Dave Evans, Strategy Director, GSD&M
1) Amend references to "13" as an age below which *any* participation in a campaign is to be avoided and instead state that "We require parental or guardian consent for participation in a WOM campaign" for participants below 16. Further define that "participation" means "acting in the capacity of a facilitator or similar agent" in the operation of the campaign and let applicable legal age restrictions governing other aspects of marketing activities take precedence as they may apply.
RATIONALE: 16 is generally accepted globally as the point at which parental control ebbs as the individual approaches adulthood. Using an accepted benchmark reduces the contentious nature of the Code; allowing for participation given parental consent avoids setting the Code up as a wedge issue in emerging legislation. At the same time, the inclusion of Parental Consent opens a larger market (below 13) absent contravening laws as they may exist: it's often beneficial to reach people as young as 8,10,12. . .with messages relating to sexual conduct, smoking, drinking and similar issues that each year seem to move down one grade level with notably devastating consequences. To the extent that an acceptable WOM campaign was created in support of the public good (recognizing and setting aside for the moment the obvious issues of determining the public good) would we not want the freedom to engage this age group provided parental or guardian consent?
2) Remove references to "13" and COPPA from the Code.
RATIONALE: By duplicating what's in an external law, we ensure otherwise unnecessary Code updates and reduce the global applicability of the Code. By specifying COPPA, which itself sets forth 13 as regards its specific provisions, the Code is effectively a US implementation.
3) Articulate the core notion of "trust" without being overly specific and thereby creating "loophole" opportunities. Let the over-riding commitment to ideals such as trust and integrity define the Code of Ethics on this point.
RATIONALE: By omission in an overly specific Code we risk creating loopholes for those not sharing our ethical framework or choosing to attack the Code.
4) Move toward a simpler Code and therefore a more universally applicable code in respect for the global market in which anything advanced at this early point is likely to be cited. Generally clean up the Code of Ethics, removing phrases like "we will comply with all applicable laws" unless a reference to a specific law adds clarity. For example, referring to COPPA in the "minors" sections adds meaning since it specifies COPPA as a standard for that section.
RATIONALE: General references such as "we comply with all relevant regulations" are at best superfluous and at worst arrogant: the implication is that "we have a choice" in adhering to the law. As an ethically-based industry organization we have no such choice.
April 1, 2005