teens had a youth audience greater than 35% under

18.3 Even shows with 22% under-17 audiences were characterized by marketing plans as “youthtargeted.”4

 These shows reach millions of teens and are ranked by Nielsen as among the top teen

programs. Accordingly, to determine which television programs to review for this report, the

Commission focused on the same programs airing during the same time of day that industry

marketing plans previously indicated were used when targeting teens, even if the percentage of

the audience under 17 is less than 35%.

The electronic game industry similarly has questioned whether advertising M-rated games

in game enthusiast magazines with a substantial or even majority under-17 readership constitutes

inappropriate targeting of children under 17. The Commission acknowledges that game

enthusiast magazines are a natural venue for advertising games, but some of these magazines

have many times the number of young readers they would have if their readership mirrored the

population at large. Indeed, the editor of one such magazine described it as a “male-teen

magazine.”5 The Commission believes that such magazines are appropriately characterized as

popular with children under 17 and as having a substantial under-17 audience.

II. POPULAR TELEVISION SHOWS AMONG TEENAGERS

The Commission reviewed advertising that occurred in December 2000 and January 2001

on network and cable television, including shows in syndication, in the after-school and early

prime-time slots when children under 17 are most likely to be watching television. The

Commission also reviewed data showing where each particular ad for an R-rated movie was first

aired between October 2000 and February 2001.
A-3

A. Network Television Monitoring

The Commission contracted with a commercial advertising tracking firm, Video

Monitoring Services (“VMS”), to track advertisements for rated or labeled products on television

programs that Nielsen data indicated were the highest rated among teens or where teens

comprised the largest percentage of the audience. VMS continuously monitored eight programs

for seven weeks during December 2000 and January 2001: Malcolm in the Middle, Seventh

Heaven, That ‘70s Show, The Simpsons, Titus, Total Request Live, WWF Heat, and WWF

Smackdown. Malcolm in the Middle, Seventh Heaven, That ‘70s Show, The Simpsons, Titus and

WWF Smackdown were the top six shows in the early prime-time (8:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.) slot

among children 12-17 in terms of number of teen viewers, according to data provided by Nielsen. 

Because the programs are ranked by audience size among teen viewers, they are not necessarily

the programs with the highest percentage of viewers under 17 relative to the total audience. The

percentage of children under 18 in the viewing audience for these six shows ranges from 22% to

36% based on March 2001 data provided by Nielsen. MTV’s Total Request Live and WWF Heat

were also monitored because they have very substantial youth audiences in terms of percentage,

although their audience size is small compared to the network and syndicated programs

reviewed. In fact, viewers under 18 make up a majority (58%) of Total Request Live’s audience. 

Most of these television programs are programs that the industry marketing plans had earlier

indicated they advertised on when they wanted to reach children under 17.6 VMS monitored

programs appearing in the New York City market.
A-4

Table A below sets out audience size for these programs based on March 2001 Nielsen

data:

Table A: Network Program Demographics

Program (Network) Average Audience

12-17 

Average Total

Audience

Percentage of

Audience Under 18

Malcolm in the Middle (FOX) 2,264,000 15,062,000 31%

Simpsons (FOX) 2,189,000 15,342,000 30%

Titus (FOX) 1,364,000 9,896,000 24%

That ‘70s Show (FOX) 1,342,000 11,272,000 22%

WWF Smackdown! (UPN) 1,323,000 7,392,000 36%

Seventh Heaven (WB) 1,270,000 7,271,000 32%

WWF Heat (MTV) 453,000 2,449,000 35%

Total Request Live (MTV) 283,000 605,000 58%

B. Syndicated Programs

In addition to the network programs listed above, the Commission reviewed syndicated

programming. Specifically, the Commission reviewed tapes of seven of the top eight syndicated

programs airing daily Monday through Friday in terms of audience among children 12-17 based

on Nielsen data: Friends, Seinfeld, Drew Carey, Home Improvement, Spin City, Seventh Heaven,

Moesha, and The Simpsons.

7

 The programs were taped on selected dates from mid-December

2000 to mid-January 2001 as aired in Chicago, Cleveland, Dallas, Los Angeles, San Francisco,

and Seattle during the weekday after-school and pre-prime-time periods (between 4:00 p.m. and

8:00 p.m. local time). Because these programs are ranked by audience size, they are not

necessarily the programs with the highest percentage of viewers under 17 relative to the total

audience. The percentage of children under 18 in the viewing audience for these six shows

ranges from 16% to 39% based on March 2001 data provided by Nielsen. Table B below sets out

the audience demographics for the syndicated programs.
A-5

Table B: Syndicated Program Demographics

Program Average Audience

12-17

Average Total

Audience 

Percentage of

Audience Under 18

Friends 897,000 8,678,000 20%

Drew Carey 627,000 5,154,000 23%

Seinfeld 624,000 7,671,000 16%

Seventh Heaven 436,000 2,437,000 37%

Home Improvement 428,000 3,380,000 27%

Spin City 402,000 4,345,000 20%

Moesha 312,000 2,024,000 39%

C. First Airing Data

The Commission’s television monitoring was limited to only certain episodes of a limited

number of network and syndicated programs, as noted above. To supplement this monitoring

data, the Commission obtained “first airing” data from VMS to gain additional information about

where the industry members placed their advertisements. The first airing data indicate, among

other information, the date, time, station, and program on which each different advertisement for

an R-rated movie, stickered recording, or M-rated game8 first aired. As these data document only

the first showing of any one ad, they do not indicate whether each ad was repeatedly shown on

these programs, or on which other programs an ad might have been aired after the initial

occasion. 

The Commission’s review of the first airing data indicates that at least five R-rated movies,

rated R at least in part for violence, were advertised on the syndicated programs identified in

Table B — programs among the top eight most popular syndicated programs airing Monday

through Friday in terms of audience among children 12-17. Table C lists these motion pictures.9

All of these ads were aired between 6:00 p.m. and 9:00 p.m. 
A-6

Table C: Advertisements for R-rated Motion Pictures

First Aired on Programs Popular with Teens

Motion Picture Title Studio Program During Which

Ad Was First Aired

Network, 

Syndicated or Cable

3000 Miles to Graceland Warner Brothers Drew Carey Syndicated

Book of Shadows: Blair Witch 2 Artisan Friends Syndicated

Book of Shadows: Blair Witch 2 Artisan The Simpsons Syndicated

Proof of Life Warner Brothers Friends Syndicated

Proof of Life Warner Brothers Friends Syndicated

The Gift Paramount Friends Syndicated

Valentine Warner Brothers Friends Syndicated

Valentine Warner Brothers The Simpsons Syndicated

Valentine Warner Brothers Friends Syndicated

The “first airing” data indicate that advertisements for explicit recordings were placed

primarily on cable television programs with substantial youth audiences in terms of percentage,

ranging from 35% to 58%. These programs include the programs identified in Table D:

Table D: Demographics of Television Programs Where 

Ads for Stickered Music Recordings First Aired 

Program (Network) Average Audience

12-17

Average Total

Audience

Percentage of

Audience Under 18

WWF Smackdown (UPN) 1,323,000 7,392,000 36%

Jackass (MTV) 357,000 1,217,000 35%

Total Request Live (MTV) 283,000 605,000 58%

Top Ten Live at 106 & Park (BET) 112,000 432,000 41%

Source: Nielsen data as of March 2001. 

Table E sets out those recordings for which advertisements were initially aired on programs

with a substantial teen audience. All of these programs began before 9:00 p.m.10
A-7

Table E: Advertisements for Stickered Music Recordings 

First Aired on Programs Popular with Teens

Recording Title Recording Artist and

Label

Program During Which

Ad Was First Aired

Network, 

Syndicated or

Cable

Awake Godsmack/UMG WWF Smackdown Network

Awjuswannaseing Musiq Soulchild/UMG BET’s Top Ten Live

(106th & Park)

BET

Awjuswannaseing Musiq Soulchild/UMG BET’s Top Ten Live

(106th & Park)

BET

Back For the First Time Ludacris/UMG BET’s Top Ten Live

(106th & Park)

BET

Back For the First Time Ludacris/UMG BET’s Top Ten Live

(106th & Park)

BET

Checkmate B.G./UMG BET’s Top Ten Live

(106th & Park)

BET

Chocolate Starfish and the

Hot Dog-Flavored Water

Limp Bizkit/UMG WWF Smackdown Network

Da Baddest Trina/WEA BET’s Top Ten Live

(106th & Park)

BET

Damizza Presents: Where I

Wanna Be

Various/WEA BET’s Top Ten Live

(106th & Park)

BET

Dracula 2000 Soundtrack Various/Sony WWF Smackdown Network

Ghetto Postage Master P/EMI BET’s Top Ten Live

(106th & Park)

BET

H.N.I.C. Prodigy of Mobb

Deep/Sony

BET’s Top Ten Live

(106th & Park)

BET

H.N.I.C. Prodigy of Mobb

Deep/Sony

BET’s Top Ten Live

(106th & Park)

BET

Holy Wood Marilyn Manson/UMG Total Request Live

(TRL)

MTV

Lights Out Lil’ Wayne/UMG BET’s Top Ten Live

(106th & Park)

BET

No Limit Records Various/EMI BET’s Top Ten Live

(106th & Park)

BET

Nothin’ But Drama Profyle/UMG BET’s Top Ten Live

(106th & Park)

BET
A-8

Pleezbaleevit Snoop Dogg Presents

Doggy’s Angels/TVT

Jackass MTV

Reflection Eternal Talib Kweli & Hi-Tek/EMI BET’s Top Ten Live

(106th & Park)

BET

Renegades of Funk Rage Against the

Machine/Sony

Total Request Live

(TRL)

MTV

Restless Xzibit/Sony BET’s Top Ten Live

(106th & Park)

BET

Stankonia Outkast/BMG BET’s Top Ten Live

(106th & Park)

BET

Stankonia Outkast/BMG WWF Smackdown Network

Stankonia Outkast/BMG WWF Smackdown Network

Take a Bite Outta Rhyme Various/UMG Total Request Live

(TRL)

MTV

The Mark, Tom & Travis

Show

Blink 182/UMG Total Request Live

(TRL)

MTV

The Reunion Capone-N-Noreiga/ADA BET’s Top Ten Live

(106th & Park)

BET

The Gift of Game Crazy Town/Sony Total Request Live

(TRL)

MTV

The Dynasty- Roc a Familia Jay Z/UMG BET’s Top Ten Live

(106th & Park)

BET

The Understanding Memphis Bleek/UMG BET’s Top Ten Live

(106th & Park)

BET

The Last Meal Snoop Dogg/EMI BET’s Top Ten Live

(106th & Park)

BET

The W Wu Tang Clan/Sony BET’s Top Ten Live

(106th & Park)

BET

The W Wu Tang Clan/Sony Total Request Live

(TRL)

MTV

Told You So Sparkle/UMG BET’s Top Ten Live

(106th & Park)

BET

TP-2.com R. Kelly/BMG BET’s Top Ten Live

(106th & Park)

BET
A-9

III. PRINT MEDIA

A. Magazines Reviewed to Assess Ad Placement

The Commission reviewed the December 2000 and January-March 2001 editions of

magazines identified in the industry marketing plans reviewed for the September 2000 Report

when the target audience included children under 17. The chart below sets out the name of the

publication, the particular issues reviewed for this report, and age demographic data for the

publication (updated from the September 2000 Report, unless otherwise noted):

Magazine Issues Reviewed Age Demographics

DC Comics 12/00, 1/01, 2/01 median age is 16.8 (data from September 2000

report)

Electronic Gaming

Monthly

12/00, 1/01, 2/01, 3/01 47% under 18; average age is 21; median age is

18

GamePro 12/00, 1/01, 2/01, 3/01 58% age 16 and under

Metal Edge 12/00, 1/01, 2/01, 3/01 average age is 21

Unofficial Playstation 1/01, 2/01 43% age 16 or younger

Right On! 12/00, 1/01, 2/01, 3/01 71% of audience is under 18; 58% of audience is

under 16; “Our median age is 16; however, many

of our readers are as young as 8 and range into

their 30's.”

Seventeen 1/01, 2/01 47% of audience under 18; median age is 18.8

Teen 12/00, 1/01, 2/01 median age for readers 12 and up is 17; median

age for readers 12-24 is 16; median age for

readers 12-19 is 15.

