Censorial Spirit…BBC drop segment of The Spirit of Diaghilev ballet

Read more TV & Radio News at MelonFarmers.co.uk

Based on article from entertainment.timesonline.co.uk

The BBC has abandoned plans to screen a ballet featuring a deformed Pope who rapes nuns that it had announced as one of the highlights of its Christmas schedule. Last month the corporation said it would televise In The Spirit Of Diaghilev from Sadler’s Wells as part of a season of ballet programmes. The tribute to the Russian impresario comprises four acts, each by a groundbreaking choreographer, with the entire production due to be screened on BBC Four next month. Richard Klein, BBC Four Controller, promised viewers a great watch, hailing the combination of one of the most inventive and musically exciting ballet scores being performed by one of Britain’s foremost dance groups. But it wasn’t until the production premiered at Sadler’s Wells that the BBC discovered that one of the acts, Eternal Damnation To Sancho And Sanchez by Javier de Frutos, centres on a group of horny priests and a fictional hunchback Pope, who rapes eunuchs and pregnant nuns. The act prompted boos from the Sadler’s Wells audience and a number of walk-outs. After extensive discussions within the BBC, the corporation has decided to drop the de Frutos section. The three other acts will air as planned during the broadcast on December 18. A BBC spokesman said: We have decided not to show this particular work as it contains material unsuitable for the pre-watershed slot for which the programme was commissioned. The BBC said it could not show the Pope act in a separate late-night transmission, with a clear warning, because it would still be considered inappropriate for a pre-Christmas broadcast. The three other In The Spirit Of Diaghilev acts, which have been favourably received, are not narratively linked so the BBC believes that viewers will not notice the cut.

Haunted by Censors…Mock the Week wins the Golden Spoon Award for Bad Taste

Read more TV & Radio News at MelonFarmers.co.uk

Based on article from dailymail.co.uk

A joke about the Queen broadcast on BBC2’s satirical panel show Mock the Week had been cleared by the corporation’s TV censor. Comedian Frankie Boyle joked that you would not hear the Queen say during her Christmas broadcast: I’m now so old that my p**** is haunted. The episode had first been shown in 2007 but was repeated in October 2008 during the Jonathan Ross and Russell Brand furore. A complainant said the joke was grossly offensive and added: It would have been objectionable at the best of times but coming as it did in the midst of the Ross and Brand controversy it was quite unforgivable. An initial complaint to the BBC’s management had been rejected saying that, while the joke was near the knuckle, it was in keeping with the show. The viewer then took his complaint to the BBC Trust which also rejected the complaint, despite admitting the joke had sexist and ageist overtones. Richard Tait, BBC trustee and chairman of the editorial standards committee, said the joke was well after the watershed, well signposted and within audience expectations for the show. He said: The committee did feel this joke was in bad taste – it had both sexist and ageist overtones. However, a gag on a different episode of Mock the Week about Olympic swimmer Rebecca Adlington was deemed to have broken rules. In August last year, Boyle said Adlington looks like someone who’s looking at themselves in the back of a spoon. He also made a sexual innuendo about the gold medalists’ love life, saying Adlington’s boyfriend looked like a male model and continuing: So from that I have deduced that Rebecca Adlington is very dirty – I mean if you just take into account how long she can hold her breath… One viewer told the BBC he was appalled. The show’s producer later responded to the complaint, saying the ribbing might have gone a tad too far and apologised. The trust said that 75 complaints were received about the item, originally aired in the week that Team GB returned from the Olympic Games. It found that, while Adlington was a public figure, she had not courted media attention. The judgment said: The joke about her appearance and the sexual innuendo were humiliating and there was no demonstration of a clear editorial purpose for the inclusion of these comments. The committee also noted that the commissioning editor had made her views known about preferring not to include the joke. It said it was concerned she appeared to have been unable to obtain the edits she would have preferred.

