From Gold Plated Pension on an Ofcom thread
"Ofcom today find themselves in the High Court to defend their 'Generally Accepted Standards' and 'Offensive Material' policy following a ruling they made against an interview carried out by radio presenter John Gaunt.
Gaunt was presenting TalkSport in November 2008 when during a live interview with councillor Michael Stark about Redbridge Council's decision to prevent smokers from becoming foster parents accused him of being a "Nazi", a "health Nazi" and an "ignorant pig".
A total of 53 complaints were received by Ofcom who decided in May 2009 that Gaunt had breached Generally Accepted Standards.
The ruling is in Ofcom Broadcast Bulliten number 133 dated 11th May 2009.
http://www.ofcom.org.uk/tv/obb/prog_cb/o...sue133.pdf
Following this ruling Gaunt lost his job at TalkSport but won the right in January 2010 to judicial review the Ofcom decision with the backing of Liberty, a human rights and civil liberties organisation.
Gaunt also found an unlikely backer in Shami Chakrabarti, the director of Liberty, whom he once branded "Britain's most dangerous woman".
Chakrabarti attended the hearing, and said afterwards that the case was a very significant test of free speech in Britain.
"This is not about one journalist and one politician," she said. "There is a big principle here. People do not have the right not to be offended. It's a very dangerous right to assert."
She said it was "a chilling moment" when Ofcom's barrister argued that Gaunt's interview did not represent "political speech". "Ofcom needs to wear its power with a little more humility," she added.
Gaunt himself criticised Ofcom as an unnecessary regulator that curbed freedom of expression. "We don't need Ofcom, we have got an off switch," he said. "We have a draconian, unelected, expensive to run quango of do-gooders who can stand there and say 'this is good taste and decency'. We don't need them
The review is set to last two days and it will be very interesting to see what evidence Ofcom presents to defend it's decision, especially when they have just relaxed their stance on offensive language following a consultation of just 130 people.
If i had been aware of this case last week i would have happily taken two days off work and made the twenty minute journey from my office to the High Court to listen to the evidence and Ofcom's justification.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/jun...port-ofcom
I for one fully support Gaunt's view of Ofcom and people's ability to use the off switch.
Watch this space it may have more impact on Ofcom's code than just the right of free speech. "
Are you reading Mr Bluebird? Ofcom in court defending their Generally Accepted Standards and Offensive Materials policies.
These would be the people and policies you claim couldn't be challenged as they were all about European directive's and whether Ofcom is "reasonable".
Well, looks like they can be challenged after all, as I and a number of others suggested.
What a surprise, you seem to be just another adult channel making claims that aren't true.