ThisisBigBrother.com - UK TV Forums - Channel 5 in trouble with Ofcom

ThisisBigBrother.com - UK TV Forums (https://www.thisisbigbrother.com/forums/index.php)

- BB12 (https://www.thisisbigbrother.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=586)

- - Channel 5 in trouble with Ofcom (https://www.thisisbigbrother.com/forums/showthread.php?t=193071)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vicky. (Post 4825423)

LOL how ridiculous.

They would have a (still quite pathetic) point if it was 11 secs BEFORE the watershed...but it wasnt

They probably WOULDN'T have a point if it was 10 MINUTES AFTER the watershed:

OFCOM say :

Quote:

Rule 1.4 Watershed (including trails)
The ‘watershed’ is a well understood concept and audiences are concerned if they believe programme content is ‘pushing the boundaries’ of what is generally accepted close to the watershed. Audience research shows strong support and recognition for the watershed on all television channels. The watershed plays a crucial role for parents and carers with children aged 5 to 8 and trust in pre-watershed programming is essential, particularly leading up to 1930. It is also important that the content of pre watershed trails is appropriate for the time of broadcast. Although the watershed is a useful tool for regulating viewing amongst older children, it is one of many factors taken into account when regulating their viewing. Some programmes scheduled to start before the watershed and finishing after 2100 may be of special appeal to children, especially during school holidays. Depending on the channel and audience it attracts, viewers can be concerned at strong, adult material immediately after the watershed when a significant number of children could still be watching television.

Rule 1.7 Information
Even with appropriate scheduling, some additional information about pre-watershed and post - watershed programmes may be necessary. Where appropriate, viewers appreciate information about content that may be problematic for certain ages – particularly if a programme appeals to a wide-ranging audience.

BBC say:

Quote:

Television Scheduling and the Watershed
5.4.6

Television scheduling decisions need to balance the protection of young people and particularly children with the rights of all viewers, including those without children, to receive a full range of subject matter throughout the day. They must also be judged against the requirements of the watershed.

The 9pm television watershed is used by broadcasters to distinguish between programmes intended mainly for a general audience and those programmes intended for an adult audience. However, parents and carers share in the responsibility for assessing whether programme content is suitable for their children, based on their expectations of that content.

The 9pm watershed signals the beginning of the transition to more adult material, but the change should not be abrupt. Programme makers and schedulers should also take into account the nature of the channel and viewer expectations. The strongest material should appear later in the schedule. If sudden changes of tone are unavoidable they should be clearly signposted, for example by giving clear information about scenes of a sexual nature, violence or the use of strong language.

5.4.7

Programmes broadcast between 5.30am and 9pm must be suitable for a general audience including children. The earlier in the evening a programme is placed, the more suitable it should be for children to watch without an older person. Programmes in later pre-watershed slots may not be suitable for the youngest children or for children to watch without an older person.

Only in exceptional circumstances can there be any departure from this practice, and then clear content information should be given. Exceptions may include, but are not limited to, images that some children might find distressing in natural history programmes or items in pre-watershed news bulletins. Any proposed exceptions must be referred to a senior editorial figure or, for independents, to the commissioning editor.

5.4.8

Programmes that straddle the watershed, that is start before 9pm and finish sometime after 9pm, should normally be pre-watershed compliant throughout.

C4 say :

Quote:

ii) Strong Language
The most offensive language i.e. the words ‘****' and ‘****' and their derivatives (e.g. ‘****ing' and ‘mother****'), cannot be used before the 9pm watershed as this would breach the Ofcom Code and must be removed or obscured by bleeping or dipping. This includes the words in written form (including subtitles) and gestures. Any proposed use of the word ‘****' or any of its derivatives after the watershed should be referred up by the commissioning editor to the relevant editorial head for approval in writing before transmission and arrangements for an on-air warning must be made. A ‘swear form' (commonly referred to as a ‘**** form') must be completed, copied to the programme lawyer where appropriate. Because of its greater potential to offend, any proposed use of the word ‘****' post-watershed should be referred up by the commissioning editor to the Head of Channel 4 or relevant channel and/or Controller of Legal & Compliance, copied to the editorial head, for approval in writing before transmission, following advice from the particular programme lawyer.

Remember: these words and their derivatives must never be broadcast before 9pm in any form.

Note: If the word ‘****' is to be included within a programme, the warning must refer to "very strong language", rather than merely "strong language".

