2 hours Ago By Kamya Pandey
Explainer Briefly Slides Consumer Unity & Trust Society (CUTS) International has sent comments to the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare (MoHFW) urging it not to mandate static anti-tobacco warnings for streaming services. Instead, MoHFW should consider incentivizing platforms to come up with innovative mechanisms to build awareness about the negative effects of tobacco consumption, CUTS suggests. “The mandatory static warnings during tobacco-related scenes may significantly disrupt the viewing experience,” CUTS argued, in its comments to the MoHFW’s recent regulations which instruct streaming platforms to carry non-skippable warnings on all content when a user first opens up a platform.
Streaming services also have to carry static warnings every time a an actor smokes on screen. It says that the static warnings would be especially detrimental to the viewing experience on mobile devices. Given that a large portion of people in India consume streaming content on small screens, “these warnings can obscure key visual elements or subtitles, which are crucial to the storytelling,” it argued.
This becomes additionally problematic because streaming platforms pride themselves on delivering high-quality content, it said. Further, CUTS says that if platforms have to carry these warnings, MoHFW should instruct them to carry warnings in the same language as the content. If platforms carry it in another language (for instance, Hindi warnings on a Telugu film), it would “be both confusing and of limited use to the user.
” Use a data-driven approach to health warnings: Commenting on the mandate for non-skippable health spots across all content, CUTS says that the government should consider “a more data-driven strategy to assess the impact of these health warnings” in the context of streaming services. Given that the regulation currently mandates health spots on all content, children’s content would also end up carrying them. CUTS’ submission argues that the government must conduct research into how anti-tobacco messaging affects younger viewers and their psychological responses to frequent health warnings.
CUTS expresses concern that repeated fear-based health messaging could have unintended psychological effects on children. It quotes research that states that intrusive messaging can end up desensitising adolescents. Besides, “imposing uniform anti-tobacco warnings across all ages and content types could prove counterproductive,” the submission argues.
It mentions that streaming services already have parental controls and age ratings in place, protecting children from viewing negative behaviors in films/TV shows. As per research , while pictorial health warnings can be impactful, they can also elicit psychological reactance in viewers, CUTS says. For context, psychological reactance is a phenomenon where a viewer may get motivated to oppose good advice because they feel like their freedom is being threatened.
For instance, when you tell someone not to smoke, they might end up doing the opposite because they think you are threatening their freedom to make choices. Place warnings based on the kind of content a viewer watches: Instead of placing health spots in front of all content, CUTS suggests a “strategic approach” where streaming services show users health spots based on the content that the user frequently watches. For instance, platforms should show users health spots the first time they view content containing tobacco consumption.
Afterward, the frequency of health spots should vary depending on the content a viewer watches and the frequency of tobacco consumption in said content. “Regulatory authorities can also work with OCCP [Online curated content platforms also called streaming services] to identify target groups (e.g.
, youth vs adults) and adjust the frequency and type of warnings accordingly,” the submission reads. This can prevent users from feeling overwhelmed with warnings. Further, the government can also create a code of ethics together with streaming services, experts, and consumer groups.
This code of ethics should give streaming services some discretion on how they implement health warnings. It should also have mechanisms in place so that civil society can monitor the implementation and effectiveness. Making health spots skippable: CUTS suggests that the health spots that platforms must show as soon as someone opens up a platform should be skippable after 3-5 seconds.
They argue that sitting through a 20-second disclaimer can be confusing for a user who opens up a streaming platform for the first time, it can also cause the viewer to move away from the screen. “Longer non-skippable format could lead to frustration and reduced attention, ultimately diminishing the effectiveness of the health messaging intended to promote awareness,” it argues. Forcing viewers to sit through the longer health spot takes away their agency.
This is contradictory to “the entire edifice of digital economy and regulation, which considers consumers’ consent essential to deliver any message or content to them,” the submission says. It adds that the current approach of non-skippable disclaimers “reflects an overtly paternalistic attitude from the state,” which the society should be moving away from. The disproportionate burden on streaming platforms: Streaming services should not disproportionately deal with the burden of spreading anti-tobacco messaging, CUTS argues.
It says that tobacco-related messaging is readily available on other sources and the government imposes no stringent regulations on those selling tobacco products online. E-commerce platforms, for instance, don’t have to carry anti-tobacco health spots, they only show buyers a pop-up stating that tobacco use is injurious to health. This suggests that viewing content featuring tobacco consumption has more friction than actually purchasing a tobacco product.
“This inconsistency raises questions about the effectiveness of the proposed regulations on OCCP compared to the more lenient approach taken toward online tobacco sales,” CUTS says. Also read:.
