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)

Channel 5 in trouble with Ofcom

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011...=FBCNETTXT9038

Quote:

Ofcom has ruled that Channel 5 broke the broadcasting code for repeatedly airing clips of Big Brother housemates using the word "****" immediately after 9pm – in once case the expletive was used just 11 seconds after the watershed.

Channel 5 argued that the use of the swearwords was "editorially justified" owing to a range of factors, including that the broadcaster felt that 11 seconds was not "immediately after the watershed".

In two episodes of the reality TV show – the Friday night eviction episodes of 23 and 30 September – clips rounding up events in the Big Brother house over the course of the previous week featured housemates using the word "****" or "****ing" a total of four times.

The four uses of the expletive occurred within 31 seconds of the 9pm watershed, which is designed to protect children from being exposed to more adult material such as swearing and violence.

One instance of the use of the expletive came just 11 seconds after 9pm and less than six seconds after the start of the show.

Channel 5 said that the weekly roundup clip at the start of each show was "essential" to remind viewers of the build-up to the eviction. The broadcaster added that the strong language reflected the "heightened tensions" and "represented the genuine feelings of the housemates".

Ofcom recently updated broadcasters on guidance for airing content around the watershed, noting that there should be a "smooth transition to more adult content. It should not commence with the strongest material."

The broadcasting code guideline in question, rule 1.6, is designed to "avoid a sudden change to material that would only be deemed suitable for a post-watershed broadcast".

Channel 5 defended the broadcasts, arguing that viewers are familiar with the type of content in Big Brother, and the fact there is an "unambiguous" warning at the start of the episodes that there is "strong language from the start".

The broadcaster said this "provided a clear context and sufficiently prepared viewers for the opening sequence".

Ofcom said that four instances of swearing within 31 seconds of 9pm meant that it did not accept Channel 5's argument that the programmes "did not include strong language immediately after the watershed".

The media regulator said that given there is an "absolute prohibition" on the most offensive language immediately before 9pm, a broadcaster would need "very strong reasons" to justify airing strong language straight after the watershed.

"Ofcom did not consider there was sufficient editorial justification to include repeated use of the most offensive language in these programmes so soon after the watershed," it said in its ruling.

"The two uses of the word '****' or '****ing' in each programme in the period directly after the watershed did in Ofcom's view constitute an 'unduly abrupt' transition to more adult material at the watershed."

Got to give Ofcom something to do

Ofcom are itching to get someone in trouble.
Parents are warned that after 9PM anything is aloud to be done, wether it is sexual, swearing, as long as it is after 9.

It's parents fault if their kids pick up these words for letting them stay up after 9PM

Ofcom need to grow up.

This is beyond pathetic. There's already a ****ing watershed, what more do they want? It doesn't matter whether it's 11 seconds after or not, they adhered to the 9pm watershed guideline and that's that. I wish they'd stop pandering to the wishes of old women who instead of allowing their children to watch these evidently adult programmes which also include prior warnings of such content (if they're really that dim), should do the right thing and either change the channel or send their children to bed, it really isn't that hard.

Censorship in this country is going too far now and this report is utterly laughable.

Ofcom can **** off
Dirty load of *****

Ok Ofcom allows shows like The X Factor to blatently rig the results,but C5 get told off for showing swear words after the watershed lol.

Ofcom you stink.

On a side note, as if hearing a few swear words is going to be detrimental to a child's life anyway. I hate this age-old assumption that it's the worst thing since the Holocaust if a child is heard swearing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack_ (Post 4825369)

This is beyond pathetic. There's already a ****ing watershed, what more do these OFCUNTS want? It doesn't matter whether it's 11 seconds after or not, they adhered to the 9pm watershed guideline and that's that. I wish they'd stop pandering to the wishes of old women who instead of allowing their children to watch these evidently adult programmes which also include prior warnings of such content (if they're really that dim), should do the right thing and either change the channel or send their children to bed, it really isn't that hard.

Censorship in this country is going too far now and this report is utterly laughable.

As a mother, I find this very insulting Jack. That article doesn't mention anything about "old women" complaining or anyone else complaining for that matter.

11 seconds after the watershed is still after the watershed.

Screw you, Ofcom, go do something useful for christ sake.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Christmas Neeve (Post 4825377)

As a mother, I find this very insulting Jack. That article doesn't mention anything about "old women" complaining or anyone else complaining for that matter.

Well I'm sorry if it offended you then, but let's be honest the chances are that most people that complain to OFCOM about anything are either elderly people or the mothers (perhaps fathers) I guess who are supposedly 'worried' about the content their children view. I seriously doubt there is a lot of 18 year old men that complain if they hear the word 'sh*t' at 9:01pm on Big Brother.

I know there'll be exceptions to the rule and I'm aware that yes it's most likely a generalisation, but we're all aware that I'm not the only one that thinks this and that's probably for good reason.

Good for Ofcom - it's just common sense - C5 are trying to push the boundaries of controversy because the program content itself failed to attract an adult audience but depended on impressionable pre-teens and juveniles ..... :idc:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack_ (Post 4825383)

Well, all the mothers I know have better thing to do then complain about bad language on TV :hmph:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Omah (Post 4825386)

No, Channel 5 are trying to reflect an aspect of reality (the use of swearing in every day life) correctly in what is a reality TV show. Censoring such words would mean that's not a reflection of real life, when someone swears in real life you don't hear the bleep machine appear from nowhere to mask the word do you?

Someone will probably mention that Channel 5's attempt at Big Brother took away from the 'reality TV' aspect anyway, and whilst that might be true, the use of expletives is still an aspect of reality.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Christmas Neeve (Post 4825388)

Well, all the mothers I know have better thing to do then complain about bad language on TV :hmph:

The same for me, but that doesn't mean they don't exist. Pretty sure there's been stories in the paper about parents/the elderly complaining :p

Quote:

Originally Posted by Omah (Post 4825386)

By airing people swearing after the watershed? How controversial :laugh:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack_ (Post 4825383)

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.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack_ (Post 4825389)

True. I agree that while C5 haven't done the best job, the swearing aspect is accurate.

I find this whole thing utterly pathetic though.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom (Post 4825394)

Oh I don't agree with Offcom, I was just saying that Old women/mothers complaining wasn't mentioned in that article

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack_ (Post 4825383)

most people that complain to OFCOM about anything are elderly people

What do you mean by "elderly"?

Quote:

I seriously doubt there is (sic) a lot of 18 year old men that complain if they hear the word 'sh*t' at 9:01pm on Big Brother.

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by Samuel. (Post 4825393)

By airing people swearing after the watershed? How controversial :laugh:

Well, you're getting heated about it ...... :joker:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Christmas Neeve (Post 4825396)

Oh I don't agree with Offcom, I was just saying that Old women/mothers complaining wasn't mentioned in that article

Just saw the bolded bit and didn't read your whole post :blush2:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack_ (Post 4825389)

No, Channel 5 are trying to reflect an aspect of reality (the use of swearing in every day life) correctly in what is a reality TV show.

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack_ (Post 4825389)

Someone will probably mention that Channel 5's attempt at Big Brother took away from the 'reality TV' aspect anyway, and whilst that might be true, the use of expletives is still an aspect of reality.

Your reality, not mine ..... :nono:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom (Post 4825403)

Just saw the bolded bit and didn't read your whole post :blush2:

It was only a couple of lines long :nono:

;)

LOL how ridiculous.

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

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)

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: