Autumn 2008 Newsletter (pdf)

STANDARDS VITAL  SAYS BURNHAM

"Standards are what have kept British broadcasting valued, celebrated and trusted in the UK and around the world. And I think they are becoming more, not less, important to traditional print and broadcast media as we look to the future."

It is rare indeed for someone in Mr Burnham's position to be frank about a matter that clearly concerns him.  mediawatch-uk warmly welcomed his remarks as they opened the way very well to a private meeting we had with him in October to discuss media standards.

Speaking to the Convergence Think Tank, Mr Burnham went on: "My theme today is standards - and in some ways I want to rehabilitate the word. Call me old-fashioned, but for me standards are absolutely vital to everything we are considering. I will begin with broadcasting but will then apply some of the same thinking, same tests, to the online world.

"What do I mean by standards? I'm thinking of guiding principles like impartiality and accuracy in TV and radio news, the integrity of programme making and the 9pm watershed, protecting against harm and offence that have stood us in good stead for years.  Why are these important?

"Being trusted has never been more important. People are still relying heavily on TV news - despite the explosion in information sources.  And trust is what people value most, particularly in news. Lower standards and you lose the trust and the public support that goes with it. 

Lose trust and you lower the quality, you lose innovation, you lose the ability of programme makers to take risks, you lose new possibilities, new talent goes undiscovered, and high quality programming is compromised."

In his address Mr Burnham also outlined his concern about "product placement" advertising. He said: "Another test of standards that is coming round the corner is product placement.  The Government is obliged to consider this as part of the implementation of the new Audio Visual Media Services Directive. 

I can see the arguments and benefits of product placement and understand why people feel it is an inevitability given the pressures they are under. As a viewer I don't want to feel the script has been written by the commercial marketing director."

MEDIAWATCH-UK'S RESPONSE

In our response to the Government's consultation on the new Audio Visual Services Directive we called for the Office of Communications (Ofcom) to be given responsibility for regulating Video-on-Demand programmes that are downloaded from the Internet. 

We said it was not appropriate for this important and innovative development to be left to voluntary codes drawn up by the industry in their own interests.  We also called for the current prohibition of product placement advertising to be maintained in the United Kingdom.

Mr Burnham attracted strong criticism from the industry for his remarks about product placement.

It would be good if mediawatch-uk members and supporters wrote to him to express support.  He can be contacted at: The House of Commons, Westminster, London, SW1A 0AA.

COUNCIL FOR CHILD INTERNET SAFETY LAUNCHED

Some of the biggest names from industry and charities have joined forces with the Government, parents and young people to help keep children safe online, Children's Secretary Ed Balls and Home Secretary Jacqui Smith announced in September. 

The new UK Council for Child Internet Safety (UKCCIS) will unite over 100 organisations, including mediawatch-uk, from the public and private sectors working with Government to deliver recommendations from Dr Tanya Byron's report ‘Safer Children in a Digital World'.

Reporting directly to the Prime Minister, the Council will help to improve the regulation and education around internet use, tackling problems around online bullying, safer search features, and violent video games. 

It is expected that Government ministers will introduce tough rules to make websites carry age certificates and warning signs if they feature sex, violence or strong language.  Culture Secretary said that tougher content guidance would help parents monitor their children's internet use.

John Beyer, director of mediawatch-uk said: "We welcome the new Council and wish it every success in its endeavours.  Many parents are very worried and concerned about the offensive and harmful material so easily accessible on the Internet. 

We hope that other countries will follow the example we have set in the UK and we hope it will lead directly to an International Treaty on content that will effectively require the plethora of pornographic and violent imagery currently available to be permanently removed from the world-wide-web."

IN THE NEWS

Channel 4's Sex Education Show, screened at 8.00pm, caused widespread offence and many people complained to Ofcom.  The programme asked school pupils to discuss pornography and inspect graphic images of genitalia.  

