Coloured Judgement…Ofcom considers ITV News item using the word ‘coloured’ instead of ‘black’

Read more Ofcom Watch at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See article [pdf] from stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk

ITV News and Weather ITV1, 26 February 2012, 13:30 This news bulletin included an item on racism and homophobia in British football and reported on an anti-discrimination summit chaired by the Prime Minister at Downing Street that day about how to combat discrimination in the sport. Four complainants alerted Ofcom to the reporter using the term coloured to describe some football players and coaches during this pre-recorded news item, indicating that they found it offensive. During the item the reporter said in voiceover: … Football has certainly come a long way since bananas were routinely thrown at coloured players. But one shameful statistic remains – only three of the 92 League clubs employ a black manager, and one of those Keith Curl, was only appointed at Notts County a few days ago. The Government are funding a scheme to promote more coloured coaches and are also tackling the issue of homophobia in the sport. Ofcom considered the material raised issues warranting investigation under Rule 2.3 of the Code, which states: In applying generally accepted standards broadcasters must ensure that material which may cause offence is justified by the context … . Such material may include, but is not limited to, offensive language, … discriminatory treatment or language…. ITV said that the reporter’s use of the term coloured was inappropriate and we do not defend its use. It was an editorial misjudgement and we apologise to those who were understandably offended by the use of this term. ITV said that once the report was broadcast, the Licensee recognised very quickly that inappropriate language had been used and took swift action to mitigate the potential for further offence by: editing the reference from the news programme scheduled on ITV1 +1; issued an apology that was distributed to the press that afternoon; published an apology on the ITV News Twitter account within the hour of the broadcast; and removed the report from the ITV News website. The Licensee said that approximately 20 viewers had contacted ITV News and ITV Viewer Services directly and apologies were made to all these complainants. Ofcom Decision: Resolved Ofcom recognises that the use of language changes over time and likewise the impact of offence it may cause will also be subject to change. However, broadcasters are required to ensure that potentially offensive material is justified by the context. In this case we noted that the pre-recorded news report concerned: the issue of racism in British football; an anti-discrimination summit at Downing Street; and two recent high profile cases regarding racism and Premier League football players. Ofcom noted that on two occasions the reporter used the term coloured during this news item. Although the word coloured has various meanings, Ofcom understands that it is potentially offensive when used to describe certain individuals from ethnic minority groups because it fails to recognise adequately their specific differences and also has associations with racial segregation. Therefore in Ofcom’s view the use of the word twice in a news report was clearly capable of causing offence to viewers. However, we noted that ITV recognised the editorial mistake almost immediately after broadcast, and took swift and appropriate action to mitigate the potential for further offence by for example: editing the report prior to its repeat on the ITV1 +1 service and issuing apologies via the press, the social media site Twitter and to those viewers who contacted it directly. On balance, and in light of the steps taken by ITV to mitigate this offence, Ofcom therefore considered the matter resolved.

A Mere Pimple…Ofcom dismiss complaints about a Jeremy Clarkson quip about the Elephant Man

Read more Ofcom Watch at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See article from guardian.co.uk

Ofcom has cleared Jeremy Clarkson’s comparison of a Japanese car to the Elephant Man of breaching the broadcasting code. Ofcom had received about 40 complaints that it was offensive to people suffering from facial disfigurement.Clarkson compared a Japanese car/camper van hybrid to people with growths on their faces in an edition of BBC2′s Top Gear in February. The controversial presenter deployed gestures as if he had a disability and slurred his speech in a way that seemed to mimic Joseph Merrick, the so-called Elephant Man, saying that the car looked like something you would not talk to at a party. Co-presenter Richard Hammond called it the elephant car. An Ofcom spokesman said: Ofcom recognises that the comments were potentially offensive to individuals living with facial disfigurement. However, on balance we believe that they would not have exceeded the likely expectation of the audience, and any potential offence was justified by the context. We have informed the BBC of the issues raised by the complainants so they can be taken into consideration for future programmes.

