Have I Got Complaints for You…BBC dismisses whinges about Ross Noble Elephant Man joke…but…

Read more BBC and BBC Trust Watch at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See BBC Editorial Appeals Findings [pdf] from downloads.bbc.co.uk See Offending episode of HIGNFY from YouTube

Have I Got News For You? BBC One, 1 June 2012 In a sequence discussing which advertisements had received the most complaints, guest Ross Noble made a comment about actors attending The John Merrick School of Drama and impersonated the speech of John Merrick as portrayed by John Hurt in the film The Elephant Man. The complainant said this made fun of people with disabilities and as such encouraged ridicule and bullying. The Committee concluded: that the programme was not in breach of the Guidelines on Harm and Offence as the remarks were editorially justified because they referred to the actors in the commercial (with reference to the character of John Merrick) and were not intended to stereotype people with this kind of disability. that the programme met generally accepted standards in the context of this comedic exchange. that, notwithstanding its decision not to uphold, the Committee could appreciate that some viewers may have been offended by this segment and it considered that the impersonation of John Merrick’s speech and physical disability, in particular, was at the margins of acceptability. The complaint was not upheld.

Banned Babe Links…Ofcom whinges at babe channels for promotion of related porn websites

Read more Ofcom Watch at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See Broadcast Bulletin [pdf] from stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk

Northern Birds, Essex Babes, Sportxxx Girls, and Livexxx Babes 24 September to 8 February 2013, various times throughout the day The services all transmit interactive daytime chat and adult chat advertising content. These services are freely available without mandatory restricted access and are situated in the adult section of the electronic programme guide of the Sky digital satellite platform ( Sky EPG ). Viewers are invited to contact on-screen presenters via premium-rate telephony services ( PRS ). The female presenters dress and behave in a sexually provocative way while encouraging viewers to contact the PRS numbers. The licencesare all held by Satellite Entertainment Limited ( SEL ). Ofcom received a complaint that, throughout the day and across all these channels, on-screen references were made to the website bluebird.tv by means of a graphic giving the URL of the website positioned in the bottom left-hand corner of the screen. The complainant said that on accessing the website there were no access restrictions, and that users were directed to freely accessible R18 equivalent content by clicking on any number of links . From Ofcom’s examination of the broadcast material, it appeared that no verbal references to the website URL were made by the presenters. The bluebird.tv website consisted of a homepage containing a number of tab-style links to Bluebird branded content. There were no access restrictions other than responding OK to a pop-up box on first visiting the site to confirm that the user was over 18 years of age. Ofcom observed that this website contained explicit pornographic material (equivalent to the British Board of Film Classification ( BBFC ) R18-rated content 1 ). Registration and age verification by means of using a credit card (holders must be over 18 years of age) was only required if the user wished to become a member of the premium Bluebird service. Two types of explicit pornographic material could be accessed and viewed from the Bluebird Films homepage. The first type, on initially accessing the Bluebird Films website, consisted of an embedded video player positioned in the centre of the screen, which automatically played a video clip. The player showed a 50-second video clip, the first 30 seconds of which featured edited glamour shots of scantily clad or naked women, kissing, touching and posing in an erotic way. The final 20 seconds of the clip, however, featured explicit sexual material involving shots of oral sex, vaginal penetration, and the use of sex toys for sexual stimulation or penetration some of which were in close-up. The second type of pornographic material was accessible at the bottom of the page and consisted of 17 photographic hyperlinks under the heading Bluebird Films Hot Movies . These links promoted pornographic films that could be viewed in full by purchasing premium Bluebird membership or by purchasing the associated DVD product (from the Buy DVD’s [sic] tab positioned at the top of the page). Clicking on these photographic hyperlinks led the user through to teaser videos, each between about one and two minutes in length, promoting the full film to which the photographic hyperlink corresponded. These teaser videos featured explicit sexual material including vaginal penetration, oral sex, and masturbation some of which was again in close-up. Ofcom considered BCAP Code Rule 30.3, which states: Advertisements for products coming within the recognised character of pornography are permitted behind mandatory restricted access on adult entertainment channels only. [After an initial approach from Ofcom the company reorganised the website so that the first website which would be accessed by viewers does not contain adult material itself but links though to another related website that does. Ofcom judged that this technique does not circumvent the ban on links to porn sites]. Ofcom Conclusion: Brach of Rule 30.3 The broadcast of an advertisement, on channels without mandatory restricted access, for a website containing pornographic material, is a serious breach of the BCAP Code. Ofcom is particularly concerned that the Licensee in these instances broadcast, for extended periods both during daytime and immediately after the watershed when children were available to view (some unaccompanied), on-screen references to a website which led to R18 equivalent material without any access restrictions. Ofcom therefore puts the Licensee on notice that it will consider these breaches for the imposition of a statutory sanction. Breaches of BCAP Code Rule 30.3

