In relation to epigraph 2.1, the general conclusion of these works refers to the
transparency of the CSR reports. Limiting to offer environmental or sustainability generic
scales is a way to conceal the specifically contracted obligation, when not to falsify it. A
responsible fulfillment of a social aim is simulated whose accomplishment is avoided.
From the analysis of the cross-check documentation that is referred to in point 5, it
follows that the information presented is opaque, not contrastable, and that relevant
information about child friendly time is omitted. In CSR reports and in corporate or
advertising documentation, good intentions, which do not correspond to the reality of
content, abound. Hence, the interest that may have the measurement and the
presentation of an index based on the programming analysis that does not get
contaminated by the institutional rhetoric.
Even though the guides and questionnaires previously alluded to in point 3.1 have
advanced in their adaptation to the particularity of the audiovisual consuming companies,
they are still an insufficient instrument. If the best practices of each sector are not
compared and the programmation is not checked by the analysis of content, the
“environmental sustainability” scales and the diagrams of the guides can camouflage under the appearance of fulfillment, the irresponsible management of the audiovisual
business.