UK TV and Radio News

EastEnders viewers were treated to the classic Den and Angie episode on Tuesday evening, which focused on just the two of them as Den told Angie he wanted a divorce

However the episode rather highlighted that we are now subject to stricter censorship rules than in 1986. The classic episode feature several instances of the word, 'bastard', something that is no longer allowed before the watershed,

Angie, played by Anita Dobson, said to Den, played by Leslie Grantham: 'Cause I hang on like a bloody limpet, you bastard!' Later in the episode, Den referred to himself as a 'selfish bastard' too.

The Daily Star rooted out the ineviable comments from Twitter. One tweeted:

I'd forgotten you were allowed to say bastard in EastEnders when it began. Hasn't TV gone backwards in some ways. Today folk would have a fit and report them to Ofcom.

Ofcom has decided not to impose any further sanction on ESTV Ltd after an interview with David Icke on its local television channel London Live included potentially harmful content about the coronavirus pandemic. It has already been required to broadcast a summary of Ofcom's findings

Our investigation found David Icke expressed views which had the potential to cause significant harm to viewers in London during the pandemic. We were particularly concerned by his comments casting doubt on the motives behind official health advice to protect the public from the virus.

These claims went largely unchallenged during the 80-minute interview and were made without the support of any scientific or other evidence. While we acknowledge that David Icke has a right to hold and express these views, they risked causing significant harm to viewers who may have been particularly vulnerable at the time of broadcast.

Ofcom stresses that there is no prohibition on broadcasting views which diverge from or challenge official authorities on public health information. However, in broadcasting David Icke's unsubstantiated views without sufficient challenge or context, ESTV failed in its responsibility to ensure that viewers were adequately protected. As a result, we directed London Live to broadcast a summary of our findings on 22 April 2020 at 22:00.

Ofcom subsequently considered whether imposing any further sanction in addition to the direction would be appropriate in this case. Ofcom concluded that the direction it had already imposed on ESTV to broadcast a statement of its findings was sufficient in remedying potentially significant harm to viewers and that any further sanction would not be appropriate in this case. Ofcom's decision not to impose any further sanction on ESTV was published on 8 June 2020.

An episode of sitcom Fawlty Towers has been taken off UKTV's streaming service because it contains racial jokes. The BBC-owned platform said it had made The Germans unavailable while it carries out a review.

In the 1975 episode, Basil Fawlty declares don't mention the war around German guests, while the Major uses the dated term 'wogs' about the West Indies cricket team.

Actor and creator John Cleese attacked the 'cowardly' BBC describing the move as stupid. Speaking to The Age newspaper, he said the episode was clearly a critique of racist attitudes:

One of the things I've learned in the last 180 years is that people have very different senses of humour. Some of them understand that if you put nonsense words into the mouth of someone you want to make fun of, you're not broadcasting their views, you're making fun of them.

A UKTV spokesman said:

UKTV has temporarily removed an episode of Fawlty Towers The Germans from Gold's Box Set. The episode contains racial slurs so we are taking the episode down while we review it. We regularly review older content to ensure it meets audience expectations and are particularly aware of the impact of outdated language. Some shows carry warnings and others are edited. We want to take time to consider our options for this episode.

The Germans is still available to view on Britbox, which is part-owned by the BBC, with a message saying it contains some offensive racial language of the time and upsetting scenes. It is also on Netflix, carrying a warning about language, [and] discrimination.

Else where there have been a few similar complaints about jokes on ITV's Ant & Dec's Saturday Takeaway and the BBC's Gavin and Stacey.

Update: Reinstated. Maybe it was the BBC censorship that caused the most offence.

13th June 2020. See article from bbc.co.uk

A classic episode of the comedy Fawlty Towers will be reinstated to streaming service UKTV but with a warning about offensive content and language. A UKTV statement said:

 We already offer guidance to viewers across some of our classic comedy titles, but we recognise that more contextual information can be required on our archive comedy, so we will be adding extra guidance and warnings to the front of programmes to highlight potentially offensive content and language.