Ed’s Programme Guide…The Government looks set to extend broadcast levels of TV censorship to all internet TV channels that present themselves in a TV’s EPG

Read more UK Government Watch at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See article from parliamentlive.tv

On 12th February 2013, the government minister for Culture, Communications and Creative Industries, Ed Vaizey, appeared before the House of Lords Communications Select Committee to give his opinions about media convergence. One interesting point was that the government intends to extend internet censorship in the upcoming Communications white paper. The government looks set to extend the onerous TV censorship regime administered by Ofcom to all channels appearing on a TV’s Electronic Programme Guide. At the moment, internet TV channels are not subject to Ofcom’s suffocating TV censorship. Vaizey feels that ‘viewers expect’ anything that looks like a TV channel which presents itself for channel hopping in the EPG to be subject to the same strict censorship as broadcast TV. However channels presenting themselves via an app interface, seem likely to be let off the hook and censored according to the less strict censorship of the Video on Demand censor, ATVOD. So anything featuring biased news such as Fox News, or else hardcore porn will have to stay off the EPG, and stick with being available only as an app. Vaizey’s thinking is that viewers will not expect the same strict censorship for a channel that is more obviously internet based.

Elitist Censorship…Ofcom claim sexy material causes widespread offence amongst viewers watching babe channels at 3 in the morning

Read more Ofcom Watch at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See Broadcast Beulletin [pdf] from stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk

Elite Nights Studio 66 TV 2 (938), 15 July 2012, 03:00 to 03:55 Elite Nights is a segment on the babe channel Studio 66 TV 2 (Sky Channel 938). The female presenters dress and behave in a sexually provocative way while encouraging viewers to contact the premium rate telephony services ( PRS ) numbers. The licence for Studio 66 TV 2 is owned and operated by 965 TV Ltd. Ofcom received a complaint that content on this service, broadcast from 03:00, contained images that were inappropriate on a free-to-air service. Ofcom noted there were two female presenters on screen at this time. The first female presenter was wearing black shoes, a pair of yellow knickers with party all night printed on the back and a black top pulled down to expose her breasts. The second presenter was wearing a pink thong under a pink one-piece outfit, which was pulled down to reveal her breasts. During the broadcast the presenters stroked each other’s thighs, buttocks, stomachs and breasts. They also adopted sexual positions, such as on all fours with their buttocks to camera and also lying side by side with their legs intertwined, and while in these positions mimed sexual intercourse, sometimes for quite prolonged periods. Ofcom also noted that while the female presenters filled most of the screen there were graphics on the right of the screen showing still images of women, all of whom were topless and in some cases naked, although their genitals were obscured. These images were accompanied by short code numbers which viewers could text to receive pictures and video content of the women, for example TXT XXX to 899** and TEXT FERNANDA TO 899** . In the bottom left-hand corner of the screen we noted there were graphics that were text only, such as FILTHIEST X RATED VID OF THE MONTH! TEXT JULY TO 899** , and TEXT BABE TO 899** . Ofcom considered BCAP Code rules: Rule 4.2: Advertisements must not cause serious or widespread offence against generally accepted moral, social or cultural standards. Rule 30.3: Advertisements for products coming within the recognised character of pornography are permitted behind mandatory restricted access on adult entertainment channels only. Ofcom Decision Widespread Offence On 27 July 2011, Ofcom published revised rules on the advertising of telecommunications-based sexual entertainment services and PRS daytime chat services. For example the rules explicitly state that adult chat broadcasters should: [T]ake particular care if two or more presenters appear together on screen. If there is any contact between the presenters of an erotic or sexual nature (for example kissing, stroking, or contact between thighs, breasts or genital areas) or any miming or simulation of a sexual act performed by one presenter on another, in Ofcom’s view there is a high risk of causing serious or widespread offence against generally accepted standards. Sidebar Adverts The still graphics included in these advertisements comprised still images of women, all of whom were topless and in some cases naked. In addition, the on-screen graphics were accompanied by text which included: FILTHIEST X RATED VID OF THE MONTH! TEXT JULY TO 899** and TXT XXX to 899** . This in Ofcom’s view clearly indicated to the viewer that if they texted the relevant word or term to the on-screen short code number they would be provided with access to explicit adult material. To assess the product being advertised, Ofcom sent a text message to a short code shown on-screen. As a result Ofcom was sent details of a URL which gave access to explicit video images of a female masturbating. Some of these images were in close- up. Further, although we received a text message requesting age verification, we were able to access the explicit sexual content without being required to provide any proof of age. We noted the Licensee’s argument that viewers would only have been able to obtain the video clips and images if their handset had been age-verified by the relevant mobile network operator. However, we considered this did not remove or weaken the duty on the Licensee to ensure that the products advertised on this channel were acceptable on a free-to-air service. In Ofcom’s opinion this explicit sexual material was clearly equivalent to that which would be given a British Board of Film Classification ( BBFC ) R185 rating. Both R18 equivalent content and adult sex material 6 are clearly within the recognised character of pornography . Therefore any advertisement for this type of content was prohibited on a free-to-air service without mandatory restricted access, regardless of whether the images featured in the on-screen advertisement were edited or masked in an effort to make them non-explicit and suitable for broadcast on a freely available service or whether handsets to which the clips were downloadable had been age-verified by the relevant mobile network operator. Rule 1.18 of the Broadcasting Code makes clear in giving the meaning of mandatory restricted access that this must consist of a PIN protected system (or other equivalent protection) which cannot be removed by the user, that restricts access solely to those authorised to view [i.e. adults] . As Ofcom’s assessment of the on-screen promotions demonstrated (see above), we were able to freely access the explicit sexual content which was being advertised without being required to provide any proof of age. These advertisements for products within the recognised character of pornography were therefore shown on these channels without mandatory restricted access as required by Rule 30.3 of the BCAP Code. Advertising for pornographic content is not suitable for broadcast at any time on any interactive adult chat service available free-to-air, regardless of the type of images broadcast as part of the advertising content. Breaches of BCAP Code Rules 4.2 and 30.3