Daily Mail in Harrowing Attack on TV Programme…A few viewers complaint about violent scenes in Silent Witness

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

27th April 2012. See article from dailymail.co.uk

According to the ever ludicrous Daily Mail: The BBC has been hit with a ‘flood’ of complaints over a ‘harrowing’ sex attack scene in crime drama Silent Witness. Viewers were ‘appalled’ at the ‘graphic’ violence on the BBC1 series this week, contacting the broadcaster in their hundreds to register ‘anger’. As well as a scene in which a murderous prison guard carried out a prolonged sexual assault on a man, apparently using a baton, the programme also featured ‘explicit’ images of a man having his throat cut. Although the show aired after the watershed, a few viewers said the assault was graphic and nasty and went too far. There have been about 500 complaints about two episodes, with the BBC receiving 483 and TV censor Ofcom a further 35. The complaints will be assessed by Ofcom. A large number related to the scenes where prison officer Daniel Kessler was shown attacking a drug dealer in a toilet. Viewers heard the violence being carried out in a closed cubicle and saw blood seep from beneath the door. The man’s half-dressed body was later seen as the prison guard emerged from the cubicle. While the attack was not shown in full, the use of sound, including the maniacal comments of the killer and the screams of the victim, left viewers in little doubt what was happening. A BBC statement said the scene was not an attempt to gratuitously shock the audience but was rooted in character and research and showed the brutality that Kessler was capable of. We don’t feel the content of these episodes would have gone beyond viewers expectations We’re sorry if you [viewers] felt we got it wrong on this occasion.’ Update: BBC Response 29th April 2012. See article from bbc.co.uk We’ve received complaints from some viewers who felt the two part instalment of Silent Witness entitled Redhill was too violent. As programme makers we take our responsibility to the audience extremely seriously and try to make sure we strike the right balance between compelling drama without being unnecessarily graphic. Towards the end of the first episode we had established that DI Bridges and Officer Kessler had previously worked together and that he was the one very much in control. The final scene was not an attempt to gratuitously shock the audience; it was rooted in character and research, showing just what DI Bridges was prepared to do for her colleague for the sake of her family, as well as the brutality that Kessler was capable of. We acknowledge that certain scenes may have been challenging, but we filmed and presented them in such a way as to make sure that although as a viewer the implication was there, it was never actually shown. Silent Witness is now in its 15th series and we believe the general tone and content is widely recognised by its regular audience. It’s fair to say the show is known for tackling challenging stories and exploring adult themes and we don’t feel the content of these episodes would have gone beyond viewer’s expectations. As well as scheduling the series after the 9pm watershed, we made sure the content was widely publicised and gave a warning before both episodes which on Sunday stated: …With scenes some viewers might find upsetting and violent scenes. And Monday: ….With graphic violent scenes and some scenes which some viewers might find upsetting, Silent Witness. We’re sorry if you felt we got it wrong on this occasion.

Strictly Come Dancing…BBC Trust savages appellants whingeing about Robbie Savage taking off Michael Jackson

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

Thanks to Nick See article [pdf] from bbc.co.uk

Strictly Come Dancing, BBC One, 29 October 2011 Two people appealed to the BBC Trust against the BBC’s response to complaints regarding a dance routine on the Strictly Come Dancing Halloween special. The appeals were consolidated and considered together across the range of issues raised. The complainants said that a dance routine performed by Robbie Savage to the Michael Jackson song Bad was sexually explicit (particularly in relation to its ending, when the contestant jumped onto the judges’ desk in front of one of the male judges) and was inappropriate for the programme’s audience. The Committee concluded: that the routine in question was not sexually aggressive and would have been viewed more as pantomime behaviour, a caricature of Michael Jackson’s dance routine, and would not have had a harmful effect on children. that, while some viewers may have found elements of the routine tasteless and vulgar, overall the routine did not exceed audience expectations. that the audience would be familiar with the nature of Robbie Savage’s on-screen relationship with the male judge and would take that into consideration as part of the narrative of the show. that the dance routine met generally accepted standards, but that the final hip thrust on the judges’ desk was at the margins of acceptability in a programme appealing to a wide family audience. The complaints were not upheld