Teen People Holiday ‘01, 2/01 59.3% of readers between 12 & 16

Thrasher 12/00, 2/01, 3/01 median age is 17.5, average age is 16.3 (data

from September 2000 Report)

Tips and Tricks 1/01, 2/01 77.1% under 24 (data from September 2000

Report)

Vibe 12/00, 1/01, 2/01, 3/01 43.6% under 18 (data from September 2000

Report)

WWF Magazine 12/00, 1/01 62% between 12 & 17

YM 12/00, 1/01, 2/01 70% of female readers between 12 & 19
A-10

B. Magazines and Newspapers Reviewed to Assess Rating Information Practices

To assess rating information practices (whether a rating or rating reason was displayed

clearly and conspicuously) the Commission examined ads in the following magazines and

general circulation newspapers, in addition to the 14 magazines identified above. Because rating

information is primarily for parents, it made sense also to review general circulation periodicals,

and not just periodicals aimed at children, to see if rating information was included.11

Magazines Issues Reviewed

Computer Gaming World 12/00, 1/01, 3/01

Nintendo Power 12/00, 2/01

Official SEGA Dreamcast Holiday 2000

PC Gamer 12/00, 1/01, 3/01

Rolling Stone 12/00, 1/01, 2/01, 3/01

Spin 1/01, 3/01

Teen Celebrity March 2001

Teen Movieline Winter 2000

The Official U.S. Playstation

Magazine

12/00, 1/01, 2/01

Newspapers Issues Reviewed

Atlanta Journal-Constitution 1/5/01, 1/12/01, 1/26/01

Chicago Sun-Times 12/15/00, 12/22/00, 12/29/00, 1/5/01, 1/12/01, 1/19/01, 1/26/01

Chicago Tribune 12/15/00, 12/22/00, 12/29/00, 1/5/01, 1/19/01, 1/26/01

Dallas Morning News 12/15/00, 12/22/00, 12/29/00, 1/5/01, 1/12/01, 1/19/01

Los Angeles Times 12/15/00, 12/29/00, 1/5/01

New York Times 12/15/00, 12/22/00, 12/29/00, 1/5/01, 1/12/01, 1/19/01, 1/26/01

The [Cleveland] Plain Dealer 12/8/00, 12/15/00, 12/22/00, 12/29/00, 1/5/01, 1/12/01, 1/19/01,

1/26/01

Seattle Post-Intelligencer 12/15/00 - 12/21/00, 12/22/00 -12/28/00, 1/5/01 - 1/11/01,

1/19/01 - 1/25/01

Seattle Times 12/15/00, 12/29/00, 1/5/01, 1/12/01, 1/19/01

Washington Post 12/15/00, 12/22/00, 12/29/00, 1/5/01, 1/12/01, 1/19/01, 1/26/01
A-11

1. See September 2000 Report at 15, 33, 48-49.

2. See generally id. and Appendix I to the September 2000 Report.

3. See Appendix I to the September 2000 Report. Moreover, only one had more than 37% under

18. Id. The 11 programs are those network and syndicated programs for which the Commission

had audience composition data. Those industry members that have defined a substantial youth

audience have used a 35% under 17 figure, a threshold that only one of the 11 programs would

likely reach.

4. See September 2000 Report at n.283 and Appendix I.

5. According to the editor of GamePro: “GamePro is the fifth largest male-teen magazine and

the largest-circulation video game publication in the U.S. According to Teen Research

Unlimited, 20 percent of all American male teens (one out of five) read GamePro in ‘99.” 

Editor’s Letter: I’ll Take GamePro to Win, GamePro, Apr. 2000, at 26. GamePro’s readership

is nearly 60% under 17. See chart infra Section III.A.

6. Newer programs rose to popularity only after the time that the industries prepared the

advertising dissemination schedules which were later provided to the Commission for the

September Report.

7. Ranking is based on Nielsen data as of December 2000. Technically, older episodes of The

Simpsons are no longer in “barter syndication,” and for that reason Nielsen no longer ranks the

program among those syndicated shows. The Simpsons is included here because, for the three

years preceding the release of the September Report when the program was barter syndicated,

that program ranked first, third, and first among those programs in terms of audience size among

children 12-17. See Appendix I to September 2000 Report. For purposes of this report the

Commission refers to older episodes of The Simpsons as “syndicated” to distinguish those

programs from the first-run network episodes.

8. The first airing data show that one M-rated game was initially advertised on a television

program that likely has a substantial teen audience. The game, THQ’s Evil Dead, was advertised

on an early morning MTV program.

9. Where a particular motion picture or recording appears two or more times in the first airing

data, different ads for that film or recording initially aired on those programs.

10. Some advertisements for stickered recordings were aired between 9:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m.

during the second hour of the program WWF Smackdown, which begins before 9:00 p.m.

11. The general circulation periodicals were not reviewed for the purpose of assessing whether

ads were targeted to children.

ENDNOTES


 FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

WWW.FTC.GOV FOR THE CONSUMER

TOLL-FREE 1-877-FTC-HELP