John Beyer said: "We received a number of complaints about the first programme.  People are absolutely appalled and astonished that something so explicit was put on by Channel 4 at 8pm.  I find it extraordinary that they could put such a programme on at all let alone at that time.  It seems to me that Ofcom really must say how this is not in breach of the statutory requirement to protect under-18s."

A reality television show has been accused of crossing the line from entertainment to sadism.  In Channel 5's Unbreakable the contestants are buried alive, trapped in a tent full of CS gas and must wade through piranha-infested water.  They are also subjected to waterboarding - a torture technique used by the CIA on terror suspects.  This involves being tied down on a board, tilted back and having water poured over the face, which recreates the experience of drowning.  One of the volunteers was so traumatised they had convulsions on the first day of filming. 

John Beyer, director of mediawatch-uk, said: 'Ofcom's Broadcasting Code states that programmes should not include material that is harmful and/or offensive. This programme could well be in breach of the code. 'Waterboarding is a form of torture that I believe is illegal under international law and so should not feature in any programme merely as a form of entertainment.  We hope very much that Ofcom will be monitoring this series and taking whatever action is appropriate.'

New rules regulating the amount on TV advertising came into force at the beginning of September which will permit 12-minute long advertisements.  In response to this John Beyer said: "These new rules threatened to be detrimental to our viewing of commercial television.  I feel the way things are going with advertisements is that it is all designed to help TV channels improve their income.  Our viewing is likely to be interrupted more and more and many people will find this completely unacceptable."

Film studios are failing to include details of the explicit content of films or their age classification on posters and publicity material.  John Beyer said that the BBFC should do more to ensure film companies include the certificates and guidance on their publicity material.  "It is the Board's responsibility, placed on it by Government, to provide information for people, mainly parents with young children.  I think part of the problem is that the BBFC is an industry body rather than a public body", he said.

THE NATURE OF TV

At the Edinburgh Television Festival in August this year the McTaggart Lecture was delivered by Peter Fincham, ITV's Director of Television.  Readers may remember that he was forced to resign from the BBC in 2007 following a row over a misleading trailer for the five-part series A Year With The Queen.

In his lecture he described Television as a "broad church, but it does not want empty pews. At ITV entertaining our audience is part of our DNA.  So is our commitment to providing our services free to the consumer." 

Mr Fincham went on to tell his audience that he had found the time to read Ofcom's Public Service Broadcasting report.  We sympathise with his opinion that this report "has a language all its own understood by regulators, consultants, strategists and media commentators" and far removed from "the person in the street".  Ofcom, he said, "likes to imagine television as a form of social engineering".

Mr Fincham's remarks suggest that he harbours a degree of resentment about Ofcom and its efforts to regulate broadcasting in the public interest.  He attempts to hide the truth that TV is a primary means of "social engineering" with or without regulation and whoever is in control.  That is in the nature of TV. 

The real question is whether society is engineered for good or ill and whether we are told Truth that is not coloured by the quest for ratings and audience share.  No doubt Mr Fincham would regard ITV's new series aimed at children, Green Up Your Life, to air this autumn, as justifiable "social engineering" because it will help to raise awareness of Global Warming and that is a Good Thing.  The aim of this series is to illustrate how the little actions we make each day can create a greener planet.

mediawatch-uk would argue that the frequent portrayal of antisocial and immoral behaviour and dysfunctional lifestyles alongside values and standards that are not generally accepted has certainly helped to engineer a society that is, to say the least, sadly lacking in respect and civility. 

Looking at the storylines in the popular soap operas, which we are told "reflect society as it is", we see that they are characterised by violence, aggressiveness, deceit, drug abuse, infidelity, incivility and disrespect.   Are we really to believe that all of this is not "social engineering" and that it is not having a damaging effect on our society? 

On the occasion, some years ago, of the BBC's 75th anniversary, the then chairman of the BBC Governors, Sir Christopher Bland, boasted how the corporation "had shaped the taste of the nation".  Enough said!