We will reinstate Fawlty Towers once that extra guidance has been added, which we expect will be in the coming days.

We will continue to look at what content is on offer as we always have done.

Offsite Comment: Now even Fawlty Towers is being erased

13th June 2020. See article from spiked-online.com   by Brendan O'Neill

The crazed witch-hunt against offensive culture is completely out of control.

Netflix , BBC iPlayer and BritBox have removed comedy series Little Britain from their platforms amid PC concerns about its use of blackface.

Netflix pulled the BBC series on Friday. Netflix has also dropped the comedians' airport mockumentary Come Fly With Me . BBC iPlayer and BritBox have also ditched Little Britain from their platforms this week.

A BBC spokesman told Variety:

There's a lot of historical programming available on BBC iPlayer which we regularly review. Times have changed since 'Little Britain' first aired, so it is not currently available on BBC iPlayer.

BritBox also confirmed that Little Britain was no longer on the service, adding that Come Fly With Me had not been available for six months.

Little Britain first aired in 2003, while Come Fly With Me debuted in 2010. Both series saw the comedians play characters from different ethnic backgrounds with the use of make-up. In Come Fly With Me, Lucas and Walliams wore make up for characters including airport worker Taaj, passenger liaison officer Moses Beacon, and airline boss Omar Baba while Walliams also starred as health-spa guest Desiree Devere in Little Britain.

It seems strange that a TV censor should get involved in a very tense global situation with China vs the western world. One would have thought that this should be better handled by diplomats and the Foreign Office. Perhaps Ofcom have been working with the government behind the scenes.

Anyway Ofcom has published a series of decisions against news reports from China's propaganda channel CGTN. Ofcom said that news reports broke thier rules with biased coverage of pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong.

Ofcom said it was minded to formally sanction CGTN, the English-language rolling news channel owned by the Chinese government, for a serious failure of compliance after it failed to represent anti-Beijing viewpoints as protests raged across Hong Kong in late 2019.

Ofcom noted that CGTN often focused on violence by protesters against police officers, while downplaying attacks by the authorities on the public. Its output also parroted the views of the pro-Beijing Hong Kong government without giving sufficient airtime to people with alternative views, while focusing on economic disruption to businesses rather than the reason they were being disrupted.

It remains to be seen how China will respond to the sanctions. In March, Beijing revoked the visas of many American journalists after Donald Trump restricted the activities of CGTN and other Chinese outlets in the US.

CGTN said viewers understood it was representing a different view and the channel was simply serving its purpose to inform our international audiences of the Chinese perspective, which is often alternative to the mainstream western media.

Ofcom has announced that Alison Marsden has been appointed as Director of Content Standards, Licensing and Enforcement.

Alison will be leading the team with responsibility for setting and enforcing content standards for television, radio and on-demand services and Ofcom's broadcast licensing programme. She will also sit on Ofcom's Content Board, a committee of the main Ofcom Board, which has advisory responsibility for a wide range of content issues.

Alison joined Ofcom in 2007 as a broadcasting standards specialist. Since 2016 she has worked as Director of the Standards and Audience Protection team, responsible for setting and enforcing Ofcom's Broadcasting Code.

Before joining Ofcom, Alison worked in television production, firstly at the BBC producing and directing specialist factual and factual programmes, and later for various independent production companies.

Alison takes up her new roles with immediate effect.

50,000 people have signed a petition calling for the sacking of Piers Morgan from his job presenting ITV's Good Morning Britain.

This comes after thousands of complaints were filed to Ofcom over numerous combative interviews he has had with politicians amid the coronavirus crisis.

The petition ludicrously claims that Morgan is one of the country's most heinous public figures. In particular, the petition organiser takes issue with his reporting on transgender issues. The petitioners say:

Wake up to the reality of Morgan's behaviour. Hate crimes are on the rise, transphobia and discrimination over gender identity is becoming commonplace both upon social media and in the real world, and ITV continue to sit idly and let it play out in the name of entertainment.