Buried Alive by Complaints…BBC is to research the level of violence in its programmes

Read more TV & Radio News at MelonFarmers.co.uk

Based on article from guardian.co.uk

BBC management is to conduct a study into the level of violence in its programmes after ‘concerns’ were raised by the BBC Trust and viewers about an EastEnders storyline that showed a character being buried alive. Speaking at a Westminster Media Forum seminar in London on offence and standards on television, the BBC director of editorial policy, David Jordan, said that the issue of violence on TV was second in importance only to swearing for viewers: We thought we might be detecting a greater sensitivity to the threat of violence and being scared, Jordan added. There was a particular episode of EastEnders where someone was buried alive. Nobody was hurt. Nobody was brutalised, but somebody was buried alive. He was referring to two EastEnders episodes screened on BBC1 over the Easter weekend last year in which a philandering character, Max Branning, was buried alive by his estranged wife, Tanya. Jordan said that both the BBC Trust and Ofcom had noticed this trend for viewers to have a lower tolerance threshold for TV violence: We thought we should have a look at what levels of violence are acceptable but also in news programmes too to see what is expected. Do you sanitise things … it’s not something we’ve looked at for a while. Jordan said he expected the research into violence to be carried out by the end of the year. Channel 4’s viewers’ editor, Paula Carter, revealed at the same event that complaints to the broadcaster are falling. The number of complaints made to Channel 4 is declining. In the year so far they are 20% down, Carter said. She explained that the main reason is because of the declining popularity of reality show Big Brother. Carter also revealed that of about 200,000 to 250,000 calls or emails made to Channel 4 in a year, only about 10% are complaints about issues of strong language: Our biggest single issue is in fact scheduling … If people feel we didn’t deliver a programme at the time expected,.

iController…BBC Trust mandate iPlayer parental controls already in place

Read more Internet TV News at MelonFarmers.co.uk

Based on article from digitalspy.co.uk

The BBC Trust has said that stringent parental controls should always be included on BBC iPlayer to ensure children do not watch inappropriate content. The BBC’s governing body expressed concern yesterday that there is no direct equivalent of the watershed online. According to the Trust’s latest review of BBC Editorial Guidelines, clearer labelling must be placed on the catch-up service to flag up strong or challenging content. When we make audio or visual content available on demand on BBC platforms, and where appropriate, we must provide information to enable users to understand its context and to make informed choices about its suitability, both for themselves and for children, before they access, the organisation said. The new editorial standards stipulate that any post-watershed programming should be flagged with a G For Guidance rating to highlight its potential unsuitability for younger audiences, with a system of content labels indicating the relative strength. More stringent parental controls must also be included on BBC iPlayer, involving a lock function for challenging content which can then only be accessed by inputting a password. Both these functions are already in place on the catch-up service, but this is the first time that the editorial guidelines have factored in their provision. The Trust is now holding a public consultation on the proposed guidelines, with licence fee payers able to have their say until December 24. When approved, the new editorial standards will come into force in summer 2010.

Online as On-Air…BBC online news to follow broadcast guidelines

Read more at MelonFarmers.co.uk

Based on article from guardian.co.uk

The BBC Trust today unveiled a new set of editorial guidelines that could lead to changes to the content its journalists can post online. The draft guidelines state that: Nothing should be written by [BBC] journalists and presenters that would not be said on-air. Some industry observers are already referring to that as the Jeremy Bowen clause . The BBC’s highly-regarded Middle East editor, was censured by the Trust in April for loose phrasing in a potted history of post-war Israel, which appeared on the BBC News website. Our audiences should not be able to tell from BBC programmes or other BBC output the personal prejudices of our journalists and presenters on such matters, the new guidance says. This applies as much to online content as it does to news bulletins. Nothing should be written by journalists and presenters that would not be said on-air .

Humiliated Stunts…BBC TV to dumb down to please the easily offended

Read more TV & Radio News at MelonFarmers.co.uk

Based on article from business.timesonline.co.uk

BBC presenters are to be banned from swearing immediately after the 9pm watershed and from conducting humiliating and intimidating prank phone calls under sweeping changes to the corporation’s editorial guidelines. The BBC will take the radical step of putting its guidelines out for public consultation as it tries to pander to nutters after editorial blunders such as the prank phone calls involving Jonathan Ross and Russell Brand. The BBC Trust, the internal regulator, has conducted a review of the rules governing programming and is proposing new regulations banning the use of offensive language between 9pm and 10pm except in exceptional circumstances, and encouraging producers to bleep more swear words. Other plans to go forward for public consideration include new restrictions on risqué breakfast radio presenters, such as Chris Moyles, whose shows are on air when large numbers of children are listening.  The trust is also insisting that the BBC never condones malicious intrusion, intimidation and humiliation . Although much of the public focus will be on the trust’s recommendations for bad language and behaviour, the plans will also include rules aimed at safeguarding the accuracy and impartiality of the BBC’s factual programming, as well as measures to ensure that children do not emulate aggressive behaviour of characters in programmes such as EastEnders. Regulations on ensuring the integrity of phone-ins and text voting are also proposed. Once the public consultation period is over, the trust will consider the responses before coming to a final decision on the use of its editorial guidelines. It is expected to put the regulations into operation early next summer.

