Dear Mr Lilburn,
I would like to express my sincere apoligies to the way in whixh you were offended by the recent Brasseye programme that was aired on Channel 4.
It was never our intention to offend our viewers as we were only trying to mock the media rather that the delicate subject which the subject was focused on, which was phedophilia.
We would like to say that as the programme was aired after 10pm it did not break any the rules of the ITC Programme Code.
With regards to the child with enhanced breasts, we would like to say that this did not break any of the rules as the privacy was protected.
Finally we would just like to apoligise again for the way in which you were offended by viewing this programme.
Yours sincerly,
Ofcom.
Tuesday 5 May 2009
Tuesday 28 April 2009
Letter of complaint to Ofcom
Ofcom,
I am writing to you to tell you that i am deeply offended by the recent Brasseye programme that was aired on channel 4.
I would like to inform you that i would like to see action taken against this programme because of the graphic nature of the show and the way in which the subject of phedophiles was broadcast.
I was deeply shocked and horrified by the images of the young american girl standing naked with her parents while they stared and gazed at her new boob job. This was disgusting as the girl was aged about 8 years old.
I feel the subject and the way in which the phedophiles were described was very graphic and disturbing and im sure that many people will be disgusted by this programme.
I would like to end by saying that i am shocked at the way the celebrities were involved in commentating in the programme. People look up to these celebs and it is wrong that they were allowed to appear in a programme as deeply offending as this one.
I would like strong sanctions to be issued to both the programme and also channel 4.
Sam Lilburn.
I am writing to you to tell you that i am deeply offended by the recent Brasseye programme that was aired on channel 4.
I would like to inform you that i would like to see action taken against this programme because of the graphic nature of the show and the way in which the subject of phedophiles was broadcast.
I was deeply shocked and horrified by the images of the young american girl standing naked with her parents while they stared and gazed at her new boob job. This was disgusting as the girl was aged about 8 years old.
I feel the subject and the way in which the phedophiles were described was very graphic and disturbing and im sure that many people will be disgusted by this programme.
I would like to end by saying that i am shocked at the way the celebrities were involved in commentating in the programme. People look up to these celebs and it is wrong that they were allowed to appear in a programme as deeply offending as this one.
I would like strong sanctions to be issued to both the programme and also channel 4.
Sam Lilburn.
Tuesday 21 April 2009
The ITC's Programme Code
http://www.ofcom.org.uk/static/archive/itc/itc_publications/codes_guidance/programme_code/index.asp.htmlThe
ITC's Programme Code is split into 8 different sections that aim to air nothing in its programmes which offends against good taste or decency or is likely to encourage or incite to crime or lead to disorder or be offensive to public feeling.
The different sections include:
Section 1: Family Viewing Policy, Offence to Good Taste and Decency, Portrayal of Violence and Respect for Human Dignity.
Section 2: Privacy, fairness and gathering of information.
Section 3: Impartiality.
Section 4: Party Political and Parliamentary Broadcasting.
Section 5: Terrorism, Crime, Anti-Social Behaviour, etc.
Section 6: Charitable Appeals and Publicity for Charities.
Section 7: Religion.
Section 8: Commercial References in Programmes.
Friday 3 April 2009
BBC fined £150,000 over Sachs row
Ofcom has fined the BBC £150,000 over the lewd phone calls Jonathan Ross and Russell Brand made to actor Andrew Sachs on Radio 2 last year.
The media regulator said the fine reflected "the extraordinary nature and seriousness of the BBC's failures" and the "resulting breaches" of its code.
The BBC said it accepted Ofcom's findings and added that the material "should never have been broadcast".
Brand resigned over the affair and Ross was suspended for three months.
The fine relates to two episodes of the Russell Brand show broadcast on 18 and 25 October 2008.
'Gratuitously offensive'
Ofcom said the BBC broadcast explicit, intimate and confidential information about Georgina Baillie, the granddaughter of the Fawlty Towers actor, without obtaining consent either from her or Sachs.
"This not only unwarrantably and seriously infringed their privacy but was also gratuitously offensive, humiliating and demeaning," it said.
Ofcom fined the corporation £70,000 for breaching rules on generally accepted standards and offensive material.
It also imposed a £80,000 fine for failing to adhere to rules which protect members of the public from unwarranted infringements of privacy.
