Broadcast Bulletin Issue Number 234 15/07/13
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Ofcom Broadcast Bulletin Issue number 234 15 July 2013 1 Ofcom Broadcast Bulletin, Issue 234 15 July 2013 Contents Introduction 4 Notices of Sanctions DM Digital Rehmatul Lil Alameen, 9 October 2011, 18:30 6 DM Digital POAF Conference, 25 November 2011, 21:00 and 4 December 2011, 21:00 8 Note to Broadcasters Policy Statement: Commercial Communications in Radio Programming 11 Standards cases In Breach The Pitch Controversial TV, 11 May 2013, 19:00 19 Journey of a Lifetime Channel i, 27 January 2013, 17:00 21 Weekend Out Sony TV Asia, 12 October 2012 and 4 January 2013 28 Resolved It’s Complicated (trailer) Film 4, 5 April 2013, 13:13 38 Bradford: City of Dreams BBC 2, 9 May, 2013, 20:00 41 Advertising Scheduling cases Resolved Resolved findings table Code on the Scheduling of Television Advertising compliance reports 43 2 Ofcom Broadcast Bulletin, Issue 234 15 July 2013 Fairness and Privacy cases Upheld Complaint by Mrs Yvonne-Charley Walsh on her own behalf and on behalf of Mrs M A Mallender, Mr Johnnie Mallender and Mr David Mallender 999: What’s Your Emergency?, Channel 4, 22 October 2012 44 Not Upheld Complaint by Mr Gareth Davies on behalf of himself and Apex Multiple Contractors The Ferret, ITV1, 30 July 2012 51 Other Programmes Not in Breach 70 Complaints Assessed, Not Investigated 71 Investigations List 79 3 Ofcom Broadcast Bulletin, Issue 234 15 July 2013 Introduction Under the Communications Act 2003 (“the Act”), Ofcom has a duty to set standards for broadcast content as appear to it best calculated to secure the standards objectives1. Ofcom must include these standards in a code or codes. These are listed below. Ofcom also has a duty to secure that every provider of a notifiable On Demand Programme Services (“ODPS”) complies with certain standards requirements as set out in the Act2. The Broadcast Bulletin reports on the outcome of investigations into alleged breaches of those Ofcom codes below, as well as licence conditions with which broadcasters regulated by Ofcom are required to comply. We also report on the outcome of ODPS sanctions referrals made by ATVOD and the ASA on the basis of their rules and guidance for ODPS. These Codes, rules and guidance documents include: a) Ofcom’s Broadcasting Code (“the Code”). b) the Code on the Scheduling of Television Advertising (“COSTA”) which contains rules on how much advertising and teleshopping may be scheduled in programmes, how many breaks are allowed and when they may be taken. c) certain sections of the BCAP Code: the UK Code of Broadcast Advertising, which relate to those areas of the BCAP Code for which Ofcom retains regulatory responsibility. These include: the prohibition on ‘political’ advertising; sponsorship and product placement on television (see Rules 9.13, 9.16 and 9.17 of the Code) and all commercial communications in radio programming (see Rules 10.6 to 10.8 of the Code); ‘participation TV’ advertising. This includes long-form advertising predicated on premium rate telephone services – most notably chat (including ‘adult’ chat), ‘psychic’ readings and dedicated quiz TV (Call TV quiz services). Ofcom is also responsible for regulating gambling, dating and ‘message board’ material where these are broadcast as advertising3. d) other licence conditions which broadcasters must comply with, such as requirements to pay fees and submit information which enables Ofcom to carry out its statutory duties. Further information can be found on Ofcom’s website for television and radio licences. e) rules and guidance for both editorial content and advertising content on ODPS. Ofcom considers sanctions in relation to ODPS on referral by the Authority for Television On-Demand (“ATVOD”) or the Advertising Standards Authority (“ASA”), co-regulators of ODPS for editorial content and advertising respectively, or may do so as a concurrent regulator. Other codes and requirements may also apply to broadcasters and ODPS, depending on their circumstances. These include the Code on Television Access Services (which sets out how much subtitling, signing and audio description relevant 1 The relevant legislation is set out in detail in Annex 1 of the Code. 2 The relevant legislation can be found at Part 4A of the Act. 3 BCAP and ASA continue to regulate conventional teleshopping content and spot advertising for these types of services where it is permitted. Ofcom remains responsible for statutory sanctions in all advertising cases. 4 Ofcom Broadcast Bulletin, Issue 234 15 July 2013 licensees must provide), the Code on Electronic Programme Guides, the Code on Listed Events, and the Cross Promotion Code. It is Ofcom’s policy to describe fully the content in television, radio and on demand content. Some of the language and descriptions used in Ofcom’s Broadcast Bulletin may therefore cause offence. 