The screening of new Channel 4 drama Adult Material has been pushed back until the autumn.

The adult related content requires a 10pm slot and in the current climate of coronavirus, it would have to compete with the main BBC and ITV news programmes, which are still getting 6.5 million viewers tuning in for updates on the Covid crisis.

It's hoped that by waiting until the autumn, there's a chance that the crisis will have calmed down and people's viewing habits will return to normal.

ITV's Britain's Got Talent earned 155 complaints to the advert censor, ASA, over a Lynx advert that features a dry humping squirrel.

During Saturday's May 2 show the broadcaster aired an ad for Lynx Africa featuring a jokey coda of CGI squirrel humping a can of the bodyspray. It was aired 15 minute before the watershed.

A spokesperson for the Advertising Standards Authority told Metro:

We [had] 155 complaints about the Lynx TV ad featuring a squirrel behaving amorously with a deodorant can. The general nature of the complaints is that the ad is offensive, is inappropriately scheduled and is unsuitable for children.

No decision has been made on whether there are grounds for an investigation.

The UK TV censor is looking into a TV network's broadcast of an interview with conspiracy theorist David Icke about supposed links between 5G transmitters and coronavirus.

Ofcom said it was assessing this programme as a priority, following London Live's screening of the programme on Wednesday evening. The London Live interview appeared in part on YouTube titled The Evil of 5G Technology.

The conspiracy theory is more about the dangers of 5G than coronavirus. It is based on noting that 5G uses the high frequency end of the radio wave spectrum which is up there with microwaves, which when transmitted at high power, can indeed sizzle your sausage.

It is hard to believe that David Icke will have convinced many viewers about these theories as Icke doesn't seem to be very knowledgeable about the claims. He is just passing on a Chinese whispers style rumour waving his hands and embellishing it with a few unconvincing analogies.

The coronavirus extension seems to be that the virus is doing most damage in big cities. Rather than the more obvious correlation with high density and multi occupancy housing, the conspiracists are claiming that the correlation is with the recent introduction of 5G.

The government has expressed concern about the programme with Culture Secretary Oliver Dowden saying:

I would be expecting Ofcom to take appropriate action. Clearly they are independent but I will be in touch with them to understand what action they are taking in respect to that.

Ofcom has now received 19 complaints about the programme.

 

Update: Why we shouldn't censor Covid conspiracy theories

11th April 2020. See article from spiked-online.com by Tom Slater

David Icke must be free to air his nonsense about 5G.

Update: Ofcom is about as unconvincing as David Icke when censuring London Live without offering any of their own evidence

20th April 2020. See article from ofcom.org.uk . See also Ofcom decision  [pdf] from ofcom.org.uk

Ofcom is a censorial organisation tainted by its frequent censoring programmes on grounds of 'wrong think' based on its own moralising politically correct view of what is 'truth'. So when they censure someone for an opinion, it comes across as an Orwellain rebuke for a 'wrong' opinion. Therefore in cases of scientific truth, Ofcom needs to make a point of actually linking to the science explaining exactly why the conspiracy theory is false. Otherwise, just like in antivaxx, an unevidenced official denial ends up adding credence to the conspiracy.

Ofcom has demanded that London Live broadcasting a statement explaining Ofcom's opinions about the programme. Ofcom writes:

Ofcom has today imposed a sanction on ESTV after an interview with David Icke on its local television channel London Live included potentially harmful content about the coronavirus pandemic.

Our investigation found David Icke expressed views which had the potential to cause significant harm to viewers in London during the pandemic. We were particularly concerned by his comments casting doubt on the motives behind official health advice to protect the public from the virus.

These claims went largely unchallenged during the 80-minute interview and were made without the support of any scientific or other evidence. While we acknowledge that David Icke has a right to hold and express these views, [...BUT...] they risked causing significant harm to viewers who may have been particularly vulnerable at the time of broadcast.