ARE YOU RAISING STANDARDS?

By Pauline Webborn
There's a lot of talk about standards these days, especially raising standards - in education, the health service, public service and indeed broadcasting!  Andy Burnham, the Culture Secretary, recently claimed he wished to ‘rehabilitate the word'.

However the debate of how broadcasting standards can best be agreed to suit everyone, wrangles on.  Each of us has a different set of standards even within our own homes and within that context these may vary between adults and definitely between adults and children, as I well know!! 

However there is something I encounter as I speak to various groups - an undeniable agreement that broadcasting standards are pushing moral boundaries, which generally people are uncomfortable with!  Whilst the media and often the Government sit on the fence on this issue and ‘wait' for ‘scientific evidence' that inappropriate behaviour, language and images may be having an effect on the behaviour in society - the ordinary men and women in the street are happy to admit that they are witnesses to the influences of film and television on the behaviour of society around them.

We hope therefore that you will take up the challenge to respond to offensive broadcasting that you see on any TV channel, by completing one of our new postcards and sending it to Ofcom (the TV regulator).

At a recent meeting with Ofcom officials, John Beyer and I were encouraged to hear of the genuine intent to reprimand and fine any broadcaster that is found to be crossing the line of acceptable content, and that they appear to be committed to protecting against harmful and offensive subject matter. The more we champion that cause, the more effective we will be in raising this issue in the places that matter!

Pauline Webborn, our Promotion and Development Officer, is available to speak at meetings and can be contacted on 01233 633936

NOT THEIR HIGHEST PRIORITY!

The Office of Communication (Ofcom) attracted some good publicity for its PSB review and the proposals to give a proportion of licence fee money to commercial broadcasters hit the headlines.  However, there was much more to the review than this.

Answering some of the points in the consultation we said: "It is not surprising that audiences want content that reflects life in the UK because of the high percentage of programmes shown on British TV that are made in the US and reflect an American ‘cultural identity' rather than a British one. 

This is not the same as ‘increasing our understanding of the world', which, increasingly, is becoming little more than a romantic illusion as most entertainment now has a global identity as international media markets have expanded.  In our opinion Ofcom must face up to the truth that commercial television, whether ‘public service' or not, is primarily a money making enterprise, calculated to deliver audiences to advertisers and aimed at satisfying investors and shareholders.  Viewers' interests are not the highest of their priorities."

We quoted again remarks made in May 2004 by Lord Hattersley about standards:

"One of the hard facts of television's decline is that liberty, far from producing an improvement in quality, has produced a continual deterioration in standards.  Why go to the trouble and expense of producing first class shows when there is a fortune to be made from rubbish - as long as it is associated with sex and violence?  Notoriety increasingly takes the place of quality and forces the quality of broadcasting down, down, down."

We went on:

"Declining audiences and share are now the rule rather than the exception and there is a corresponding decline in investment in unprofitable services.  The fact is that ‘public service' programming is less and less what the people want.  It is not without relevance to restate the ancient Roman metaphor that all some people are interested in now is ‘bread and circuses'.  Having been given this for so long, any ‘public service' content must seem an unattractive proposition!"

ITV Regional News - Grade asked to reconsider

Our full response to the PSB review 2008 is here

VIOLENT FILMS BLAMED FOR KNIFE CRIME WAVE

The Oscar-winning film director, Lord Attenborough, revealed recently that he "abhorred the pornography of violence" that proliferates in modern cinema and warned it has created a culture where people are no longer shocked when weapons are used.  "Thirty years ago if Gary Cooper pulled out a gun the audience would give a sharp intake of breath," he said.

Lord Attenborough, 84, said such scenes were to blame for making guns and knives seem normal.  He added that viewers are now desensitised to real life crime because they are so used to seeing graphic images on screen.  "Now the act of violence with a gun or a knife is the norm and we in the entertainment industry are partly responsible in making the presence of weapons such as knives almost an acceptable commonplace.  So now knife crime is not thought of as something that is horrific and to be abhorred. It is part of normal existence."