C5 themselves say :

Quote:

4A Protecting Under 18s and Harm and Offence : Key Points
Under 18s must be protected from potentially harmful and offensive material. One of the main ways of achieving this is through the appropriate scheduling of programmes.
The watershed is 9 pm. Nothing unsuitable for children should, in general, be shown before 9pm or after 5.30 am. After 9 pm, there should then be a gradual transition to more adult material, not an abrupt change. Generally, the more adult in nature a programme is, the later in the schedule it should appear.
Potentially harmful or offensive material includes strong language, violence, sexual behaviour etc.. Its inclusion must be justified editorially and by the context i.e. taking into consideration the editorial content of the programme, its scheduling, the audience's likely expectations, any warning that has been given etc..
Audience expectation is key. Viewers should be clearly forewarned of any potentially harmful or offensive material so they can make their own informed choices about what they and their children watch. This usually requires clear on-air pre-transmission warnings.

So what makes C5 special enough to ignore the guidelines and break the rules ?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom (Post 4825394)

I'm normally one for controversy but I'm completely with Niamh on this one, you're missing the obvious point. A lot of people leave the channel they're watching on for a good 5-10 minutes after the programme they were watching has finished. This could easily have happened there especially with kids watching whatever was on at 8pm, and 11 seconds is pushing it before finding something else to watch. Its nothing to do with watching BB just to complain.

BB just isn't a 9pm show to begin with. The move to 9pm was when it started its rapid decline and one of the only things Channel 5 got right was keeping it on at 10pm. I'll never understand people who complain though. Don't see the point or what it achieves.

If I'm watching TV with my younger brothers or other family/friends that are young and something comes on that I know would be inappropriate for them, I turn over onto a random channel and then begin browsing to see what's on, that way they can't see the said programme at all.

It's not the fault of Channel 5 if other people choose to leave channels on for 5/10 minutes after 9pm, they are fully aware of the fact that the watershed begins at that hour and so really, if they don't want their children to see any post-watershed content, they should change channel or switch off immediately. I see your point, but laziness isn't an excuse.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Omah (Post 4825399)

What do you mean by "elderly"?

By definition (mine obviously, people have differing ones) - people that have retired around the average retirement age.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Omah (Post 4825399)

Of course not, but the debate is about those who are much younger, the pre-teens and juveniles ..... ;)

So you're trying to say that 13 year olds would perhaps complain about this sort of content? :conf:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Omah (Post 4825405)

In my "real life", swearing is not a regular part of the vernacular ..... :nono:

Surprise, surprise...I knew this statement would pop up at some point from somebody, it always does whether in real life or on this forum. It doesn't matter whether you hear swearing in your social group or not, it still exists in many other social groups and to try and deny that would be beyond stupid.

If you went to any pub and stayed there all night, you'd struggle to find one where there wasn't any cases where you heard someone swear. That's almost certainly the case with football grounds - try going there and not hearing anyone swear.

You can bring your own 'real life' into it as much as you want, perhaps you and your friends/family don't swear - but a lot of people do, and so as such it is part of reality because it happens in real life for a lot of people. That's the end of that discussion.

These people need marching off a plank into the middle of the Atlantic Ocean.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack_ (Post 4825519)

So you're trying to say that 13 year olds would perhaps complain about this sort of content? :conf:

No ..... the watershed guidelines are there to protect the under 14's, who, nominally, are under the control of a parent or guardian

Quote:

As I said, your reality, not mine ..... we obviously move indifferent social circles with different social standards ..... as for being "stupid", I would suggest that only the "stupid" swear, since they lack the education, the inclination or the imagination to construct expressive and meaningful sentences from the wealth of words that the English Language has to offer ..... :idc:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack_ (Post 4825519)

Completely get what you're saying but the watershed isnt an immediate time for things to happen, e.g. a graphic sex scene isn't appropriate for 9.01pm just because its after the watershed. I've got no problems with the content personally but I do think this is the reason why BB is more suited to a 10pm slot, the slot it had for years and the slot it had when BB was at its height.

Where's Gavin when you need him

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack_ (Post 4825519)

The "watershed" is NOT an immediate concept - it's a flexible one (see the guidelines issued by OFCOM and all the terrestrial TV channels) to allow viewers without the benefit of your unwavering and lightning control of all the TV channels on all the TVs, PCs and media servers in your house to make their own (somewhat slower, maybe impeded) decisions about equipment and programs in their house ..... ;)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom (Post 4825628)

Exactly ..... :thumbs:

if ofcom was to look at this forum they would shut it down and they would be right to!
this forum is being run by forum members so called mods, that are posting on this forum id call that a conflict of interest!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack_ (Post 4825519)

You can bring your own 'real life' into it as much as you want.