Stereotypical Censors…BBC whinges at Graham Norton lesbian quip

Read more TV & Radio News at MelonFarmers.co.uk

Based on article from news.bbc.co.uk

The BBC has reprimanded Graham Norton’s chat show for perpetuating potentially offensive stereotypes of lesbians. The corporation upheld a complaint about a show in which the star made comments about a patent application. Referring to a woman used to illustrate the application, Norton said: I don’t know why they’ve got some strange lesbian to be the model. After the comments, guest Ruth Jones, the star and co-writer of sitcom Gavin and Stacey, scolded Norton, saying: She may not be a lesbian, come on now . She went on to say people should not be judged by their appearance, asking the host: What does a lesbian look like? Indicating the illustration, Norton replied: That. He also stressed: Anyway, there’s nothing wrong with being a lesbian . One viewer complained to the BBC about the episode, broadcast on BBC Two in March. The BBC’s Editorial Complaints Unit agreed with their comments: Although the initial references might have been inoffensive if considered on their own, they prompted an exchange with one of the programme’s guests which gave the references the appearance of perpetuating or reinforcing a potentially offensive stereotype. The programme team were reminded of the need to avoid any possibility of being seen to endorse offensive sexual stereotypes.

Trusting the BBC to Self Censor…Government questions the role of the BBC regulator

Based on article from independent.co.uk Read more UK Government Censorship on MelonFarmers.co.uk

The Culture Secretary, Ben Bradshaw, called for an overhaul of the regulatory structure of the BBC yesterday and claimed that the Corporation’s governing body, The BBC Trust, should be scrapped. In a speech to the Royal Television Society’s annual convention, Bradshaw said the Trust, which only came into effect in 2007 was an unsustainable model and should be replaced. I know of no other area of public life where – as is the case with the Trust – the same body is both regulator and cheerleader. The BBC is under intense pressure from commercial media organisations that whinge it has grown too large. The Corporation’s senior management is concerned that a future Conservative government would try to reduce the BBC licence fee.

BBC in an Era of Easy Offence…BBC recommendations in response to Russell Brand Show

Based on article from news.bbc.co.uk See the report Taste, Standards and the BBC [pdf] from news.bbc.co.uk Read more Television News on MelonFarmers.co.uk