It is rare for someone as highly respected as Lord Attenborough to speak so plainly about the harmful influence of violence in Film.  mediawatch-uk warmly welcomes these remarks and we hope very much that other filmmakers following in his footsteps will take seriously what he said.  We hope also that those responsible for the regulation of films and broadcasting will hear what he has said and take the necessary action to reduce gun and knife violence in entertainment.

THANK YOU . . .

We take this opportunity to thank all members who have enrolled new supporters this year and those who have renewed their annual subscriptions.  We thank you too for the many letters of support you send in.

IMPORTANT CONFERENCE

The Harmful Effects of Violent Films and Computer Games on Young People's Behaviour, and Effective Preventive Action
Monday 17 November 2008 from 1.00pm to 4.00pm

The urgent purpose of this conference is to sensitise those in authority to the link between violent media content and violent behaviour, particularly among young people. If you cannot attend please invite your Member of Parliament.

Speakers include The Rt Hon Kieth Vaz MP, Professor Kevin Browne, University of Liverpool, Brian Moore, Chief Constable of Wiltshire Police, Keith Bakker, founder of the first Clinic for Video game addicts, Robert Prendergast, Joint Director of Urban Mission and Louise Brown from Christian Care for Our Nation.

This event is sponsored by Nadine Dorries MP and organised by Pippa Smith and Miranda Suit, founders of mediamarch.

This event is free and entry is by ticket only.  Please telephone: Pippa on 01308 482333 or Miranda on 020 8467 6452

MEMBERS' LETTERS

Sir, Thank you for the new Ofcom contact cards, which I hope will be very successful, they are a brilliant idea.  Enclosed is a photocopy of a recent brush I had with Ofcom and BBC 1 using my first contact card.
Mr Maher, Lancs

Sir, Please find enclosed my annual sub plus a small donation towards the excellent work you are doing.  At 84 years of age I fear my active involvement is limited but I continue to express my complaints vocally and I am now able to complete a postcard with necessary details to guide me.  A good idea!
Miss Snell, Dorset

Sir, Please find enclosed a cheque to help a little towards the wonderful work you are doing.  I found the summer newsletter positive and encouraging, on the whole, but there is still much to do.  Thank you for all the hard work put in to protect viewers and listeners from harmful immoral output.  Thank you too for the cards, which you have sent, which makes it easier to make a protest about programmes, which are immoral and violent.
Mrs Lee, Essex

Please order and use more of our post cards to contact Ofcom.  They are available free on request from info@mediawatchuk.org

LEGACIES

In recent years mediawatch-uk has been indebted to members and supporters who have kindly arranged to leave us legacies.  This income has enabled us to continue confidently with our most important work.

GAMING - THE SHIFTING BATTLEGROUND

At the mediawatch-uk office we receive calls from journalists most days.  In August a local reporter telephoned for a comment about a new computer game called MadWorld, which according to its creators, 'revolves around the themes of brutality and exhilaration'.  The game has not yet been given an age rating by the BBFC but players of this 'hack and slash' game can impale enemies on road signs, rip out hearts and execute them with weapons including chainsaws and daggers.

John Beyer, director of mediawatch-uk, said: "This game sounds very unsavoury.  I hope the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) will view this with concern and decide it should not be granted a classification.  Without that it cannot be marketed in Britain. 

We need to ensure that modern and civilized values take priority rather than killing and maiming people.  It seems a shame that the game's manufacturer has decided to release this game exclusively on the Wii.  I believe it will spoil the 'fun for all the family' image of the Wii."

Within hours of these remarks being published a rain of hostile emails from gamers poured into our office telling us to "shut the f*** up", suggesting that we have "got our knickers in a twist", demanding, as though we were on trial for an heinous crime, to know what right we had to impose our "narrow minded bigotry" on them and stopping them playing an "adult" game of their choice. 