Well, you certainly are ...... :laugh:

Quote:

Originally Posted by thesheriff443 (Post 4825686)

:suspect:

Quote:

Originally Posted by thesheriff443 (Post 4825686)

So the job of a mod is to read every thread and look out for any insulting posts, and they're not allowed to voice their own opinion on post anywhere?

Piss off back to DS or wherever you're from.

Quote:

Originally Posted by thesheriff443 (Post 4825686)

Yeah because people would actually moderate on here and not post for free wouldn't they?

What kind of forum has mods that don't post? :suspect:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Samuel. (Post 4825813)

What kind of forum has mods that don't post? :suspect:

DS if I remember correctly

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jingle Bellend (Post 4825818)

DS if I remember correctly

Weird. I don't see how having posters as mods would be problematic; it's worked for every other forum I've been on.

How boring for the DS mods. And what's to say they wouldn't be just as opinionated as a poster would be.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Little Donkey (Post 4825726)

So the job of a mod is to read every thread and look out for any insulting posts, and they're not allowed to voice their own opinion on post anywhere?

Piss off back to DS or wherever you're from.

thanks for your insult! i rest my case!

Quote:

Originally Posted by thesheriff443 (Post 4825845)

thanks for your insult! i rest my case!

No problem. :love:

Hold on, how does that rest your case, I'm not a mod.

my case is,if you cant put your opinion across without haveing to insulting me!,
then you show your ignorance to all on here,

PC gone mad, and if you think kids don't know swear words then I give up!

Quite how this thread has become a mods v FM's is another point I don't understand.

You can be the best parent in the world and vet your childs viewing habits, but they will still hear it in the big bad world out there. Much better imo is to acknowledge real life, and educate your children about what is acceptable and what isn't! Don't try and wrap them in cotton wool and pretend it doesn't exist, it does, deal with it appropriately.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Incensed (Post 4825870)

PC gone mad, and if you think kids don't know swear words then I give up!

You can be the best parent in the world and vet your childs viewing habits, but they will still hear it in the big bad world out there. Much better imo is to acknowledge real life, and educate your children about what is acceptable and what isn't! Don't try and wrap them in cotton wool and pretend it doesn't exist, it does, deal with it appropriately.

Erm, isn't that the Watershed is all about ?

Swearing is not acceptable before the watershed but is acceptable, under certain conditions, thereafter .....

Whether you let your young children watch programs with swearing in after the watershed is your business .....

Quote:

Originally Posted by Omah (Post 4825613)

No ..... the watershed guidelines are there to protect the under 14's, who, nominally, are under the control of a parent or guardian

Still don't understand what that's got to do with my example that chances are that an 18 year old man wouldn't complain.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Omah (Post 4825613)

You know it's funny, I refrained from insulting you on your quite frankly prudish, ignorant views on the basis that I thought you wouldn't sink to such petty levels, how wrong was I?

If I, and people around me choose to swear that doesn't mean we have low social standards, it just means we aren't as uptight as you are about such irrelevant issues. There are many excuses for swearing (not that anybody needs excuses for saying a word anyway), one of them being when you've hurt yourself or you're annoyed, going by what you're saying if someone fell over in the street, snapped their leg in half and blood was shooting everywhere and they shouted '******!' you'd look down upon them with disgust and disregard them because they have 'low social standards'. It's such a pathetic stance to take upon such a silly issue.

And no, swearing doesn't mean you lack a wide vocabulary either, that's another overused, ignorant cliche. Stephen Fry swears but he certainly isn't some ill-educated Essex chav.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom (Post 4825628)

Fair point I suppose, although there are varying degrees of severity. A graphic sex scene compared to a few uses of the word '******' aren't really on the same level. I do agree 10pm works better for BB though, but it still annoys me how '*****' is bleeped out at such a late time, not only in BB but in other shows too.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack_ (Post 4825931)

Still don't understand what that's got to do with my example that chances are that an 18 year old man wouldn't complain.

18 year old "boy", in many cases, but still nominally adult and therefore free to make lifestyle choices, for better or for worse, uninhibited by experience .....

Quote:

You know it's funny, I refrained from insulting you on your quite frankly prudish, ignorant views on the basis that I thought you wouldn't sink to such petty levels, how wrong was I?

Regrettably, you sank to the petty insult level first ..... and you're at it again - ...... :nono:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack_ (Post 4825931)

.....
more abuse
.....

:idc:

That's just silly. Oh for **** sake. :bored: