Research type: 

Quantitative

Region: 

National

Year of report: 

2010

Summary of findings: 

Parents (parents of children aged 4 to 14)
• Overall, there was a positive shift in terms of total advertising awareness
• total awareness (after prompting with a list of media) saw a significant uplift (66% pre, 71% post)
• Recognition of individual ads was as follows:
• Almost 1 in 3 parents (31%) recognised the radio ad (similar to young people – 29%)
• 1 in 5 had seen at least one of the press/poster ads (23% amongst young people, despite being shown fewer ads)
• An average of 12% recognised the online ads (which is lower than amongst young people)
• Awareness of the campaign slogans also increased significantly
• Awareness of ‘Zip it, block it, flag it’ went from 12% pre-wave to 22% post-wave campaign and awareness of ‘Click Clever, Click Safe’ went from 9% pre-wave to 15% post-wave
• It is interesting to note though that the ads shown, which were mainly aimed at parents, appeared to resonate better with young people than parents :
• 40% of young people said that they liked the ads compared with 18% of parents
• Almost half of young people (48%) said that the ads were ‘aimed at people like me’ compared with 23% of parents
• Over 1 in 3 parents (36%) said that ‘these ads are aimed at children’
• When shown a list of possible actions they could take as a result of seeing the ads, 41% of parents said that they would be more likely to talk to their children but the more campaign specific actions were not as highly endorsed
• Once again, it appears that the ads provided more of a call to action for young people
• Most campaign specific actions were endorsed by over half
• 33% parents said they would not do anything after seeing the ads versus 23% amongst young people
• Positive changes in key ‘outcome’ measures were yet to be seen
• There had been no uplifts in levels of confidence following the campaign- when it comes to Internet-related matters or confidence in talking to their child
• There had been no uplifts from wave to wave in the proportions of parents taking steps to ensure their children’s online safety
• Similarly, there were no changes in these measures for children

Young People (aged 11 to 14)
• Overall, there had not been any significant shifts in advertising awareness following the campaign
• Unprompted awareness of advertising/publicity about internet safety and children/young people was broadly unchanged (50% pre-wave, 44% post-wave – note the 6% decline is not significant), and total awareness (after prompting with a list of media) also remained unchanged (60% pre, 59% post).
• Recognition of individual ads was as follows:
• 29% recognised the radio ad
• 23% recognised the poster ad
• 13% recognised the Clown online ad, and 16% recognised the Clever online ad
• Awareness of the campaign slogans also remains largely unchanged
• Awareness of ‘Zip it, block it, flag it’ went from 16% pre-wave to 22% post-wave campaign and awareness of ‘Click Clever, Click Safe’ went from 13% pre-wave to 16% post-wave: these movements are, once again, not significant.
• Given that the Click Clever Click Safe campaign was mainly targeted at parents, these similar levels of awareness are unsurprising.
• The only children-specific activity was online, but unprompted awareness of Internet advertising has dropped amongst young people (14% pre-wave, 8% post campaign)
• Having viewed the ads, young people indicated that they resonated well with them:
• Almost half of young people (48%) said that the ads were ‘aimed at people like me’
• Similar proportions said that they understand what the ads want them to do (49%) or gave them good advice (55%)
• When shown a list of possible actions they could take, only 12% said that they would not be likely to do anything as a result (or didn’t know what they would do). Three fifths said that they would be more likely to never give out their password to people as a result of the ads (60%), and similar proportions said they would not download files/links from people they don’t know (58%) or give out personal information to people (56%).
• Given that the campaign is not particularly aimed at young people, and their fairly low levels of awareness and recognition, it is perhaps unsurprising that there were few changes in key ‘outcome’ measures
• There were no changes from wave to wave in levels of confidence - when it comes to Internet-related matters – and steps taken when coming across inappropriate content/material (e.g. 67% at both waves said they feel confident when using the internet)
• There were also no changes from wave to wave in the proportions of young people saying that their parents have taken steps to ensure their children’s online safety (e.g. around ¾ of young people at both waves said that their parents have explained to them that they shouldn’t download files/links from people they don’t know).

Research objectives: 

GFK was commissioned by COI and DCSF to assess the effectiveness of the new ‘Click clever, click safe’ campaign amongst both parents and children.

Background: 

DCSF in conjunction with the UK Council for Child Internet Safety (UKCCIS) developed a new communications strategy aimed at keeping children safe online

The strategy was unveiled on 8 December 2009 but the main campaign was launched on 9 February 2010

The main objectives of the campaign are to empower both parents and young people to keep safe online. More specifically, the Click clever, Click Safe campaign aims to:
• Increase awareness amongst parents about the dangers their children are facing on the Internet and providing them with strategies and information to help their children keep safe online.
• Inform young people about the harmful or inappropriate content they may encounter while surfing the Internet and equipping them with tools and information to help them make wise decisions.

The campaign messaging focuses on three specific rules:
– ‘Zip it’: Don’t disclose personal information
– ‘Block it’: Block contact from people who are bullying or harassing you
– ‘Flag it’: Report any problems to parents, teachers or website providers

The campaign spend was £1.7M and include sponsorship (TV), radio, press, outdoor, online and PR

Please note that this research was commissioned by the Department for Children Schools and Families under the previous administration and not is necessarily representative of current government policy.

Quick summary: 

Research was commissioned to assess the effectiveness of the new ‘Click clever, click safe’ campaign amongst both parents and children. Overall parental campaign awareness increased significantly post campaign, although the ads themselves seemed to resonate more with children (even though most of the ads were aimed at parents). Awareness and recognition didn’t increase amongst children post campaign, which probably reflects the fact that these executions were mainly aimed at parents.

Audience Summary

Gender: 

Male
Female

Ethnicity: 

Mixed

Age: 

Parents of 4-14 year olds, Young people aged 11-14

Social Class: 

Mixed

Methodology

Methodology: 

Parents (of children aged 4 to 14)
• Pre/post wave
• 807 interviews pre-wave (4th to 9th February 2010)
• 719 interviews post-wave (4th to 12th March 2010)
• Random Location Omnibus & ad hoc boost in Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland
• Face-to-face in-home CAPI assisted survey

Children aged 11 to 14
• Pre/post wave
• 260 interviews pre-wave (27th January to 5th February 2010)
• 309 interviews post-wave (4th to 12th March 2010)
• Conducted via GFK’s Online UK panel

Parents (of children aged 4 to 14)

• Second phase of the research
• 478 interviews (18th to 23rd March 2010)
• Random Location Omnibus
• Face-to-face in-home CAPI assisted survey

Data collection methodology: 

Face-to-face
Online

Fieldwork dates: 

Jan-March 2010

Contact Name: 

Louisa Marsh

Email: 

louisa.marsh@coi.gsi.gov.uk

Role: 

Senior Research Manager

Agree to publish: 

-1

Private

Research agency: 

GFK NOP

COI Number: 

300762