Others, of a more sober character, asked reasonably why we should be so concerned about games when there was so much violence in films and on television!  We were also accused us of being "cowards" for not responding properly to belligerent strictures and one ‘emailer' observed glibly that "violent acts are not a symptom of video games and films, but rather the human condition".  Another said: "If you don't like violent content, don't view or use it". 

Others thanked us cynically for drawing attention to the game saying they would rush out and buy it as soon as it was available.  Yet others told us to focus on retailers and said that parents should safeguard their children from "adult" games.  

Feature articles, grossly exaggerating the significance of our comments, were written in computer game magazines exonerating the multimillion pound games industry and headlines were achieved on Google News UK and dismissive remarks made in The Guardian newspaper.  It is comforting to know that the BBFC, too, received "abusive and incoherent" protests from gamers who disagreed with their decision to reject the game Manhunt II - a decision that was subsequently overturned on appeal.

It is evident from this that the battle for standards has rather shifted away from television towards games and the internet.  Dr Tanya Byron, in her review for the Prime Minister, made a number of recommendations, including some relating to the regulation and classification of computer games, and the setting up of a UK Council of Child Internet Safety.  This was launched at the end of September.

Meanwhile, the Department of Culture, Media and Sport issued a public consultation on Video Game Classification which closes at the end of November 2008.  In its response to this consultation mediawatch-uk called for the Video Recordings Act 1984 to be amended so that online gaming is brought within its terms and we called for a unified classification scheme that must be "trustworthy, uniform and clear" and there must be "power to refuse to certify certain titles". 

"We did not agree that any new system "must work for the games industry" alone or that it "must support retailers".  "The overriding priority", we said, "really ought to be the welfare of children and families."

Games/Internet2008    Rotting Brain and Conscience   

The response to the DCMS Video Game Classification consultation is here 

HAVE YOUR SAY

The excellent BBC Complaints website (www.bbc.co.uk/complaints), where you can also express praise for good programmes, informs visitors that "Your complaint is important to us".  The chairman of the BBC Trust, Sir Michael Lyons says: "The BBC Trust ensures BBC programmes are high quality."  This website is an important innovation and there is a wealth of information accessible from it including the latest responses to complaints and the regular complaints bulletins. 

A recent concern with viewers was another stabbing portrayed in the BBC's flagship soap opera EastEnders.  More than 100 viewers protested about the episode screened on 28 August and repeated the following Sunday afternoon.  The BBC's justification of these scenes was predictable: "Whilst issues of violence and knife-crime may be in the news currently, they were not glamorised or glorified in any way within this episode, rather we saw the devastating consequences of such actions and the clear message was that crime does not pay."

In a recent issue of the Radio Times a reader asked: "If I complain directly to the BBC about their programmes, what happens?  Who reads complaints?  Are they actually passed on to programme-makers?"

Keith Jones, BBC Audience Services' head of communications and complaints, responds:  "Yes, some are replied to by programme teams and some centrally - it depends on the nature of the complaint.  We compile a daily report on feedback for all staff across the BBC so every complaint provides us with useful feedback even if the person making the complaint hasn't specifically asked for a response.  The BBC's Complaints Management Board meets monthly to ensure that lessons are learnt from complaints and fed into editorial and managerial processes."

Given that there have been at least three stabbings in EastEnders in recent years as well as gang violence, shootings, threats and intimidation that have given rise to hundreds of complaints from the public, we do wonder if these "editorial and managerial processes" need overhauling!

Please note that the BBC has changed the Complaints telephone number to:
03700 100222. 
Please amend your Directory!

BBC in the News 2008

'mediawatch-uk newsletter' is published three times a year in Spring, Summer and Autumn.  Future editions may be obtained by joining mediawatch-uk.  The annual subscription of £15.00 and any donation should be sent to:

mediawatch-uk, 3 Willow House, Kennington Road, Ashford, Kent, TN24 0NR