A Big Fat Gypsy Banning…Channel 4 pull episode of Full English

Read more UK TV and Radio News at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See article from chortle.co.uk

Channel 4 has pulled the last episode of its animated series Full English from its schedules. In the dropped episode, moody Goth Eve rebelled against her parents by eloping to marry a gypsy boy. The episode, entitled, My Big Fat Gypsy Knightmare , was said to have been dropped for being controversial. On the show’s official Facebook page, producers claimed Channel 4 were afraid of falling foul of the law or TV censor Ofcom. On their Facebook page, producers urged fans to email Channel 4 in protest and said: We’ll try and find a way to get the episode out there, and will also try and post clips from it over the coming weeks, so people can enjoy some of the filthiest and most offensive ep to date… To clarify… we’re not officially cancelled. Decision won’t be made until end of January.

Diversity of Censorship…Channel 4 censors the word gay from daytime broadcasts of The Simpsons

Read more UK TV and Radio News at MelonFarmers.co.uk

Thanks to Nick See article from telegraph.co.uk

Channel 4 has admitted to editing the word ‘gay’ out of The Simpsons as the word was judged inappropriate for transmission before 6pm. The term was removed from a Sunday lunchtime showing of a 1994 episode called Homer Loves Flanders . In the episode Homer Simpson goes to an American football match with his God-fearing neighbour Ned Flanders but is initially embarrassed to be seen with him. The pair bond and Homer yells: I want everyone to know that this is Ned Flanders … my friend! His workmates Lenny and Carl overhear him and Lenny says: What d’he say? Originally Carl replies: I dunno. Somethin’ about being gay. But on Sunday his line was cut and the episode switched to advertisements after Lenny speaks. Channel 4 told The Independent claimed that it was a ‘mistake’ was caused by an overly cautious compliance checker. Channel 4′s gay censorship seems to be somewhat at odds with the fine words on their website: Diversity in TV and the media, it’s a big subject – and a top priority for us at Channel 4. After all, a key part of our remit is to appeal to people whatever their culture, nationality, religious persuasion, physical and mental ability, sexual orientation, race or age

So What Will Ofcom Pinheads Say?…Cable and Satellite broadcasters propose PIN protected daytime TV that would currently be banned until the watershed

Read more UK TV and Radio News at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See article from guardian.co.uk