Iranian Propaganda Channel Closed Down in Europe…Germany initiates shut down of the satellite channel, Press TV

Read more EU Censorship News at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See article from advanced-television.com

Under pressure from the German government, media censors at BLM have initaiated an action to remove Iran’s international English Channel, Press TV, from SES Astra. In an email sent to the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting officials, Vice President of the SES Platforms Services, Stephane Goebel, noted that the BLM has asked Press TV be immediately removed from the platform. The authority has claimed that Iran’s English-speaking channel does not have a license for broadcast in Europe. Goebel added that his company will be no longer able to keep the Press TV signal on air and will need to shut down the service without further notice. The channel was turned of on 3rd April. Press TV has responded that the decision to remove Press TV is a flagrant breach of regulations and a disproportionate act. The channel has said that it will be demanding compensation unless transmissions are restored by April 5.

Some Serious Censure…Ofcom whinges at the occasional instances of strong language that accidentally slip out before the watershed

Read more Ofcom Watch at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See article [pdf] from stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk See article from dailymail.co.uk

Ofcom have a regular whinge at strong language that slips out before the watershed. Broadcasters usually explain the accidental slip up. The latest examples are; Road Wars Pick TV, 11 January 2012, 18:00 Road Wars is a fly-on-the-wall documentary featuring the work of traffic police squads in the UK and USA. The licence for Pick TV is held by British Sky Broadcasting Ltd (Sky or the Licensee). Ofcom was alerted to offensive language in this broadcast by two complainants. During this episode, a man was arrested on suspicion of possessing Class A drugs and taken to a police station. On the way to the station, the man became violent and during an altercation that followed he used offensive language. The words fuck or fucking were broadcast five times. Ofcom considered Rule 1.14 of the Code, which states: The most offensive language must not be broadcast before the watershed…. Sky apologised for any offence caused to viewers by the broadcast of offensive language in this programme. The Licensee said that upon discovering the incident it launched an immediate investigation and concluded that the broadcast of this post- watershed version of Road Wars resulted from human error. Hanging Up Sony Entertainment Television, 29 January 2012, 20:00 Hanging Up is a comedy drama in which three dysfunctional sisters clash over who should take on the burden of looking after their ailing father. The film has been given a 15 certificate rating by the BBFC. A complainant alerted Ofcom to the use of the word fucking in this broadcast of the film. Approximately 40 minutes into the film there is the following interchange between sisters Maddy and Eve: Maddy: I’ve told you a million times, stop talking to me as if I’m like you! Eve: Oh, fuck you! [turns to another character] And fuck you! Sony said that the unedited version of this film carried a restriction that should have automatically prevented it from being scheduled before 9pm, but that a software upgrade on 5 November had disabled a block automatically preventing this post-watershed content from being scheduled before the watershed. Ofcom concluded in both cases that the words ‘fuck’ and ‘fucking’ broadcast before the watershed were a clear breach of Rule 1.14. Ofcom Warning to Broadcasters Ofcom further decided to publish a general warning to broadcasters against ‘fucking’ accidents Ofcom has recently noted a number of cases where material which was originally produced for a post-watershed timeslot has been transmitted unedited or inappropriately edited for transmission pre-watershed or when children are particularly likely to be listening. This material often contains unsuitable language or violence. In such cases broadcasters frequently explain that such failures have occurred as a result of transmission and/or human errors. All broadcasters are reminded that they are under a clear duty to ensure that robust procedures are in place, supported by a sufficient number of appropriately qualified and trained staff, to ensure full compliance with the Code. All broadcasters must check their compliance procedures regularly to confirm they are effective enough to fulfil this requirement. Failure to have adequate procedures in place to ensure compliance with Ofcom’s codes is a serious matter. Ofcom recently made clear that it expects broadcasters to exercise particular care in relation to the protection of children and the compliance of material broadcast before the watershed on television, and on radio when children are particularly likely to be listening. Broadcasters are put on notice that any serious or repeated failings in this area are likely to result in Ofcom taking further regulatory action, for example, the consideration of the imposition of statutory sanctions The Daily Mail prodded Vivienne Pattison of Mediawatch-uk for a sound bite: I’m really glad that Ofcom is taking it seriously because it is something we have brought up with them. What I would really like to see is for them to show teeth and rather than a rap on the knuckles I would like to see some serious censure. We need real and meaningful sanctions. I think what people want is a regulator with teeth that can show some leadership and be taken seriously.’