The BBC Trust ordered a review of acceptable standards following the row over obscene phone messages left for the actor Andrew Sachs by Jonathan Ross and Russell Brand. The report – written by BBC creative director Alan Yentob and director of archive content Roly Keating – calls for clear guidelines on intrusion, intimidation and humiliation to to ensure that everyone involved in programme making understands that such behaviours are unacceptable. Of 2,206 adults aged over 16 were questioned for an Ipsos Mori survey. The main findings were: Where audiences are concerned about the area of taste and morality on television as a whole, this is often connected with broader concerns about falling standards in terms of quality and the over-reliance on reality formats. Standards of morality, values and behaviour in the media in particular are not a top-of-mind issue for the majority of the public. The BBC overall performs well in the audience’s perceptions of standards of morality, values and behaviour, compared to other channels and broadcasters. The audience also has higher expectations of the BBC. In general terms, the public do not want increased censorship or regulation. The majority value the creativity of the BBC and accept that it may sometimes lead to offending some people. When prompted, a significant proportion of the audience have various concerns about standards of morality, values and behaviour in the media as a whole, including newspapers, magazines, broadcasting and online content. Strong language is an area of concern for some audiences; they recognise when language is used for clear purpose or effect within a programme – including comedy and entertainment – but dislike ‘unnecessary’ or excessive use. In certain genres, the offensive potential of strong language can be compounded when it is combined with apparently aggressive or bullying behaviour. This reflects broader public concerns about aggression and bullying within society as a whole. There is little public consensus or agreement about what constitutes offence: it means very different things to different sections of the audience. The context in which potentially offensive content is placed is of paramount importance to audiences, as are judgements of quality. Both can make the difference between whether something is acceptable to audiences or not. Tone and intent can also make strong material acceptable: the ‘twinkle in the eye’ of a performer and their skill in delivery can make the decisive difference, even with potentially offensive material. Age and socio-economic group go some way to describing who in the audience is more likely to have concerns, but they do not tell the full story. Younger audiences (11-15 year-olds) are uniquely self-selecting in their choice of media content, through the web and magazines as well as broadcast material. Though strongly drawn to more sexual content, some express unease about the sexualised nature of the media world in which they live and the pressure to ‘grow up fast.’ Sexual content on television and radio was a matter of relatively low concern for audiences. There was an expectation that the television watershed should be respected, and content on radio appropriately scheduled. There is no appetite for a watershed in radio. Some respondents commented that the transfer of some successful series from BBC Two may bring a somewhat ‘edgier’ tone to BBC One. Respondents expressed few concerns about standards on BBC Radio. However, of all the BBC’s services, Radio 1 has the most divided response in terms of morality, values and behaviour. Audiences are conscious of the challenges presented by the growth of online and on-demand content, but there is little awareness of the BBC’s ‘G for Guidance’ systems, or understanding that iPlayer has a parent password protection scheme which prevents children accessing adult content. Conclusions Audiences accept potentially offensive content but believe it should be there for a purpose. They have a sophisticated sense of different programme genres, from serious documentary to reality and entertainment. Producers should ensure that any potentially offensive material has a clear editorial purpose and ask themselves is it necessary? Does it enhance the quality of the experience for audiences? Viewers understand and value the television watershed. The BBC must respect and maintain its significance as a crucial contribution to audience confidence in television standards. There is no audience demand for a radio watershed. Of all BBC services, BBC One is the most sensitive, because of its ability to unite generations and families in shared viewing. The bar for the strongest language between 9pm and 10pm must therefore remain significantly higher than on other BBC television channels. On all channels, producers, presenters, commissioners and controllers have a shared responsibility to ensure that the force and value of the strongest words is not weakened by over-use. The mandatory referral of the most offensive language to Channel Controllers reflects this and must be maintained. Mischievous banter, practical jokes and formats, which include elements of confrontation and criticism, can all be legitimate – indeed the public tell us that they can add greatly to their enjoyment; but programme makers, on-air artists and presenters must ensure that they never tip over into malice, humiliation or harm. Audiences admire performers who take risks but have the expertise to know when to draw a line. To support such talent, producers and controllers must always be candid and open with them about judgements of tone and content, and be prepared where appropriate to take and enforce tough decisions. Risk-taking is as vital a part of the BBC’s mission in comedy, drama and entertainment as it is in other genres. As with all programme making, the greater the risk, the greater the thought, care and pre-planning needed to bring something groundbreaking to air. Recommendations New series on television and radio For new series where questions of taste and standards are likely to arise, there must be a discussion with the commissioning executive early in the production cycle to agree appropriate parameters of tone and content, to ensure that all involved – including presenters and performers – have given thought to questions of channel, context and slot. Even when a returning series has established expectations of strong language and content, there should be a similar discussion before the start of each run. Greater care over cross-channel transfers When a TV series moves to a more mainstream channel – especially to BBC One – producers and controllers should be sensitive to its new context, and give careful consideration to adaptations of tone or format if necessary. Clearer policy on bleeping of strong language A clearer policy should be set for the use of bleeping in TV and radio programmes. In general, where strong language is integral to the meaning or content of a programme – and other questions of slot, context channel etc have been resolved – it should not be disguised. But when in other circumstances a sequence that is editorially necessary happens to contain the strongest language, it may be right to bleep or disguise the words, even after the watershed. New guidance on malicious intrusion, intimidation and humiliation BBC programmes must never condone malicious intrusion, intimidation and humiliation. While they are all aspects of human behaviour which may need to be depicted, described or discussed across the BBC’s factual and non-factual output, they must never be celebrated for the purposes of entertainment. New guidance is needed to ensure that everyone involved in programme making for the BBC understands that malicious intrusion, intimidation and humiliation are unacceptable. Clearer audience information and warnings The BBC should always recognise that some sections of its audiences are more readily offended than others. We owe the public the information they need to make informed choices about viewing and listening and to avoid material they may regard as unsuitable for themselves or their families. Each channel must make even greater efforts to ensure that appropriate content information (eg. billings and presentation announcements) is provided which enables informed judgements to be made by all audiences, both pre- and post-watershed, about programme content. Music radio Music radio thrives on strong personalities, and young audiences value BBC Radio 1 highly; but editorial teams must be reminded that particular care needs to be taken at times of day, such as school runs, when different generations may be listening together. Major awareness campaign about online guidance The BBC has pioneered content guidance and child protection mechanisms provided by the iPlayer. Audiences are concerned about the internet as a space of unregulated content and are insufficiently aware of the protection available for BBC content. A major campaign of public information is needed as soon as possible to raise awareness of the content guidance and offer reassurance to audiences. The BBC should also work to ensure that the next generation of Freeview and FreeSat PVRs have PIN protection functionality. More regular audience research In-depth audience research, along the lines of the findings in this paper, should be conducted more often to ensure that the BBC maintains a full and detailed understanding of audience attitudes to taste and standards. To keep up with changes in audience taste, research should be commissioned every two to three years. Careful attention should be given to key tracking questions that will enable the BBC to identify changes in audience and societal attitudes. Revision of Editorial Guidelines and Guidance The BBC’s Editorial Policy department should use the research, general principles and recommendations in this report to inform the current general revision of the BBC’s Editorial Guidelines and, in particular, to clarify audience expectations of tone and context. In addition, new Guidance will be required to keep programme and content makers up-todate with audience expectations of BBC content. Increased commitment to training The research findings offer new opportunities to illuminate the understanding of taste and standards for programme makers across the BBC. The findings should be briefed to leadership groups in all content divisions by the Director and Chief Adviser, Editorial Policy. The Colleges of Production and Journalism should develop new training material that explores audience attitudes specific to each of the key genres, which will be rolled out to programme makers both in-house and independent. The audience research and the conclusions of this report should also be made available through normal Editorial Policy channels to all programme makers. The findings of this study and the materials used in it should inform online courses, which will be used to maintain editorial policy standards.