Broadcasters including Sky are seeking a rule change so that more adult TV could be shown pre-watershed if protected by a PIN. The proposals being put forward by the Commercial Broadcasters’ Association, a lobbying group for cable and satellite broadcasters including BSkyB. Currently peak-time dramas and comedies are not allowed to be shown before the watershed, unless they are cut to remove swearing, violence and sex. However, pay-per-view programmes and content on premium film subscription channels are allowed before the watershed because viewers have to key in a pin code before they can watch them. Such a system is already in place for online catchup TV services. The group representing broadcasters including Sky, UKTV and MTV, has asked the Department for Culture, Media and Sport for regulations to be changed to extend this pin protection system to cover all other shows on cable and satellite channels. It is understood that audiences would have to enter the pin every time they wanted to watch a peak-time show before the watershed. The Coba executive director, Adam Minns, said: The system of pin protection is well established in the UK. It has proven to be effective technically and is something with which audiences are familiar — it is now used on a range of services. At the same time, it provides consumer protection that is arguably more effective than the watershed regime. Extending such a regime to other services could potentially encourage innovative new forms of content delivery. It is expected that such a move would need a consultation by Ofcom as it would require changes to the TV censor’s broadcasting rules

Child Snatcher on EastEnders…Social workers ‘outraged’ at being being portrayed in a negative light

Read more UK Nutter News at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See  article from  guardian.co.uk See  article from  bbc.co.uk

The British Association of Social Workers (BASW) is engaged in a battle with the BBC over a storyline in EastEnders . The TV soap featured a social worker removing a baby from a teenage mother, Lola, apparently without sufficient grounds to do so. Many social workers took to Twitter and Facebook to say the episode made a mockery of their profession. Bridget Robb, acting chief of the BASW, called the storyline shabby and said it had provoked real anger among a profession well used to a less than accurate public and media perception of their jobs . The BBC responded to complaints: It is not our intention to portray social workers in a negative light. Whilst the audience has seen how much Lola loves Lexi, and seen her behaving responsibly in caring for her baby, her social worker has not. Each time the social worker visited, she regularly saw worrying behaviour that concerned her. The social worker also witnessed a series of other incidents and, under these circumstances; we believe the audience will have understood why she had to act quickly to remove Lexi when Lola was arrested for assault. There was no suggestion that the social worker’s actions arose from anything other than a genuine desire to protect Lexi, or that her concerns about Lola were unreasonable given the picture she and the previous social worker had formed over a substantial period of time. Although EastEnders tackles many social issues and always carefully researches the details, it is a drama and Lola’s story and that of the social worker are not intended to be representative of everyone in the same situation.

Jeremy Clarkson vs Elephantine Political Correctness…BBC’s Editorial Standards Committee upholds complaint about Top Gear making references to Elephant Man

Read more BBC and BBC Trust Watch at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See article [pdf] from downloads.bbc.co.uk

Top Gear BBC One, 5 February 2012, 8pm An appeal to the Editorial Standards Committee concerns an episode of Top Gear which included comments about people with growths on their faces in an item about a new campervan. The complainant said that the item was offensive, prejudicial and unacceptable . The complainant also expressed the view that the BBC’s Editorial Guidelines should be updated to include specific consideration for under-represented groups of people in British society, including those with facial disfigurements. The Committee concluded: that the audience would have understood the connection which the presenters drew between the character played by John Hurt in The Elephant Man and the design of the Prius campervan, and that the joke at this point was about the vehicle’s design. that the slurred speech used by Jeremy Clarkson was also part of this reference to The Elephant Man, but that this mimicry was on the margins of acceptability. that, while most of the comments made about the campervan would have not exceeded the expectations of the audience, a remark about talking to a car at a party and not being able to look at a person with a facial disfigurement, taken with the reference to …one of those really ugly things … I’m talking about a growth… , strayed into an offensive stereotypical assumption not confined to The Elephant Man. that the programme was in breach of the Guidelines on Harm and Offence as the exchanges about facial disfigurement noted above were not editorially justified and did not meet generally accepted standards in the context of their portrayal of a disability. that the Editorial Guidelines and corresponding Guidance together give sufficient and appropriate guidance to programme-makers on the issue of the portrayal of minorities and vulnerable social groups and it was not necessary to change the Guidelines in the way that the complainant had suggested. The complaint was upheld

Obituary: Angharad Rees…Starred in Hands of the Ripper and was lovely in Poldark

Read more Movie News at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See  article from  bbc.co.uk

Welsh actress Angharad Rees has died after a long battle with cancer, her family has said. Ms Rees, who starred in BBC drama series Poldark in the 1970s, was 63. Ms Rees played Demelza in Poldark, a costume drama based on the novels written by Winston Graham and first broadcast in the UK between 1975 and 1977. She also had a role in cult classic Jack the Ripper film Hands Of The Ripper and on stage she appeared in A Winter’s Tale, Richard II and Romeo And Juliet. Her family said she remained an active supporter of the arts and was an honorary fellow of Royal Welsh College of Music and Drama in Cardiff.