Cr*pples, B*****ds and Censored Words…Sky EPG censors Crown of Thornes

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

Thanks to Wynter

The easily offended Sky EPG has taken offence at the weekend’s Game of Thrones episode. The episode title Cripples, Bastards and Broken Things has become Cr*pples, B*****ds and Broken Things.So has ‘*’ become the 27th letter in the English language? Presumably it can be added to the alphabet after ‘z’. Isn’t it about time that these new spellings were standardised and incorporated into the dictionary. Something like: F*ck Pronounced: fuk, verb or noun, slang. archaic spelling: fuck, definition: more or less anything users want it to mean.

Moral Censors…Ofcom has another whinge at late night babe channels Sport XXX Girls and Northern Birds

Read more Ofcom Watch at MelonFarmers.co.uk

Thanks to Nick See article [pdf] from stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk

Bluebird Live Sport XXX Girls (Channel 967), 28/29 August 2011, 23:45 to 00:45 Sport XXX Girls (Channel 967), 29 August 2011, 02:45 to 03:45 Sport XXX Girls (Channel 967), 3/4 September 2011, 23:45 to 00:45 Bluebird 40+ Northern Birds (Channel 954), 29 August 2011, 22:50 to 23:25 Bluebird Live and Bluebird 40+ are segments of interactive adult chat broadcast on free to air babe channels Sport XXX Girls and Northern Birds. The licences for Sport XXX Girls and Northern Birds are held by Satellite Entertainment Limited (SEL). A complaint alerted Ofcom to the level of sexual content in the material listed above. Ofcom therefore viewed this content and found: 1. Bluebird Live, Sport XXX Girls, 28/29 August 2011, 23:45 to 00:45 The female presenter was wearing a light blue one piece costume which consisted only of a thin strip of fabric between her legs which covered her vagina but resulted in her outer genital area being exposed. During the broadcast she lay with her legs wide open to camera gently thrusting her hips forward and stroking her upper inner thigh area. Given that this shot of the presenter with her legs wide open remained onscreen for the majority of this broadcast, the material was both invasive and prolonged. SEL denied that the presenter’s outer genital area was exposed, saying that it was covered by her garment. The Licensee also denied that these were prolonged or intrusive images, and asked for further clarification about what Ofcom considered to be invasive about the material. 2. Bluebird Live, Sport XXX Girls, 29 August 2011, 02:45 to 03:45 The presenter wore only a pink lace thong and was filmed with a hand held camera. Throughout the broadcast there were various prolonged and intrusive images filmed, extremely close up and for a duration of time, from directly behind the presenter’s buttocks and also between her wide open legs. While being filmed in these positions she thrust her buttocks and hips towards the camera revealing her outer genital area and anal detail. SEL said there were no prolonged images in the sequence with the potential to cause offence, and asked for Ofcom?s clarification as to how the images were intrusive and prolonged. 3. Bluebird Live, Sport XXX Girls, 3/4 September 2011, 23:45 to 00:45 The female presenter was wearing only a thin white and red thong. For the majority of this broadcast she was positioned on all fours with her buttocks to camera. While in this position her anal and outer genital areas were clearly visible. Given these shots had a duration of several minutes and were in sufficient close up to show anal and outer genital detail they were both prolonged and intrusive. The Licensee said that the presenter?s garment was clearly covering her genitals, and that for most of the sequence the model was on her stomach with the camera focussing on her face; therefore, SEL failed to see how these images could be in breach of the BCAP Code. 4. Bluebird 40+, Northern Birds, 29 August 2011, 22:50 to 23:25 The presenter wore a black leather look thong composed of a thin strip of fabric only covering her vagina and so revealing her outer genital area. During the broadcast she lay on her back with her legs wide open to camera, and while in this position she gently thrust her hips backwards and forwards. Some particularly intrusive images followed, filmed at close range, when her outer genital area was visible for a prolonged period. In this position she massaged and stroked around her outer genital area. Ofcom considered this material raised issues warranting investigation under Rule 4.2 of the BCAP Code, which states that: Advertisements must not cause serious or widespread offence against generally accepted moral, social or cultural standards. Ofcom Decision: Breach of Rule 4.2 of the BCAP Code Ofcom concluded that relevant scheduling restrictions were not applied so as to ensure that the material which was broadcast was not capable of causing serious or widespread offence against generally accepted moral, social or cultural standards. Specifically, this material should not have been broadcast within the context of „adult chat? advertising content that was freely available without mandatory restricted access. Therefore Ofcom found this material in breach of Rule 4.2 of the BCAP Code. Ofcom has recently imposed a sanction on the Licensee for a number of serious and repeated breaches of the BCAP Code3 , which led to the imposition of a financial penalty totalling ฃ130,000. These present contraventions of the BCAP Code by SEL are another example of very poor compliance by the Licensee. In the circumstances, Ofcom is considering what further regulatory action is appropriate.