Ofcom has also directed Radio 2 to broadcast a summary of its findings.
Creative risk:
The regulator noted that broadcasters should be allowed to enjoy creative freedom to explore issues and ideas "without undue interference".
"Creative risk is part of the BBC's public service role," it said. "However, so is the management of that risk."
Ofcom said it found in its investigation that despite Brand's show being considered to be "high risk" by the BBC prior to the incident, the broadcaster had ceded responsibility for managing some of that risk to people working for the presenter.
Ofcom's Stewart Purvis told the BBC the incident had come about because of "underlying flaws" in BBC systems.
"When the BBC decided to outsource this programme to an independent production company, it didn't put in place what we call compliance systems. In other words, ways of staying within the rules," he said.
"The executive producer of the programme was a senior figure in the agency which represented Russell Brand and a line producer was loaned by the BBC to the production company, of which Russell Brand is one of the owners."
There was therefore no one at the BBC who was "absolutely in editorial control of the whole process," he added.
Ofcom also noted in its report that Brand's interests "had been given greater priority than the BBC's responsibility to avoid unwarranted infringements of privacy, minimise the risk of harm and offence and to maintain generally accepted standards."
'Riddled with holes'
A BBC spokesman said: "As we said last October, this material should never have been broadcast and we apologised unreservedly for that.
"The BBC has since taken comprehensive action to deal with what were unacceptable failures in editorial judgement and compliance which led to the broadcast."
Ofcom also raised concerns over the BBC's assurances that it was improving compliance.
The watchdog noted it had received similar assurances as recently as the summer of 2008, following its investigations into competitions and voting in BBC programmes.
"Ofcom therefore expects BBC management to ensure that these latest improvements are fulfilled effectively and quickly," it said.
Shadow Culture Secretary Jeremy Hunt said that while the fine itself was "relatively trivial", the incident represented a "huge" breach of trust for licence fee payers.
"It is clear from this damning report that the BBC's safeguards were riddled with holes," he said. "The public needs to know that this is never going to happen again."
In a related ruling, Ofcom found Chris Moyles's Radio 1 breakfast show breached broadcasting rules by allowing Brand to refer to Georgina Baillie during an appearance on the programme.
On the show, broadcast on 21 October, Brand said he had "in inverted commas, recently 'met'" a woman he described as "Andrew Sachs's granddaughter".
The comedian went on to laughingly claim he had "'met' her brains out".
Though Miss Baillie was not named in the programme, Ofcom found she was likely to be identifiable and that it had therefore infringed her privacy.
The media regulator said the fine reflected "the extraordinary nature and seriousness of the BBC's failures" and the "resulting breaches" of its code.
The BBC said it accepted Ofcom's findings and added that the material "should never have been broadcast".
Brand resigned over the affair and Ross was suspended for three months.
The fine relates to two episodes of the Russell Brand show broadcast on 18 and 25 October 2008.
'Gratuitously offensive'
Ofcom said the BBC broadcast explicit, intimate and confidential information about Georgina Baillie, the granddaughter of the Fawlty Towers actor, without obtaining consent either from her or Sachs.
"This not only unwarrantably and seriously infringed their privacy but was also gratuitously offensive, humiliating and demeaning," it said.
Ofcom fined the corporation £70,000 for breaching rules on generally accepted standards and offensive material.
It also imposed a £80,000 fine for failing to adhere to rules which protect members of the public from unwarranted infringements of privacy.
Ofcom has also directed Radio 2 to broadcast a summary of its findings.
Creative risk:
The regulator noted that broadcasters should be allowed to enjoy creative freedom to explore issues and ideas "without undue interference".
"Creative risk is part of the BBC's public service role," it said. "However, so is the management of that risk."
Ofcom said it found in its investigation that despite Brand's show being considered to be "high risk" by the BBC prior to the incident, the broadcaster had ceded responsibility for managing some of that risk to people working for the presenter.
Ofcom's Stewart Purvis told the BBC the incident had come about because of "underlying flaws" in BBC systems.
"When the BBC decided to outsource this programme to an independent production company, it didn't put in place what we call compliance systems. In other words, ways of staying within the rules," he said.
"The executive producer of the programme was a senior figure in the agency which represented Russell Brand and a line producer was loaned by the BBC to the production company, of which Russell Brand is one of the owners."
There was therefore no one at the BBC who was "absolutely in editorial control of the whole process," he added.
Ofcom also noted in its report that Brand's interests "had been given greater priority than the BBC's responsibility to avoid unwarranted infringements of privacy, minimise the risk of harm and offence and to maintain generally accepted standards."
'Riddled with holes'
A BBC spokesman said: "As we said last October, this material should never have been broadcast and we apologised unreservedly for that.
"The BBC has since taken comprehensive action to deal with what were unacceptable failures in editorial judgement and compliance which led to the broadcast."
Ofcom also raised concerns over the BBC's assurances that it was improving compliance.
The watchdog noted it had received similar assurances as recently as the summer of 2008, following its investigations into competitions and voting in BBC programmes.
"Ofcom therefore expects BBC management to ensure that these latest improvements are fulfilled effectively and quickly," it said.
Shadow Culture Secretary Jeremy Hunt said that while the fine itself was "relatively trivial", the incident represented a "huge" breach of trust for licence fee payers.
"It is clear from this damning report that the BBC's safeguards were riddled with holes," he said. "The public needs to know that this is never going to happen again."
In a related ruling, Ofcom found Chris Moyles's Radio 1 breakfast show breached broadcasting rules by allowing Brand to refer to Georgina Baillie during an appearance on the programme.
On the show, broadcast on 21 October, Brand said he had "in inverted commas, recently 'met'" a woman he described as "Andrew Sachs's granddaughter".
The comedian went on to laughingly claim he had "'met' her brains out".
Though Miss Baillie was not named in the programme, Ofcom found she was likely to be identifiable and that it had therefore infringed her privacy.
Tuesday 24 March 2009
Our presentation on the regulation, funding and the legislation of the BBC
Publish at Scribd or explore others:
This is our powerpoint presentation on the regulation, funding and legisaltion of the BBC.
In this presentation we included information about how the BBC makes money as a commercial business and from the licence payers. We also included facts about how its commercial activities have three main objectives, that are:
To contribute to the United Kingdom’s broadcasting export.
Bringing a United Kingdom outlook at culture and the world market.
To generate sufficient income to better develop the standard of programmes.
The types of funding information that we we created includes how the BBC is paid for directly through each household TV licence. This allows it to run a wide range of popular public services for everyone, free of adverts and independent of advertisers, shareholders or political interests.
We also included a table of the BBC’s main source of funding for its
television and radio services.
Our final slide gave information on the Public Service Remit. The watchdog says that public service broadcasting will not survive in the digital age if the current range of PSB offerings on state-backed (BBC) and commercial (ITV, Channel 4, Five) stations is not overhauled and if the way they are paid is not radically changed.
Tuesday 3 March 2009
The Future of British Broadcasting
03.03.2009
Advertising is a big factor in television.
The key issues affecting British television today are:
- Piracy.
- New technology - The internet and iplayer.
- Funding.
- Audience - Fragmented Audience.
What will be the key features in ensuring its success or downfall in the future?
- Outside funding - Different models of funding.
- Format setting - Advert production.
- Trans media model - Sharing production.
- Use of new technology across differnt countries.
What other issues can you think of that may/will affect the British broadcasting?
- Declining popularity of television as a medium.
- Piracy.
- American television being high quality. Same qualities as some of the Hollywood films because of the money.
- Channel 4 and BBC are public service and are funded by the licence payer.
- Quality of American programming.
- More cost efficient to buy the programmes than it is to make them.
- Product placement.
PSB - Public Service Broadcasting means that there are laws regarding product placement and other elements of output.
Advertising is a big factor in television.
The key issues affecting British television today are:
- Piracy.
- New technology - The internet and iplayer.
- Funding.
- Audience - Fragmented Audience.
What will be the key features in ensuring its success or downfall in the future?
- Outside funding - Different models of funding.
- Format setting - Advert production.
- Trans media model - Sharing production.
- Use of new technology across differnt countries.
What other issues can you think of that may/will affect the British broadcasting?
- Declining popularity of television as a medium.
- Piracy.
- American television being high quality. Same qualities as some of the Hollywood films because of the money.
- Channel 4 and BBC are public service and are funded by the licence payer.
- Quality of American programming.
- More cost efficient to buy the programmes than it is to make them.
- Product placement.
PSB - Public Service Broadcasting means that there are laws regarding product placement and other elements of output.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)