BBC Won’t be Bullied…BBC survey finds that the public is relaxed about strong language on TV

17th May 2009. Based on article from guardian.co.uk

One of the most exhaustive pieces of research conducted by the BBC into viewers’ attitudes to taste and decency is said to show that most are relaxed about the use of bad language on air. The corporation will submit the results of the survey, which involved around 7,000 members of the public, to the BBC Trust this week. The trust had asked the management to review its editorial guidelines on taste and standards in the wake of the resignation of Russell Brand and the suspension of Jonathan Ross. The review is also likely to show that a substantial minority of viewers and listeners are in favour of less censorship. Viewers apparently objected to the behaviour of Ross and Brand because of the bullying tone of the broadcast rather than the fact that swearing was used. Mark Thompson, the BBC’s director general, told the Observer: If we set up a programme strategy based on never offending anyone – which is sometimes a world that some of our critics would like – you wouldn’t broadcast any news programmes, for example. Update: Business as Usual 19th May 2009. Based on an article from the Express. Thanks to Dan A BBC report will show that the public is more relaxed than ever about swearing on TV ­ sparking nutter fears that it will give the corporation a licence to air even more bad language. The survey of 7000 viewers’ attitudes on taste and decency was ordered by the BBC Trust after the furore over Jonathan Ross and Russell Brand leaving lewd messages on veteran actor Andrew Sachs’s answer phone. The report is said to show that viewers are relaxed about the use of bad language, especially after the 9pm watershed. Nutters fear the latest report will stop the BBC cleaning up its act. John Beyer, of Mediawatch, said: There is already far too much swearing on TV that is entirely unnecessary. My fear is that Mark Thompson, the BBC’s director general, will tell everybody that it is business as usual. But swearing alienates television viewers. If they are going to carry on broadcasting swearing, the BBC will alienate swathes more viewers. Comment: Allowing viewers to make up their own minds 19th May 2009. From Dan “My fear is that Mark Thompson, the BBC’s director general, will tell everybody that it is business as usual.” Business as usual? What, allowing viewers to make up their own minds what they want and do not want to watch and not having the viewing tastes of John Beyer and the rest of Daily Mail Tory voting middle England forced upon them? Sounds good to us Johnny Boy! “But swearing alienates television viewers. If they are going to carry on broadcasting swearing, the BBC will alienate swathes more viewers.” And those viewers will pick up their remote controls and switch over and watch something else. The kind of action you don’t seem to be able to grasp Johnny Boy! The truth is the BBC have never said they are going to be broadcasting more swearing because of this survey. This is just the fear held by their critics. Heck their critics probably hope they will broadcast more swearing just so they can have another go at them.