Gambling on More Censorship…David Cameron alludes to another route to suffocating people’s fun and the economy

Read more UK Government Watch at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See article from publications.parliament.uk

Prime Minister’s Questions. 18th January 2012. Tessa Munt (Wells) (LD): I was shocked to discover that mainstream terrestrial television carries adverts for online bingo at 5 o’clock in the afternoon and that 31 hours and 55 minutes each week is dedicated to live casino betting and gaming, which has been classified as teleshopping since 2009. At a time when there is ฃ1.45 trillion of personal debt in this country and when we are encouraging people to be moderate in their expectations and behaviour, will the Prime Minister please protect consumers, children and the vulnerable from this kind of activity by asking for a review by Ofcom— The Prime Minister: The hon. Lady raises an important issue about gambling advertisement on television. I am all in favour of deregulation and trying to allow businesses to get on and succeed. Gambling programmes and betting advertising were not permitted until the last Government allowed them in 2007 and they are strictly regulated by Ofcom and the Advertising Standards Authority. It is not just a question of regulation, as it is also a question of responsibility by the companies concerned. Anyone who enjoys watching a football match will see quite aggressive advertisements on the television, and I think companies have to ask themselves whether they are behaving responsibly when they do that. Meg Hillier (Hackney South and Shoreditch) (Lab/Co-op): On the subject of gambling, Hackney has 90 bookies—three times the national average. Will the Prime Minister listen to the debate that took place yesterday and take action this Friday and instruct his Ministers to support the private Member’s Bill that will be before the House and will give local authorities more planning powers over bookies? The Prime Minister: I will certainly look at the debate the hon. Lady mentions and the ideas expressed in it. We are all for localism and giving local authorities greater powers in these sorts of regards. I will look at the suggestion she makes.

Mission Accomplished…Indian High Commission complains to the BBC over the TOP Gear Christmas Special

Read more South Asia Censorship News at MelonFarmers.co.uk

See article from telegraph.co.uk

Top Gear’s Christmas Special had a bit of fun in India. The usual irreverent jokes ridiculed India’s food, toilets, traditional clothing, trains and history. The jokes notably included Clarkson riding around the country’s worst slums in a 4-litre Jaguar fitted with a toilet, joking: This is perfect because everyone here gets the trots. Not all the jokes targeted India, there was plenty of self effacing fun too. An advertising banner incompetently pasted to the side of train was split as carriages parted  losing the last 3 letters from: Eat English Muffins  Even David Cameron participated in the Top Gear fun. He had a cameo role waving off the Top Gear trio on a trade mission as ambassadors of Britain to save the UK from bankruptcy. At the time the programme got up the nose of the nutter mp Keith Vaz. Now the Indian High Commission in London has formally complained to the BBC, accusing its producers of deceiving them over the nature of the programme, which was jokingly billed as a trade mission.