5 Ofcom Broadcast Bulletin, Issue 234 15 July 2013 Notice of Sanction DM Digital Rehmatul Lil Alameen, 9 October 2011, 18:30 Introduction DM Digital is a television channel primarily aimed at an Asian audience in the UK, which features broadcasts in a number of languages including English, Punjabi, Urdu, Sindhi, Kashmiri and Hindi. The service is also received in the Middle East and parts of Asia. This free-to-air service is broadcast on the Sky digital satellite platform. The licence for the DM Digital service is held by DM Digital Television Limited. Summary of Decision In a finding published on 8 May 2012 in issue 205 of Ofcom’s Broadcast Bulletin1, Ofcom found that DM Digital had seriously breached the Broadcasting Code (“the Code”) by broadcasting material which was in breach of Rule 3.1 of the Code: This broadcast, which was in Urdu and was approximately one hour in duration, featured a presenter who introduced an Islamic Pir (a religious scholar) who delivered a live televised lecture about points of Islamic theology with reference to the shooting dead in early 2011 of the Punjab governor Salmaan Taseer by his bodyguard Malik Mumtaz Qadri. Salmaan Taseer had been a vocal critic of Pakistan’s blasphemy law2. This law punishes derogatory remarks against notable figures in Islam and carries a potential death sentence for anyone who insults or is judged to blaspheme against the Prophet Mohammed the Finding set out various statements made by the Islamic scholar that Ofcom found were likely to encourage or incite the commission of crime or to lead to disorder. Ofcom concluded they were likely to have this effect because, on a reasonable interpretation of the scholar’s remarks, he was personally advocating that all Muslims had a duty to attack or kill apostates or those perceived to have insulted the Prophet. The finding set out various statements made by the Islamic scholar that Ofcom found were likely to encourage or incite the commission of crime or to lead to disorder. Ofcom concluded they were likely to have this effect because, on a reasonable interpretation of the scholar’s remarks, he was personally advocating that all Muslims had a duty to attack or kill apostates or those perceived to have insulted the Prophet. A number of the scholar’s remarks, in Ofcom’s opinion, amounted to direct calls to action. In particular, Ofcom interpreted some of the Islamic scholar’s comments to be a generic call to all Muslims (and not just members of the Muslim community within Pakistan) encouraging or inciting them to criminal action or disorder, by unambiguously stating that they had a duty to kill anyone who criticises or insults the Prophet Mohammed and apostates, and by praising Pakistan’s blasphemy law and the killing of the Punjab governor, Salmaan 1 http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/enforcement/broadcast- bulletins/obb205/obb205.pdf (published 8 May 2012) 2 Section 295-C of Pakistan’s Criminal Code. 6 Ofcom Broadcast Bulletin, Issue 234 15 July 2013 Taseer, by Malik Mumtaz Qadri. Ofcom also noted that such actions were presented as being justified, and even required, as a duty binding on all Muslims according to the tenets of Islamic law and theology. Ofcom therefore considered this material breached Rule 3.1 of the Code: “Material likely to encourage or incite the commission of crime or to lead to disorder must not be included in television or radio services”. Ofcom considered this to be a genuinely unprecedented case on account of the serious nature of the breach and the poor compliance demonstrated by the Licensee. The broadcast of material likely to encourage crime or lead to disorder has the potential to cause significant harm and, in this case, the Licensee failed to have in place robust compliance procedures and a competent and experienced compliance team which could have prevented the material being broadcast. For these reasons, and in accordance with Ofcom’s Penalty Guidelines, Ofcom decided it was appropriate and proportionate in the very serious circumstances of this broadcast to impose a financial penalty of £85,000 on DM Digital TV Limited in respect of the Code breaches (payable to HM Paymaster General). In addition, Ofcom considered that the Licensee should be directed to broadcast a statement of Ofcom’s findings in this case, on a date and in a form to be determined by Ofcom and be directed never to repeat this material on its service again. The full adjudication is available at: http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/enforcement/content-sanctions- adjudications/Rehmatul-DM-Digital.pdf. 7 Ofcom Broadcast Bulletin, Issue 234 15 July 2013 Notice of Sanction DM Digital POAF Conference, 25 November 2011, 21:00 and 4 December 2011, 21:00 Introduction DM Digital is a television channel primarily aimed at an Asian audience in the UK, which features broadcasts in a number of languages including English, Punjabi, Urdu, Sindhi, Kashmiri and Hindi.