Ofcom stresses that there is no prohibition on broadcasting views which diverge from or challenge official authorities on public health information ...HOWEVER... in broadcasting David Icke's unsubstantiated views without sufficient challenge or context, ESTV failed in its responsibility to ensure that viewers were adequately protected. As a result, we are directing London Live to broadcast a summary of our findings on a date and form to be decided by Ofcom.

We are also now considering whether to impose any further sanction.

Update: Ofcom fails to clear up the myths around 5G and the coronavirus

20th April 2020. See article from telecoms.com

Telecoms industry commentators telecoms.com were also unimpressed by Ofcom's response to 5G conspiracy theories. The group writes:

UK telecoms regulator Ofcom has published an announcement that claims to rebut the conspiracy theories regarding 5G and coronavirus, but barely mentions them.

The piece, entitled Clearing up the myths around 5G and the coronavirus, starts promisingly. There is a conspiracy theory that claims 5G is connected to the spread of the coronavirus (Covid-19), it states. This is wrong. There is no scientific basis or credible evidence for these claims. But then it goes on to note that burning down phone masts can reduce connectivity and then address the persistent does 5G give you cancer? question.

Those two topics are definitely important, but they don't in any way address the mistaken belief that 5G is in some way contributing to the spread of coronavirus. The very simple fact is that physical particles cannot be transmitted over electromagnetic waves. That piece of fundamental education should be front and centre of any fact-checking campaign, and yet Ofcom chose not to mention that at all.

If, for whatever reason, Ofcom was disinclined to consult scientific experts in the preparation of its announcement, it could at least have linked to other sources that put a bit more effort into debunking this silliness.

TV censor Ofcom has said it is assessing comments made by ITV's This Morning presenter Eamonn Holmes about 5G technology and coronavirus as a priority.

Ofcom received 419 complaints about remarks not quite toeing the dictated line on refuting 5G/coronavirus conspiracy theories.

Holmes made his remarks in a segment with the programme's consumer editor Alice Beer, who dismissed the theory as not true and it's incredibly stupid. Holmes told her:

I totally agree with everything you are saying but what I don't accept is mainstream media immediately slapping that down as not true when they don't know it's not true.

No-one should attack or damage or do anything like that, but it's very easy to say it is not true because it suits the state narrative. That's all I would say, as someone with an inquiring mind.

But of course Holmes was making a valid point. The conspiracies are being widely dismissed by those in the media simply by claiming 'wrong think' and calling out people who don't agree. It seems clear that the media types following this line don't even know what the conspiracy theorists claim, let alone offer some sort of reasoning as to why they are wrong. The refutations therefore become no more convincing than the conspiracy theory itself.

Holmes 'clarified' his comments on the following day after being widely criticised. He said:

I want to clarify some comments that some of you may have misinterpreted from me yesterday, around conspiracy theories and coronavirus and this involved the roll-out of 5G.

Both Alice Beer and I agreed in a discussion on this very programme on fake news that it's not true and there is no connection between the present national health emergency and 5G, and to suggest otherwise would be wrong and indeed it could be dangerous.

Every theory relating to such a connection has been proven to be false and we would like to emphasise that. However many people are rightly concerned and are looking for answers and that's simply what I was trying to do, to impart yesterday.

But for the avoidance of any doubt I want to make it completely clear there's no scientific evidence to substantiate any of those 5G theories. I hope that clears that up.

TV censor Ofcom has decided not to pursue complaints about a Piers Morgan joke on ITV's Good Morning Britain but has taken the opportunity to give ITV a warning about the show.

A recent episode attracted 1600 complaints about a joke targeted at both Chinese people and the royal family. Piers and co-host Susanna Reid were discussing the Queen's eldest grandson Peter Phillips appearing in a TV advert for state milk in China. Morgan went into a rant about the ad saying:

Oh Peter, for god's sake man! before accusing him of exploiting his royal status.

At the next royal event, can you imagine Christmas at Sandringham is like - 'I'm sorry your majesty, but I only drink yang yank yong ying ming milk.

A month later, ITV issued a statement on the incident, claiming that the comments were not intended to mock or denigrate Chinese people, their language or accent but were intended to mock a member of the Royal Family.

Ofcom said if the incident:

Having carefully considered the context within which the comments were broadcast and the action taken by ITV, including discussing these complaints with Piers Morgan and making a public apology, Ofcom concluded overall that this programme did not warrant further investigation under the Code.

However, they did say in their report:

We remind ITV that there are compliance risks in relying on a 'combative dynamic' between presenters as a way to provide challenge and context for the broadcast of content which may cause offence.

How to Steal Pigs and Influence People
Channel 4, 14 January 2020, 22:00

Summary

How to Steal Pigs and Influence People followed vegan and ex-vegan influencers who used social media to spread their message to a mass online audience. One of the people featured in the programme was shown stealing pigs from farms and then uploading self-shot video footage to his social media channels.

Ofcom received 388 viewer complaints about this programme 203 377 of which objected it condoned criminal activity and had the potential to encourage crime and disorder. Several complainants specifically objected to the title of the programme and its pre-broadcast publicity, describing it as glamorising illegal activity.

While the programme showed scenes which contained criminal activity, we considered its overall narrative neither glamorised nor condoned this activity. In our view, the actions taken by those featured and their motivations were not portrayed positively. In our view, their behaviour was challenged by the narrator, or by the inclusion of other points of view, and the programme depicted the negative consequences of the criminal activity.

We therefore considered the portrayal of criminal activity was editorially justified by the context of this programme. For these and for the other reasons set out in detail below, we have concluded that the complaints do not warrant further investigation.

Ofcom Decision

While criminal activity was shown during this programme, we considered the overall narrative was to explore the possible motivations of the influencers, rather than focusing on the criminal activity itself. The programme highlighted these individuals' desire to gain wealth or online fame from their activism. For example, Wes was shown attempting to earn a living from being an influencer and motivated by a desire to get donations.

The programme also made clear that, to achieve fame online, influencers had to generate increasingly controversial content. When Wes decided to steal a newborn piglet, the narrator explained it was to up the ante. These actions were presented negatively and portrayed to be escalating in extremity to increase likes or followers on social media, rather than solely being motivated by their beliefs or to further their cause.

In our view, there were also several instances where the individual's criminal activity was challenged or portrayed as antisocial either by the narrator or through the inclusion of other points of view. For example, the narrator challenged Wes immediately after his theft of a piglet: What gives you the right to take this baby away from its mum? Prem, the former vegan, also strongly criticised the activists' behaviour. The programme also depicted the negative potential consequences of carrying out these crimes, particularly on the animals, through the inclusion of several videos which showed piglets had died as a direct result of being removed from farms. The programme raised the prospect that the piglet Wes stole might have also died as a result of being removed from his mother. This was reinforced by the unidentified farmer who pointed out the piglet would die in six months without its mother. Similarly, the farmer who was the victim of the activists' criminal activity, robustly challenged and condemned the activists' behaviour, explaining they had caused the animals significant distress. We considered the inclusion of this narrative highlighted the stark reality of the potential consequences associated with these criminal activities and the negative impact on both the people and animals involved.

For all the reasons outlined above, in our view, the overall narrative and context of the programme did not condone, glamorise or encourage the crimes which were shown. Given the programme sought to explore and to question the motivations of activists who believe their criminal acts are justified on moral and public interest grounds, we considered there was a strong editorial justification for showing these people carrying out their criminal activity.

While the programme showed Wes successfully stealing pigs, the fact that this behaviour was antisocial and criminal was made clear throughout. There was a warning that the programme contained criminal activity and the offence of stealing pigs was referred to as a crime throughout the programme. The inclusion of archive news footage also showed the activist had previously been convicted and served a community sentence for similar offences.

We acknowledged the programme suggested the actions taken by Wes had inspired other activists to undertake similar offences, but it was made clear this had been prompted specifically by Wes' social media activity. As the programme showed other pigs had died after being stolen, we considered it reiterated the potential negative consequences of copying these offences and did not describe them in a way which condoned them.

Ofcom commissioned Ipsos MORI to conduct research to help them understand how audience expectations of audio-visual content are evolving in a digital world. The research explored participants' changing attitudes towards content standards and their experiences of programmes across platforms including: TV, radio, catch-up, subscription and video sharing services.

Participants thought people should be largely responsible for deciding what they watch and listen to. They wanted regulators and broadcasters to ensure content is in line with people's expectations, so audiences can make informed choices.

There was limited awareness of the detail of current regulation and some confusion about how this applies, particularly for catch-up, subscription and video sharing sites. There was also confusion about whether UK rules applied to channels that broadcast content produced outside of the UK or not in English, including among some participants from a minority ethnic background.

Having been introduced to the Broadcasting Code including definitions of harmful content, offensive content and freedom of expression1, participants thought all the rules were important and there was little appetite for changing them:

• Participants overwhelmingly agreed it was essential to protect children from inappropriate content and wanted rules to cover this. However, parents were seen as having primary responsibility for the content accessed by children.
• Participants felt there were challenges around applying the rules for offensive content given its subjective nature. They focused on people knowing what to expect so they can make informed choices, for example, by having access to clear information about the content in programmes.
• Despite this, there was widespread agreement across participants that societal norms around offence have shifted in recent years and this should be reflected in the way Ofcom regulates offensive content. Participants prioritised addressing discrimination aimed at specific groups over other types of offensive content.
• Harmful content was considered more serious than offensive content, with strong concerns about the impact of harmful content on attitudes and behaviours. As discussions progressed, participants increasingly felt that adults (specifically vulnerable adults) and society overall could be affected by audio-visual content. This challenged their initial view that adults should decide for themselves what to consume.
• The potential for harm was often discussed when considering the different rules in the Broadcasting Code. In particular, rules around crime, disorder, hatred and abuse were very important to participants and strongly linked to potential harm. They emphasised how content which incited hatred or crime should be prioritised by Ofcom, even if this was on smaller channels or stations.

There was some acceptance that different rules could apply to different platforms. Attitudes were influenced by the extent to which participants felt in control:

• There was a strong desire to maintain the current rules for TV and radio because participants felt audiences were more likely to come across content by accident on these platforms.
• Many participants were more comfortable with catch-up and subscription services having fewer rules than broadcast TV and radio. This was because they felt they had an active choice in selecting content and were therefore more in control on these platforms. However, they assumed that if a programme had previously been broadcast on TV or radio, it would follow the same rules when accessed online.
• There were concerns about a perceived lack of rules on video-sharing sites, where participants were worried about accidentally coming across inappropriate or upsetting content. Rolling playlists, pop-ups, and unchecked user-generated content were common worries. However, there was concern about the feasibility of increasing regulation online.

29 people have complained to Ofcom about a virus joke on Ant & Dec's Saturday Night Takeaway.

Part five of the Men In Brown sketch saw Paul Hollywood, whose body had been taken over by an alien, reveal that he had the Universal Collider and could now infect the whole world.

A few viewers were not impressed, claiming it to be insensitive during a time when the entire world is battling the coronavirus pandemic.

Television censor Ofcom confirmed that they received a total of 29 complaints, including 22 relating to the Men In Brown sketch. Zn Ofcom spokesperson told Metro.co.uk:

We are assessing the complaints against our broadcasting rules, but are yet to decide whether or not to investigate,

This is Ofcom speak for the complaints already being in the waste paper bin but the complaints acknowledge that there is a section of society that believe that we should not be able to make light about an incredibly serious situation